@Mkristo I am surprised and your intolerance and prejudice. Islam is not bad. I think in another post we all had advice for a lady who wanted to turn apostate and discussed some of the merits and demerits of that act. All said and done,it does not diminish any single citizens rights to allow latitude for those of the Muslim faith to have their unique legal affairs dealt with within certain acceptable parameters. It should only be a concern if you as a Christian are tried using those laws.

When people take oath in courts,its God's name that is invoked and people can request either the Bible,The Quran (or perhaps even the Torah).

I think we should be more tolerant.

The problem with equality is that we desire that it be with those that have more than us rather that those that have less

dude...please stop callin us naive....the issue here is...KADHI COURTS ARE FOR LEGISLATING MATTERS BETWEEN TWO PERSONS PROFESSING THE ISLAMIC FAITH...THESE MATTERS ARE USUALLY CUSTOMARY IN NATURE....please note that the bulk of our laws are based on cannon law which were derived by st francis from the catholic church...it would be unfortunate to subject two muslims to a derivative of cannon law on a cultural matter...the issue here is...seperation of church and state....our laws also have aspects of hindu law...why not protest abt that? why not ask your bank to use cannon law in drwaing up your HP contract? if we use your argument,muslims have every right to say that the constitution is against theyr religion since its based on a certain religion... issue is the courts were already enshrined in our laws...they hav howvever been constitutionalisd.....wat issue would christians hav in this? the issue does not affect christians...

@Mkristo

Apart from pushing for equitable treatment of all religions and faiths,it is beginning to appear to me that you have lots of other beef with Muslims and Islam.
So as to make head way in persuading people to your view point,you will need to exercise some more tolerance towards all,including Muslims.
By exhibiting what could easily pass for rabid detest for any group of people,you make all of us begin suspecting that you are also under certain measure of dogmatic colonisation of mind.

All said and done,I still maintain that Kadhis court should only be anchored in a regular act of parliament.
Finding its way into the constitution,our supreme law,is to elevate it to special status.

B.timer

mkristo - it is less an issue of bembelezaing and more a matter of communicating.

Time and chance happen to all.

Though some may wish to pretend they are different from others because of the label they paste themselves ie christian,orthodox,jew,muslim,catholic or ayatollah,they are more alike.

The problem is not the religion,the problem is EXTREMISM. This is practised by all and the starter of this post is a classic example.

Let the muslim brothers be. I have not seen any trying to convert me. However,between the 'saved' and the Jehovah's witnesses,I have had enough to last me a lifetime. I keep on telling them I am ok with my regular daily shot of JD but they tell me I will burn in hell!

I would be more worried of some saved guy moving their agenda in any constitution.

The consititution as has been explained in a post here is very clear on the limitations of the Kadhi's court. In fact,if you wish to limit their influence,that is where it should be.

Next you will be told that customary law and hindu law should be thrown out the window coz some saved guy is having a tantrum.

Aiiiii!