Multiculturalism For the Win
Someone explain to me why this is not a reasonable extension of the multiculturalism argument.
For five days now, the Archbishop of Canterbury has been chorusing: how do you solve a problem like Sharia? Ever since he suggested it is “unavoidable” – and desirable – for Britain to have Islamic courts ruling on Muslim family affairs, bashing the bishop has become a national sport. But this row shouldn’t be just about the pitiful contortions of the head of a dying Church. Rowan Williams has shown us why the doctrine of multiculturalism needs to abandoned.
If you really believe that Britain is comprised of a smorgasbord of “cultures” that need to be preserved, promoted and respected as an end in itself, then this proposal is perfectly logical. Different cultures should have different courts, and rules, and schools.
February 15th, 2008 at 11:03 am
No it’s not. You can be accepting of other cultures’ behavior, as long as it is follows the law of the land. If these British Muslims wish to allow the Mullahs of an Islamic “court” to rule their lives, that is their choice as free people, and as long as they are not breaking any laws in the process, they should be left alone.
Multiculturalism does not mean multi-legal-system. There should only be one system of courts for everyone–this is an integral part of the unity of a state. Muslims in Britain also have the option of following Sharia law, which harsh though it may be, is not state enforced. Sharia law in Britain resides inside the space created by the state’s laws, and cannot extend any further.
My hope is that these Muslim females in Britain, seeing or experiencing the inherent sexism under Sharia law, will realize that they have the choice to opt out. I feel it is only a matter of time before there is a widespread sexual revolution in the Muslim world. In this world of increasing globalization and freedom, I do not see how this could not happen eventually. Perhaps they will not go completely equal, as sex roles are deeply ingrained in the culture, but I forsee dramatic improvements.
February 15th, 2008 at 11:40 am
What if the Muslim law is inextricably linked to the culture as many Mulisms argue. How then do you apply English law on Muslims that wish to be dealt with through Sharia law as a way of preserving their culture.
February 15th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
If someone wants to do something that breaks a law, they have to either move to somewhere that doesn’t have that law or get arrested. I don’t know of anyone who places the multiculturalism argument above rule of law.
February 15th, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Do you even read what I quote. Sheesh the is about how people in Brittan are saying that Muslims should their own Judicial System based on Sharia law.
February 17th, 2008 at 2:34 am
Umm, you mean the one guy who blurted it out in a lecture with a lot of reservations and provisos, was universally vilified for it and nearly forced to resign, and almost immediately started backpedalling on the statement? Ok, yes, you found one crazy person who said something stupid one time… no, I’m not letting you generalize his statement to all liberals.
February 17th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Not him, what he said. Does it have merit. How is not consistent with multiculturalism?
February 17th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Perhaps it is, but that’s doesn’t mean that holding a multiculturalist perspective means you have to favor abandoning the rule of law. Just as it’s demonstrably true that eating plants is better for the environment than eating animals, I can still think that taking care of the environment is a good idea without being a vegetarian. Other concerns are allowed to take precedent.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that yes, following multicultaralism to its logical end, just like following ANYTHING to its logical end, leads to undesirable conclusions. This is why all forms of extremism are bad; it’s not a valid criticism of the moderates within the movement.