I am astounded that so many people, including the Slate community, is so totally ignorant of these matters. Usually this is a space for taking a thoughful look. Instead more idiotic vitriol about the West's supposedly enlightened laws and customs.

In reality, British law (Which US and more so Canadian law are based on) is religious already.

In reality, Sharia is not all about stoning women. Sharia also means banking systems that do not charge interest (sortof). It means a tradition, lust like the Xian legal tradition. The inevitable is that the values of law in the community which are NOT hard and fast. (How often are they enforced except in extreme cases, how practical or desirable would it even be to go into people's homes and check on their compliance)

While there has been a recent tradition of "atheism" that is, people who like to imagine themselves above all religious value... (Gods above Gods) (And this website is clearly taking that position)... The arrogant "rational" and "pragmatic" approach of this ideology is made clear in the reaction against religious tolerance seen here.

Religion is not anathema to Reason. In fact irrational religion is a bad idea. As the application of "Sharia law" (as self defined by fanatics) is a good example of this. And also Xian practices such as crusading, the inquisition and genocide in the Americas. The problem is not religion vs. reason but extreme absolutism versus a flexible to the real world view. In the extreme position, such as taken up famously by extreme religions, all knowledge is self referential - assumptions are based on the conclusions and often hidden to the beliver. The Western "Science" of DDT, Talidamyde, Nuclear power, Single Occupancy Automobiles, Poison plastic baby bottles, Bhopal, Teflon... Our superior attitudes that uphold the name "reason" and "science" are no better than religious values using different words but with the same air of unchallengable authority (Islam was the culture that kep science and Mathamatics alive during Europe's Xian barbarian eras) are no protection and no more reasonable. We need to accept the basic facts. We need to be open minded. We need to test our ideas in public. We need to do basic research. If we do, we learn that Rowan Williams is NOT advocating by any means all the scary stories about abusing women and children that are being brought up. Those stories are the jingoistic propaganda that allows US to kill THEM in Iraq, Afganistan and other places. Those stories do not paint the whole picture and are instead emotional appeals to get to a racist faith we have for a White Xian heritage.

Please look up the issue a little more before commenting so strongly on it. Surely there is legitimate reaction and speaking out against things done in the name of Sharia. Periticularly, all the examples given of abuse done in that name should be rightly condemned. But be aware that by not refining your arguement and painting with such blind strokes: for example: We are not religious but THEY are, The Wahhabis Extremists are the authority that we will allow to define Sharia AND Islam, Europe and England are Totally seperate from the Middle East in values and people... All of these assumptions make an ASS out of U and ME. England is connected to Islam as it is connected to America. Not exactly the same but similar. The white "purity" of Albion is superstitious myth. The superiority of British law with its precedents of Apartheid, Genocide and enslavement is not valid. Only by the merits of the laws in question will the reasonable judge the value. The name Sharia or British does not automatically make any law better or worse. Many traditions that come from Islam have seeped into British law already over the past 1000 years but we recognise these values as British but fail to see the similarity in others.

In short: Your prejudices will Betray you. If you have something to say to Rowan Williams than use words, not hackneyed propaganda cliche.

Muslim living in a non-Islamic country should respect the law of the land. That is Sharia.

The stories about "honor killing" are not just stories - they're real. Did you read about the case in Saudi Arabia where a woman is forced to divorce her husband? She was happily married with children until her father died. Her uncle then nullify her marriage as he views the marriage as 'beneath her'. She was then arrested by the authority for "living with an unrelated man". W.T.F.??? And you want this kind of law to operate in a Western country? Who is the blind one here?

There's a lot of misguided, ignorant nonsense in your post, hotdoog, but the only element of it to which I care to reply is as follows: You assert that the "culture" of Islam is to be credited with keeping philosophy and mathematics alive during Europe's Dark Age. This makes about as much sense as crediting the "culture" of Christianity (or, should I say, "Xianity") with preserving literature during the Dark Age because a handful of monks were transcribing Bibles.

A small segment of the Islamic world did evidently care quite passionately about preserving and expanding knowledge, as exemplified by the golden age of Al-Andalus and one or two regimes in Baghdad before 1000 AD. But these segments of the Islamic world were largely stamped out by the more fundamentalist factions that still dominate Islam to this day. (Andalusia was conquered by fundamentalist Muslims from Northern Africa around 1000 AD, and their legacy of tolerance and passion for learning was destroyed.)

