(no subject)

[johnny9fingers]

As usual, I may have been guilty of an over-reaction.

"The Archbishop of Canterbury's message was not that there should be one law for Muslims and another for the rest. What he seemed to be positing was that the secular legal system should accommodate the traditional sharia councils which exist around the country, dealing with family and other disputes. One model could be the Beth Din, the rabbinical courts set up by a UK statute more than 100 years ago, which means they are recognised within the legal system." *

Aspects of Sharia law subordinate to English law...I could live with that: with the proper safeguards in place, of course.

Well, it appears that Rowan may have been right to bring up the debate after all.
(Or it could be I looked around me at the other folk that were up in arms about this and found I didn't like some of the company I was keeping - however the reaction was pretty universal: the Law of the Land is England. We don't have a written constitution; we have a Parliament, a Monarch, and almost a thousand years of case law. Our rights and obligations have evolved over the centuries: not always for the best specifically, but in the long run always improving.)

And I would not care to see Dr Williams hounded out of office. He can and should bring up difficult subjects. Though whether as a nation we agree with him or not is another matter.

I still reckon we should chain young folk to their desks and force them all to learn Latin. But put that down to an old man's splenetic irritation.



*
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,2254953,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=uknews  

Comments

Frickinmuck

[(Anonymous)]

James,

Please stop arguing with that nice Canadian lady, when she is so transparently correct. After all, you would have little problem seeing the point when Malcolm X rather famously said that it was almost always right to be tolerant of other people's tolerance, but that there comes a point (hopefully far beyond where my daily life takes me) where it is not acceptable to tolerate the intolerance of others. This is not an issue of being liberal but of being honest and rational and fair.
As for more Muslim men than women apparently supporting a few bits of Sharia, i have no problem in disagreeing vigorously, despite this. For example, in many parts of Africa, what those of a nervous disposition refer to as FGM is mostly done to women by women - and if you ever tried to defend that on the basis of it's a woman thing or that we should not interfere with their culture, I would happily hold you down while Emily expresses herself.

I am in fact very intolerant: it is merely that there is little reason to be intolerant of many of the things that make others intolerant, but easy to find items of my own about which to do it. Keep religion out of schools and courts - if they must believe noodles, let them carry on influencing architecture and paintings instead. What is more,I know that you know this, so think that you are just winding the poor lady up: please desist.

N

Re: Frickinmuck

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

I agree I hold a number of conflicting opinions here, m'dear. I'm trying to find a place of accommodation with the religious that does not effect the rest of us in a significantly deleterious fashion. frickinmuck is more than able to defend herself, she is one very clever lass indeed, and I take her points very seriously in my present uncertainty.
There are times when I'm uncertain of what I think: I am distrustful of kneejerk reactions, even when they are mine. And I think everyone knows my kneejerk reaction; which was considerably less temperate than lady frickinmuck's: ergo, I check myself and get responses and modify until I'm comfortable with both the justice of my position (should there be possibility of justice) and the respect for others (and other cultures) I should always observe. Respected in the breach, alas, rather more than I would hope. But then again, I fight against my 'Little England' tendencies.

You really should set up an LJ account my dear, you'd be amusing in, and amused by, some of the debates.

My dear, you used my given name, shame on you: now everyone will be doing it. Hope M is well.