Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Who let her in?

Why have we let in a woman who thinks Shariah law compels her to abandon and dump her children on other Australians? Is this fair on taxpayers - not to mention the children? Doesn't a welfare system depend on Australians sharing a mutual sense of obligation?
Two Sydney children have been placed into foster care and their 17-year-old brother reluctantly permitted to live with his violent father after their Lebanese-born mother cited “Islamic law” as the reason she was unable to care for them.
In the case highlighting how Australian courts are increasingly having to deal with the fallout from arrangements struck under Islamic, or sharia, law the mother argued religious law prevented her children living with her because her new husband should not be burdened with the responsibility for caring for them...
“The mother has completely abrogated her responsibilities as a parent in refusing to have the children live with her and proffering as an excuse that her new husband should not be required to care for another man’s children as it’s contrary to Islamic law,” the 2014 [Family Court] judgment said.
True, many Muslims would deny that this is what Sharia says. Yet no Christian here, to my knowledge, has ever argued that their faith likewise instructs them to abandon their children.
Mean, here is another claim to our welfare payments:
with two wives has been sentenced to at least six years jail for helping seven men go to Syria to fight with extremist groups including, Islamic State.
Hamdi Alqudsi, 42, of western Sydney, cried as he was being sentenced and afterwards called out to his family, including one of his veiled wives, saying he loved them before raising a finger in a salute to Allah as he was lead to the cells...
The court heard Alqudsi came to Australia from Palestine with his parents and siblings when he was 11.
Who let them in? Why?

No comments:

Post a Comment