Anglican Archbishop Embraces Sharia Law

Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...

Mo Rocca Feed

Anglican Archbishop Embraces Sharia Law

Posted Feb 15th 2008 1:09AM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Islam, Christianity, Bizarre, Atheism

Atheists can break out the champagne: there really are some wacky religious people out there. One of them seems to be Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury. In a recent speech Williams ruffled a lot of feathers--it is not Anglican custom to ruffle a lot of feathers--when he said it "seems unavoidable" that Muslim holy law or sharia is coming to Britain. Not only that, but our bearded, bespectacled cleric even thought that this would be a good thing because it would foster social cohesion.

While conceding that "nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country" some of the "extreme punishments" and "attitudes toward women" that prevail in certain Muslim countries, Williams called for a "constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law." So: no chopping off limbs and no honor killings. Williams argued, however, that other issues such as marital disputes and financial matters could be handled not by the British legal system but by Muslim sharia courts. All of this would have the beneficial result, in Williams' view, of meeting the distinctive needs of Muslims. Williams argued that Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty."

Now if this sounds absurd to you, and a little dangerous to boot, ask yourself: where have I heard this before? What we are getting from Williams is not religious craziness but liberal craziness, not theological error but multicultural reductio ad absurdum. The multicultural premise is that classical liberal rules that apply equally to everyone nevertheless discriminate against racial and cultural minorities that don't want to play by those rules. Consequently equality of rights for individuals must give way to equality of consideration for groups. Otherwise minorities will feel disenfranchised even in a society where there is equal treatment for individuals under the law. This is what Williams means when he says that Muslims should not have to sacrifice cultural loyalty in order to be loyal to Britain.

So what is our woolly-headed archbishop suggesting: office breaks for Muslims to pray five times a day? Jihadist history month? Overlooking the occasional polygamous marriage in the Muslim community? No one really knows because Williams didn't really say. And when several people expressed shock at Williams' words and called for his resignation, Williams finally acknowledged that he had spoken "clumsily" and with a "misleading choice of words." Even so, he added that while he did not favor creating "parallel jurisdictions" for sharia and secular courts, he thought that "additional choices" could be opened to Muslims. On what precisely those choices might be, Williams maintained a Sphinx-like silence.

Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [361]
Share this
- Add this post to...
- Netscape
- Digg
- Del.icio.us

Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 25)

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

1. I don't understand why Dinesh is saying that atheists would be raising their glasses. They would most likely not care at all about what the Archbishop of Canterbury has to say. It's not as if he has a say in government so his words are practically meaningless. As for what he is saying, that is definitely a bit strange. I don't see where you get the liberal aspect of it. It seems like you are just trying to find a way to say, "I hate liberals and so should you." Next time, if you are going to try and attack a group of people, at least find a good example instead of grasping at straws.

James at 2:47AM on Feb 15th 2008

2. I have to agree with James. As an atheist, however, I object to religious dogma in the judicial process at all. However, I am not a British subject and what other countries choose to do is entirely their business. If citizens do not speak out against religious rule, they have no one to blame but themselves. It does however, appear to be a supreme double standard if Jewish customs and certain laws dealing with cultural issues are granted special courts to administrate such matters, that any other religion would be denied the same process.

My personal opinion remains that matters of law are best adjudicated by civil law rather than religious dogma. I think the founding fathers in the US got it right when church and state affairs were specifically designated as separate, and all deviations from that standard have only muddied the waters and granted religious entitlements that should not exist.

Dr. S at 4:36AM on Feb 15th 2008

3. THE ABOMINATION OF SHARIA LAW: A DIRECT CHALLENGE TO DEMOCRATIC CONSTITUTIONS AND RULE OF LAW

By:Larry Houle
www.godofreason.com
intermedusa@yahoo.com

Wherever Muslims live under Sharia law adulterers are publicly flogged or stoned to death, sometimes before thousands of spectators in public stadiums. There are no rights for women or children, with women genitally mutilated, and beaten in the streets for the slightest infraction. They care nothing for other beliefs, about being fair, have no juries, no free speech. Television and radio are forbidden, music and dance prohibited. It is their way or execution, the death penalty, with no appeal, no delay. You are simply shot in the head where you stand, and your children shot before you. And these practices of the Sharia, once largely confined to the Middle East, even though mostly finished in Afghanistan, are now spreading to other parts of the world.

Here are the top eleven reasons why Sharia or Islamic law is EVIL for all societies.

11. SHARIA LAW IS SLAVERY

10. Islam commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped.

9. Islam allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives.

8. Islam allows an injured plaintiff to exact legal revenge—physical eye for physical eye.

7. Islam commands that a male and female thief must have a hand cut off.

6. Islam commands that highway robbers should be crucified or mutilated.

5. Islam commands that homosexuals must be executed.

4. Islam orders unmarried fornicators to be whipped and adulterers to be stoned to death.
Fornication:

3. Islam orders death for Muslim and possible death for non—Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Quran and even sharia itself.

2. Islam orders apostates to be killed.

In And the number one reason why sharia is bad for all societies . . .

1. Islam commands offensive and aggressive and unjust jihad.

Conclusion

The nightmare must end. Sharia oppresses the citizens of Islamic countries.

personalrep1 at 4:43AM on Feb 15th 2008

4. Why does Dinesh think athiests would celebrate such at thing? This is exactly what most non-religious people are afraid of.

