And Gina Khan? Have you read her Times interview? Its astonishingly ignorant and incoherent. He rhetoric is divisive she refers to Britain as your country (meaning white non-Muslims) or refers to Muslims in the third person. She seems another “native informant” spouting bigotry about a minority that the majority would refrain from for fear of being labelled prejudiced.

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lifeandstyle/women/article1354063.ece

David T is as ever incorrect about the courts - the main actor behind them is Faiz Siddiqui who is a Barelvi Sufi, that is, apolitical and decidedly non “Islamist” (sic)

The Prophet said that Islam will be taken down the same road as Christianity and Judaism and reduced to nothing. It came a stranger and will be reduced to a stranger.

Traditionalists who think this is an attack on ‘Islamists’ only, need to wake up and realise that this is an attack on Islam as a whole.

• The state shouldn’t ordinarily stand in the way of private agreements, and should enforce them if they take the form of arbitration in a neutral field (e.g. business dealings between equal parties).

• No religious court should have the sanction of law in family law matters, ever, in any circumstances.

• To the extent that a religious court attempts to enforce a judgement that offends against equality or human rights principles, it should be fined shut down. We do not permit shops to discriminate against Muslims, or women, even if they accept that discrimination. The same principle must apply to private arbitration services, such as religious courts.

The fact that the greatest impetus for sharia courts comes from extremely radical Islamists, who see it as part of the struggle for separatism and the creation of a theocratic Caliphate is a problem. Were there non-Islamist organisations spearheading this campaign, it would be less objectionable.