Or is it Englandistan?
The Archbishop of Canterbury caused consternation yesterday by calling for Islamic law to be recognised in Britain.
He declared that sharia and Parliamentary law should be given equal legal status so the people could choose which governs their lives.
This raised the prospect of Islamic courts in Britain with full legal powers to approve polygamous marriages, grant easy divorce for men and prevent finance firms from charging interest.
The archbishop attempted to distance himself from the extreme legal systems run in Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, where adultery can be punished by death and women who behave independently risk harsh punishments.
“Nobody in their right mind, I think, would want to see in this country a kind of inhumanity that sometimes appears to be associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states – the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well,” he said.
The Ramadhan Foundation youth organisation said the scheme would help build respect and tolerance.
“What he seems to be talking about is a situation in which people are treated differently under the law according to their religion. People cannot be treated differently. Everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law.
“I don’t doubt the archbishop’s desire to accommodate diversity, but we cannot do so at the expense of our common values.”
He declared that under its influence Britain was sleepwalking to segregation.
Yesterday he said the “implication that British courts should treat people differently based on their faith is divisive and dangerous.
“It risks removing the protection afforded by law, for example, to children in custody cases or women in divorce proceedings.
“The first people who would suffer would be ethnic-minority citizens. Follow the logic of this extreme multiculturalism through and where do we end up?
Mike Judge, of the Christian Institute, said: “I am appalled that the head of the Church of England is advocating that parts of sharia law should be introduced into British law.
“The idea that you can have the moderate bits without the nasty bits coming along at a later time is naive.”
What’s my biggest problem with this? England turning into one of those countries like this:
“I was boasting about Riyadh, telling him it doesn’t deserve its bad reputation,” she said. “I told him I never experienced any harassment. I’d had no trouble as a woman. It was business as usual.”
But on Monday, Yara learned that she had been wrong. She was thrown in jail, strip-searched, threatened and forced to sign false confessions by the kingdom’s “Mutaween” police.
“When I was arrested, it was like going through an avalanche,” she said. “All of my beliefs were completely destroyed.”
She described herself as secular, and apolitical. “I am anti-political,” she said. “I have never advocated for anything in my life.”
She said she made a point of wearing an abaya and a headscarf, like most Saudi women, “out of cultural respect.”
“I observed the rules and tried not to stand out in business settings,” she said.
So, where are all the FemiNazis at? Am I to understand that they only care about womens rights in non-Islamic countries? Or are they chicken? Afraid of being bombed by those IslmaNutters? Yes, we care about your rights… as long as you aren’t in an Islamic country. Nice standards.
And as for the cultural diversity, why should we care when they obviously don’t care? They don’t take our values into consideration while we are over there. I say we shouldn’t change unless they are willing to. All this shows to me is that we are the weak ones. The strong will take over. Just watch, it’ll happen.