Today's Islamic leaders are not representative of the golden ages of Andalus or Baghdad. They are descendants of the wild-eyed, one-book extremists who brought those golden ages to an end.

hotdoog:

I am astounded that so many people, including the Slate community, is so totally ignorant of these matters. Usually this is a space for taking a thoughful look. Instead more idiotic vitriol about the West's supposedly enlightened laws and customs.

In reality, British law (Which US and more so Canadian law are based on) is religious already.

In reality, Sharia is not all about stoning women. Sharia also means banking systems that do not charge interest (sortof). It means a tradition, lust like the Xian legal tradition. The inevitable is that the values of law in the community which are NOT hard and fast. (How often are they enforced except in extreme cases, how practical or desirable would it even be to go into people's homes and check on their compliance)

While there has been a recent tradition of "atheism" that is, people who like to imagine themselves above all religious value... (Gods above Gods) (And this website is clearly taking that position)... The arrogant "rational" and "pragmatic" approach of this ideology is made clear in the reaction against religious tolerance seen here.

Religion is not anathema to Reason. In fact irrational religion is a bad idea. As the application of "Sharia law" (as self defined by fanatics) is a good example of this. And also Xian practices such as crusading, the inquisition and genocide in the Americas. The problem is not religion vs. reason but extreme absolutism versus a flexible to the real world view. In the extreme position, such as taken up famously by extreme religions, all knowledge is self referential - assumptions are based on the conclusions and often hidden to the beliver. The Western "Science" of DDT, Talidamyde, Nuclear power, Single Occupancy Automobiles, Poison plastic baby bottles, Bhopal, Teflon... Our superior attitudes that uphold the name "reason" and "science" are no better than religious values using different words but with the same air of unchallengable authority (Islam was the culture that kep science and Mathamatics alive during Europe's Xian barbarian eras) are no protection and no more reasonable. We need to accept the basic facts. We need to be open minded. We need to test our ideas in public. We need to do basic research. If we do, we learn that Rowan Williams is NOT advocating by any means all the scary stories about abusing women and children that are being brought up. Those stories are the jingoistic propaganda that allows US to kill THEM in Iraq, Afganistan and other places. Those stories do not paint the whole picture and are instead emotional appeals to get to a racist faith we have for a White Xian heritage.

Please look up the issue a little more before commenting so strongly on it. Surely there is legitimate reaction and speaking out against things done in the name of Sharia. Periticularly, all the examples given of abuse done in that name should be rightly condemned. But be aware that by not refining your arguement and painting with such blind strokes: for example: We are not religious but THEY are, The Wahhabis Extremists are the authority that we will allow to define Sharia AND Islam, Europe and England are Totally seperate from the Middle East in values and people... All of these assumptions make an ASS out of U and ME. England is connected to Islam as it is connected to America. Not exactly the same but similar. The white "purity" of Albion is superstitious myth. The superiority of British law with its precedents of Apartheid, Genocide and enslavement is not valid. Only by the merits of the laws in question will the reasonable judge the value. The name Sharia or British does not automatically make any law better or worse. Many traditions that come from Islam have seeped into British law already over the past 1000 years but we recognise these values as British but fail to see the similarity in others.

In short: Your prejudices will Betray you. If you have something to say to Rowan Williams than use words, not hackneyed propaganda cliche.

Perhaps I just read the article incorrectly, but it seems to me that your entire rant is about a point that was never brought up by Ms. Applebaum in her article.

The following is a quote I pulled from Christopher Hitchens article on the same subject:

[A]n approach to law which simply said "there's one law for everybody and that's all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts"—I think that's a bit of a danger.

This quote is from the Archbishop, and the controversy surrounding him has to do with whether or not the law should be equally applied to everyone. It doesn't really focus on whether or not sharia law is a good idea or bad idea. As long as the British legal system is the way it is, then it should apply to everyone regardless of what your religious preference is.

of Prostitution.

What would you do if you found your wife who is your children's mother- better half - legs up and being simply f***ed by someone else?

Be honest and don't tell me you would help him hold his Testicles.

Would you opt for:

One : a DNA exam? to be sure of your Progeny.

Two : commit suicide?

Three : act like Robert Dinero ?