Opinion – Islamic law is adopted by British legal chiefs – Telegraph – John Gelmini



Yesterday, I reblogged an interesting and controversial article from the Telegraph. My blog generated a number of interesting comments, including the following from John Gelmini which I am sharing to stimulate public debate. Personally, I share the broad thrust of John’s argument but do not necessarily agree with all of his proposals.


The law of the land and the one that the Law Society should be concerned about is based on Judeo Christian ethics.

Attempts by the former  Archbishop of Canterbury and now the Law Society to change this are, as Dr Alf suggests, misguided.

Sharia Law is an alternative system that belongs in Muslim countries and in the Global Caliphate that some people in those countries would like the world to live under. In my view, it conflicts with the Wills Act and it is against our own Equality Laws, both of which apply to everyone else who is not a Muslim.

This is a threat which, due to the dynamics of birthrate and early family formation versus our falling rates of family formation, we are going to either take on or submit to within the coming decades.

In earlier posts, I have talked about the “replacement rate” for a viable population as being 2.4, whereas the rate for the UK’s indigenous population is just 1.88.

Leicester, Birmingham, Bradford, parts of Leeds, Luton and Peterborough, and sections of London, such as Tower Hamlets, represent, in my view, the “Ghost of Christmas Future” and within 30 years, I predict that they will be the norm in many other places.

For the Church of England, I believe that this means, evangelise or die. And for the Government and the institutions of the state, it means a much more muscular approach to maintaining a sense of what and who we are. That, in turn, must mean, in my judgement:

  • No application of any law that does not conform to our own
  • A move to a written constitution
  • Tough action against rogue mosques that abuse their charitable status by acting as document factories
  • No more marches by Muslims demanding a Global Caliphate
  • Strong application of the 1318 Treason Act against those preaching sedition, insurrection, etc.

In summary, what is being proposed by the Law Society is special treatment for Muslims who already  benefit from Equality laws. Surely, one of the ancient principles of British Law is equality?Why is equality not enough?

John Gelmini

Enhanced by Zemanta

Apprenticeships: Keeping up with the Schmidts | The Economist

This article from the Economist is a strongly recommended read. Check it out!

via Apprenticeships: Keeping up with the Schmidts | The Economist.

For me, the article, once again highlights the weakness of David Cameron’s government‘s policy decisions. This highlights the fundamental absence of proper strategic evaluation, with policies being hotchpotch and knee-jerk reactions.  I would question the wisdom of trying to copy German best practice which is based on fundamentally different contextual values. For example, there is a Constitutional Court in Germany which protects consumers against big government and big business. The Economist article describes how a supermarket is taking the money and not, in my view, giving enough in return to the apprentices.

In the last two years, I have spent two extended periods in Asia. and am amazed that the UK Government is developing an appenticeship policy without extensive study of Asian practice.

Let me turn this to an open question:

In your opinion, is the UK Government’s policy for appenticeships likely to be effective in addressing the huge challenges of UK unemployment?

Any thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta