« Super Tuesday | Main | Iraq Briefing - 11 Feb 2008 - AQI Is On the Run »
February 8, 2008
Sharia Law is OK by the Archbishop of Canterbury
via today's Washington Times I learn that the Archbishop of Canturbury has "called for applying Islamic Shariah law in Britain in certain instances". The Archbiship, a certain Dr Rowan Williams, said this and more as part of a lecture series. Here are a few tidbits that I picked out this morning
Among the manifold anxieties that haunt the discussion of the place of Muslims in British society, one of the strongest, reinforced from time to time by the sensational reporting of opinion polls, is that Muslim communities in this country seek the freedom to live under sharia law.
He may has well as told us that Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, and that War is Peace.
But it is important to begin by dispelling one or two myths about sharia; so far from being a monolithic system of detailed enactments, sharia designates primarily – to quote Ramadan again – 'the expression of the universal principles of Islam [and] the framework and the thinking that makes for their actualization in human history'
The "Ramadan" the Archbishop refers to so approvingly is none other than Tariq Ramadan, an apologist for the worst excesses of Islam. Ramadan is the grandson of none other than Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, one of the jihadist groups seeking the restoration of the Caliphate and destruction of the West.
The Archbishop goes on to argue for a "transformative accomodation" of Sharia law into the British legal system, because it seems "unavoidable."
In an interview on BBC Radio 4 the Archbishop repeated many of these themes, if anything even more explicity
It seems unavoidable and indeed as a matter of fact certain provisions of Sharia are already recognised in our society and under our law. So it's not as if we're bringing in an alien and rival system.
In other words, we're not going to ask Muslims to accept Western values, so we'll just accept theirs.
When asked if this would bring stoning to Great Britain, he replied that
There's a lot of internal debate within the Islamic community about the nature of Sharia and its extent; nobody in their right mind I think would want to see in this country a kind of inhumanity that's sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states - the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well...
No doubt native Britons don't want these things. But how about some of the Muslims who want the Sharia law? The Archbishop avoids that topic with weasel words, going on about
I think one of the points again that's come up very interestingly in recent discussion between Muslim and other legal theorists is the way in which in the original context of Islamic law, quite often provisions relating to women are more enlightened than others of their day; but you have to translate that into a setting where actually that whole area, the rights and liberties of women has moved on and the principle, the vision, which animates the Islamic legal provision needs broadening because of that.
What jibberish.
Does anyone think that it will end here?
To be sure, as he points out,
We have orthodox Jewish courts operating in this country
Which is something liberal apologists love to bring up. But the last time I checked Western-style civil rights were alive and well in Israel, and yes that includes it's Arab citizens too. No one is afraid of orthadox Jewish law. There is reason to fear Sharia law, and anyone who does not need only look at Islamic countries where it has been implimented, like Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other Gulf states.
In the interview the Archbishop insists that Muslims could appeal Sharia court decisions to the regular British court system, and we are supposed to be reassured by this. But Muslims won't put up with this for long. They don't recognize any higher authority than their law, and as the Muslim population increases they would put what would probably become irresistible pressure on the appeal courts to let their decisions stand.
Liberals often roll their eyes when you tell them about Sharia law coming to Europe. They think it's a conservative scare story, the purpose of which is to take away civil liberties, put us under a permanent war footing, etc etc. I've heard and read many say that oh no, Muslims are integrating into European society perfectly well.
If that's true, then why is the Archbishop so willing to grant them their own legal - limited - system within a European country?
Melanie Phillips has more analysis than I have time to write this morning.
Posted by Tom at February 8, 2008 8:16 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theredhunter.com/mt/refer.cgi/1075
Comments
Snake Hunters sez,
Another Infallible "Holy Joe", willing
to compromise Fundamental English Common Law!
Let's get him over here; he'd make a great
Running Mate for Obama or Hillary! reb
Posted by: Ralph E. at February 9, 2008 6:07 PM
TO: Tom, The Redhunter,
and his thoughtful readership.
Our S/H Weblog has found the Text
Of a Great American, and we've posted
these profound thoughts for your careful
analysis. See "Stepping Aside" by Governor
Mitt Romney.
I would urge all to read it, print it,
photo-copy and distribute this document
to friend, relative & neighbor.
There is no greater "Cause Celebre" that
I can imagine. Will you join us? reb
_______________________________________
www.lazyonebenn.blogspot.com
Posted by: Ralph E. at February 10, 2008 5:15 PM
Dr. Rowan Williams is one of those people who are best described by a remark attributed to Lenin. He referred to Western intellectuals who supported Communism and criticized their own governments as "useful idiots".
You mention problems with Sharia law in Europe but here's an interesting tidbit for you.
In Ontario, Canada, in 2002 enter a man named Mumtaz Ali. A retired lawyer, he was also the head of The Islamic Institute of Civil Justice in Ontario, a private arbitration organization.
He submitted a proposal to the Ontario government requesting the government to create a network of Islamic Sharia Law family law tribunals to arbitrate domestic matters such as divorce, custody and support payments.
Now under Sharia law women are only entitled to half of what a man gets in a property dispute and men are more likely to get custody of children, particularily boys in a divorce.
This is a clear attempt to bypass Canadian law in these matters and a very clear example of the danger to individual rights and the rule of law that Sharia law in a western democracy represents.
This proposal was finally rejected in 2005 largely due to the efforts of Muslim women and women's rights activists. Specifically Homa Arjomand who frequently speaks on the globalization of political Islam.
Dr. Williams proposal to accomodate Sharia law is sheer lunacy at it's best. It will result in Muslim self governing enclaves, within the framework of western democracies.
At some point western democracies must summon the will to insist that immigrants who wish to have a place in our societies must conform to our rules.
Accomodation to Sharia law will only lead to the fragmentation of our society and the subversion of the rule of law.
The link from which I have quoted liberally:
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2485/context/archive
Posted by: BC at February 19, 2008 2:50 AM
Very interesting, BC. Thank you for stopping by.
The good news is that the Islamists were stopped...this time. But they'll try again, and when their numbers increase they'll have more clout, and it'll be harder to stop them. We must keep up our defenses.
Posted by: Tom the Redhunter at February 19, 2008 9:53 PM
Tom you are right on the money.
The Ontario government at the time made the right call. But this will happen again.
Groups like this have shown that they will repeatedly challenge the rule of law and the separation of church and state.
Posted by: BC at February 20, 2008 12:53 PM
In the interview the Archbishop insists that Muslims could appeal Sharia court decisions to the regular British court system, and we are supposed to be reassured by this.
Sure, Muslims unhappy with the results of the Sharia courts would be able to appeal to the secular courts - at the risk of being turned into pariahs in their mosques. Or even worse, being labelled as apostates.
Remember the movie, "Witness"? There are a few lines there that would apply to this situation in spades:
Don't you know there has been talk? Talk about you...About having you - shunned! Do not make light of it...They can do it - quick! Like that! And then - then I can not sit at table with you. I can not take a thing from your hand. I - I can not go with you to meeting!
Heck, for some apostates, like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, getting shunned would be the least of their worries.
Posted by: The Foreigner at February 29, 2008 6:09 PM