How far of a stretch is it from one wacky belief system to another? Many, many strict Catholics (think Mel Gibson) would embrace something like sharia law. After all it accomplishes the only two things that the religious people seem to care about stopping abortions and oppressing homosexuals...everything else remains basically the same for them, just a change in the cast of religious characters.

I guess I will buy a bottle of bubbly tonight, and raise a glass to Dinesh.

DavidG at 7:30AM on Feb 15th 2008

5. I liked how you threw in that polygamist thing. It'll be the only thing I comment on, since it's the most wrong. Of course, conservatives aren't even in favor of gay marriage, so I can see how polygamy would make you freak out. Who cares? If it's acceptable in their culture to marry more than one at a time, LET THEM! If they're happy, WHO CARES? Who are they hurting? You own PERSONAL beliefs? Or wait, you're trying to impose your RELIGIOUS beliefs based on the BIBLE onto people who aren't even in the same religion, and don't even believe in the bible! Sure makes sense to me. I say, if a guy wants -ten- wives, and they want HIM, have at it. I wish him the best of luck. (He'll need it)

Stop forcing entire communities of people to live by your religious rules. They're not equal to anyone except christians.

Strados at 8:15AM on Feb 15th 2008

6. THIS STATEMENT FROM THE ARCHBISHOP DEMONSTRATES HOW LIBERALISM AND SECULAR HUMANISM INSPIRES PEOPLE TO BE SO OPEN-MINDED THAT THEIR BRAINS LEAK....

http://www.evolutionfacts.blogspot.com

FORMER ATHEIST at 8:20AM on Feb 15th 2008

7. The archbishop is secular?? Hahahahaha. You continue to discredit yourself every time you post 'former atheist', maurice, etc. You are nothing but a propaganda spewing spam machine.

a born atheist at 8:27AM on Feb 15th 2008

8. I would think this totally outrageous and beyond consideration....except that traditional Jewish law is already used, over British law, in certain cases in Britain, for devout Jews to settle various civil matters.

Interesting how you left out that fact.

That is typical of dinesh. Leave out pertinent facts....or perhaps he just missed this little nugget of info altogether, while doing his usual "thorough" research.

America's Most Gangsta at 8:41AM on Feb 15th 2008

9. Just more libel of atheists from Dinesh. Ho-hum.

Knight_of_BAAWA at 9:24AM on Feb 15th 2008

10. Pretty much.

Dinesh doesn't get that liberals like me don't want every culture to be have their own special legal system just because every culture has varying inherent values, but that they want one government legal system that is fair to all different aspects of society. And any legal system that undermines legal protection of minorities or women due to some superstitious mumbo jumbo is to be rejected. I spurn sharia law just as deeply as I would spurn the star chamber or the inquistion's authority. Only when a law is based on humanist needs and values can it -start- to approach fairness, and even then it must take steps to protect the rights and freedom of the individual, not the cultural subset.

But I will break open the bubbly... Mtn Dew. After all the Arch-bishop has once more demonstrated why religion is such a bad idea.

Somber at 9:45AM on Feb 15th 2008

11. You can't have multiple systems of law in place at one time. They will not be compatible. What Williams probably means is, we'll adopt those parts of Sharia that appeal to my Anglican sensibilities. I think it is just an attempt to appear accomodating to Muslims, so they won't bomb the UK anymore. Don't get your hopes up, Rowan, they can't be appeased.

What I find so funny about Dinesh's complaints is that he's actually worried about prayer breaks and polygamy??? This is from the same guy who thinks nothing is wrong with breaks for prayer in our American schools. I'm sorry, but if they want to pray five times a day, fine. It doesn't impose on me, just let me have five equal length smoke breaks every day. And the aversion to polygamy is ridiculous, as Strados mentioned.

AndrewV at 9:51AM on Feb 15th 2008

12. "This is from the same guy who thinks nothing is wrong with breaks for prayer in our American schools"

Aren't there christians who practice polygamy too?

a born atheist at 9:57AM on Feb 15th 2008

13. I do not know little about Muslims, but I am sure the action taken for adultry , being done in public, would sure tear a big hole in our free wheeling society- Maybe one that is needed, if we follow our own Bible on stoning the adultrer l--America is too full of old, out dated media of SEX is what counts and it has ruined two generations of our youth. I love sex, but in it's place, not feel wheeling and shown on TV and ADS-- this is why we are out of favor with society- Remember Shakespeare and how he had to go to the extreme which followed with Victorian area to clean up his acts, well how they will clean up today's nasty tv is beyond me--BEST POLICY TO CUT IT OFF, IS NO SPONSORS TO AIR THEIR DIRTY WORK.

Anne Brauer at 10:00AM on Feb 15th 2008

14. aba: "Aren't there christians who practice polygamy too?"

Yea, Mormons, but if you mention them then the Christians chime in with "they're not TRUE Christians..."

AndrewV at 10:03AM on Feb 15th 2008

15. transcript of a crass but applicable song....

...so you're screaming bloody murder about the taliban regime, subjugating women, and being too extreme, and basing legislation on some ancient holy book. Does that sound a bit familiar? Heres a mirror, have a look.

http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2008/02/15/anglican-archbishop-embraces-sharia-law/1#c10473836

a born atheist at 10:06AM on Feb 15th 2008

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Add your comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.

To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.

Mo's Video

The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...
Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...

Coming Soon

Most Commented On

Coming Soon

Mo's Bio

Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.