Except that they started as a european group (Greek or Roman depending on perspective) and the invasion was into Asia where they picked up the religion.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Except that they started as a european group (Greek or Roman depending on perspective) and the invasion was into Asia where they picked up the religion.
This was posted a while ago but I just couldn't let it lie.
Sharia (depending on the version) has judicial independence - judges in Sharia courts are bot supposed to be government functionaries, it has free and fair trials - evidence and arguments are presented in a systematic and regulated fashion and the roles and functions of the various actors in the case are clear and well understood, it is a codified legal system - there are literally millions of pages of argument in Islamic legal literature debating virtually every point (to the extent that actually defining Sharia is fairly hard), it EXPLICITLY protects the weak with the idea of might making right being harshly condemned and it is capable of producing a reasonable standard of justice. I am personally opposed to Sharia law because it makes distinctions about what is legally right or not that I disagree with (eg sexual morality and the role of men vs women) but not because it is inherently unjust.
Sharia law does not use juries, but nor does a large portion of Roman law, and yet Roman Law countries are not seen to be fundamentally unjust.
Sharia (depending on the version) has judicial independence - judges in Sharia courts are bot supposed to be government functionaries, it has free and fair trials - evidence and arguments are presented in a systematic and regulated fashion and the roles and functions of the various actors in the case are clear and well understood, it is a codified legal system - there are literally millions of pages of argument in Islamic legal literature debating virtually every point (to the extent that actually defining Sharia is fairly hard), it EXPLICITLY protects the weak with the idea of might making right being harshly condemned and it is capable of producing a reasonable standard of justice. I am personally opposed to Sharia law because it makes distinctions about what is legally right or not that I disagree with (eg sexual morality and the role of men vs women) but not because it is inherently unjust.
Sharia law does not use juries, but nor does a large portion of Roman law, and yet Roman Law countries are not seen to be fundamentally unjust.