so the archbishop of canterbury made the news last week with this rousing bit of logic on Sharia in Britain. in short, this so-called man of great faith thinks that Britain should allow for culture courts that settle disputes under the laws and norms of their respective communities rather than the laws of land. uhhh, you say one shouldn't have to make "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty???" um, yes, they should. that is the basis for the rule of law, one of the fundamental principles of modern society. and, they should especially when half the population in these communities is ritually disenfranchised. in modern society, the only veil that should be worn is a veil of ignorance.
also, how much of a faithful leader can you be when you cannot even stick up for your own culture? as the wise christopher hitchens has said, "to hell with the archbishop of canterbury."
[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.
aside from the utterly baffling philosophical implications of this quote, the more obvious fallacy should be apparent to even the simplest among us. excuse me, bishop, but is it not your job to teach that God supposedly decreed that there is one law for everybody and that is all there is to be said?
