Jerusalem Post
February 13, 2008
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5462
Beneath the deceptively placid surface of everyday life, the British
population is engaged in a momentous encounter with Islam. Three
developments of the past week, each of them culminating years' long
trends – and not just some odd occurrence – exemplify changes now
underway.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith describes terrorism as "anti-Islamic."
First, the UK government has decided that terrorism by Muslims in the name
of Islam is actually unrelated to Islam, or is even anti-Islamic. This
notion took root in 2006 when the Foreign Office, afraid that the term
"war on terror" would inflame British Muslims, sought language that
upholds "shared values as a means to counter terrorists." By early 2007,
the European Union issued a classified handbook that banned jihad,
Islamic, and fundamentalist in reference to terrorism, offering instead
some "non-offensive" phrases. Last summer, Prime Minister Gordon Brown
prohibited his ministers from using the word Muslim in connection with
terrorism. In January, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith went further, actually
describing terrorism as "anti-Islamic." And last week the Home Office
completed the obfuscation by issuing a counter-terrorism phrasebook that
instructs civil servants to refer only to violent extremism and criminal
murderers, not Islamist extremism and jihadi-fundamentalists.
Second, and again culminating several years of evolution, the British
government now recognizes polygamous marriages. It changed the rules in
the "Tax Credits (Polygamous Marriages) Regulations 2003": previously,
only one wife could inherit assets tax-free from a deceased husband; this
legislation permits multiple wives to inherit tax-free, so long as the
marriage had been contracted where polygamy is legal, as in Nigeria,
Pakistan, or India. In a related matter, the Department for Work and
Pensions began issuing extra payments to harems for such benefits as
jobseeker allowances, housing subventions, and council tax relief. Last
week came news that, after a year-long review, four government
departments (Work and Pensions, Treasury, Revenue and Customs, Home
Office) concluded that formal recognition of polygamy is "the best
possible" option for Her Majesty's Government.
Third, the archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, endorsed applying
portions of the Islamic law (the Shari'a) in Great Britain. Adopting its
civil elements, he explained, "seems unavoidable" because not all British
Muslims relate to the existing legal system and applying the Shari'a would
help with their social cohesion. When Muslims can go to an Islamic civil
court, they need not face "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or
state loyalty." Continuing to insist on the "legal monopoly" of British
common law rather than permit Shari'a, Williams warned, would bring on "a
bit of a danger" for the country.
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams says that Islamic law in Great
Britain "seems unavoidable."
Prime Minister Brown immediately slammed Williams' suggestion: Shari'a
law, his office declared, "cannot be used as a justification for
committing breaches of English law, nor can the principle of Shari'a law
be used in a civilian court. … the Prime Minister believes British law
should apply in this country, based on British values." Criticism of
Williams came additionally from all sides of the political spectrum –
from Sayeeda Warsi, the Tory (Muslim) shadow minister for community
cohesion and social action; Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats;
and Gerald Batten of the United Kingdom Independence Party. Secular and
Christian groups opposed Williams. So did Trevor Phillips, head of the
equality commission. The Anglican church in Australia denounced his
proposal, along with leading members of his own church, including his
predecessor, Lord Carey. Melanie Phillips called his argument "quite
extraordinarily muddled, absurd and wrong." The Sun newspaper
editorialized tha!
t "It's easy to dismiss Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams as a
silly old goat. In fact he's a dangerous threat to our nation." It
concluded acerbically that "The Archbishop of Canterbury is in the wrong
church."
Although widely denounced (and in danger of losing his job), Williams may
be right about the Shari'a being unavoidable, for it is already getting
entrenched in the West. A Dutch justice minister announced that "if
two-thirds of the Dutch population should want to introduce the Shari'a
tomorrow, then the possibility should exist." A German judge referred to
the Koran in a routine divorce case. A parallel Somali gar courts system
already exists in Britain.
These developments suggest that British appeasement concerning the war on
terror, the nature of the family, and the rule of law are part of a
larger pattern. Even more than the security threat posed by Islamist
violence, these trends are challenging and perhaps will change the very
nature of Western life.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This e-mail has been sent via JARING webmail at http://www.jaring.my
No comments:
Post a Comment