Thursday, 7 February 2008

What A Cantuar

Of course, Catholics, Jews and others already operate matrimonial tribunals and other things alongside the civil system. But a Rabbinical divorce is not a civil divorce, and a canonical annulment is not a civil annulment. In practice, most (if not all) of those who obtain either also obtain a divorce in the civil courts, which it is far easier to do. But Sharia Law does not admit of such things. It wants its courts to be able to grant civil divorces, but according to Sharia principles.

Instead, it is high time to entitle each divorcing spouse to one per cent of the other's estate up to fifty per cent, to disentitle the petitioning spouse unless fault be proved, to entitle any marrying couple to register their marriage as bound by the law prior to 1969 as regards grounds and procedures for divorce, to enable any religious organisation to specify that any marriage which it conducts shall be so bound (and to counsel couples accordingly), and to legislate that the Church of England be such a body unless the General Synod specifically resolve the contrary by a two-thirds majority in all three Houses.

And perhaps Dr Rowan Williams, a lifelong Labour supporter, is now considering joining the Tories. The Tories are affiliated to the European People's Party, as is Turkey's ruling AKP, the leaders of which are in no sense "former Islamists" and would not have been elected if they were. And the Tories' vehicles toured Ealing Southall proclaiming in various South Asian languages that Muslim, Hindu and Sikh festivals were to be made public holidays by the Tories.

Then that party's "Quality of Life Commission" (don't laugh, it's real) published a report advocating that "local communities" be given the power to designate three public holidays in their respective localities. In other words, the Tories are going to go around Asian areas at the next Election making this same promise all over again, adjusted according to how Muslim, Hindu or Sikh the particular constituency, ward or addressee happens to be. And it looks as if Labour might do the same. (The Lib Dems have doubtless been doing this sort of thing for years, because they will say absolutely anything according to how this or that the particular constituency, ward or addressee happens to be.)

After this, what else are these unspecified "local communities" going to decide? Who are they, exactly? I think we all know that they are the great and the good of the local mosque, mandir or gurdwara. Getting to decide this, and then a whole lot more, is to be their price for getting out the vote, sometimes consisting of nothing more than reminding their mates to fill in postal ballot papers the right way on behalf of their entire households.

These situations will easily perpetuate themselves, since people will move - not just from around the country, but from around the world - to live in these little Caliphates, Hindutvas and Khalistans.

4 comments:

  1. The recent pronouncement by the Archbishop of Canterbury is mindboggling!

    ReplyDelete
  2. But no more so than the promises being made by the Tories.

    Williams has forfeited his moral right to his particular ex officio seat in Parliament. He should resign and, if he wishes to promote the adoption of Sharia Law within the parliamentary process, seek election to the House of Commons on that basis.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "...if he wishes to promote the adoption of Sharia Law within the parliamentary process..."

    Where has Williams said this?

    I don't actually agree with what he says, but unsurprisingly his comments are being taken out of all proportion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. He has advocated the adoption of aspects of Sharia Law, that would require primary legislation (rather a lot of it, in fact), and he is within the parliamentary process.

    But he is within it ex officio, specifically as a voice and guardian of this country's Christian heritage. Fine by me, but that's not what he's doing. So he should make way for someone who will do it.

    ReplyDelete