Williams just can’t leave sharia alone

BOY, is the bearded weirdie Rowan Williams a glutton for punishment!

Sharia fan Archbishop Rowan Williams

Sharia fan Archbishop Rowan Williams

A year after the Archbishop of Cant prompted howls of outrage by suggesting that it “seems inevitable” that some parts of Islamic law would be enshrined in this country’s legal code, he has bounced back claiming that “a number of fairly senior people” now take the same view.

And once again, he has been slapped down by people who have a far better grip on reality.

According to this report, Williams insists that there is a “drift of understanding” towards what he was saying, and that the public sees the difference between letting Muslim courts decide divorces and wills, and allowing them to rule on criminal cases and impose harsh punishments.

However critics insist that family disputes must be dealt with by civil law rather than according to religious principles, and claim the Archbishop’s comments have only helped the case of extremists while making Muslim women worse off, because they do not have equal rights under Islamic law.

Douglas Murray, the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion, said:

He has started a process which is deeply dangerous, damaging to Britain and to Muslim women in Britain. It was a wicked move because it undermines the progressives and gives succour to the extremists.

How does the Archbishop of Canterbury know, sitting in Lambeth Palace, that a woman in Bolton has volunteered to give up half her inheritance to her brother?

Neil Addison, a barrister who specialises in religious discrimination cases, said:

I think the Archbishop has failed to give a justification for sharia law. What’s the advantage it would bring to British Muslims and to British law? I believe his speech was deeply harmful to British Muslims because it helps the separation of them from the rest of society.

What he was asking for was sharia dealing with wills and divorce, which are public areas of law, not private ones.

Ironically, Williams chose to re-enter the debate just as the One Law for All Organization, which vehemently opposes sharia in the UK, was preparing for a rally in London on March 7.

As part of International Women’s Day, One Law for All supporters will gather at Trafalgar Square in the afternoon, then March to the Conway Hall in Holborn for a public meeting  – Sharia Law, Sexual Apartheid and Women’s
Rights – and an arts competition.

19 responses to “Williams just can’t leave sharia alone”

  1. remigius says:

    Seeing the Grand Wizard of Canterbury in that picture reminds me of something my grandma used to say…

    “If you wanna look a twat wear a silly hat”

    Gawd bless ‘er.

  2. valdemar says:

    Perhaps we should institute some kind of Dhimmi Quisling award for Islamic appeasers? Dr Williams would be on the shortlist.

  3. David L says:

    Williams is simply one of those people who doesn’t care what you believe in without evidence, just as long as you do believe something without evidence. There can’t be any other explanation for why he would want to bring in Islamic laws when he is top honcho of the Anglican church.

    Also, thanks for the heads up on the demonstration. I’ll definately be going with my camera to document it. Actually Barry, we should arrange a Freethinker meetup for everyone on this site in London if people can make it. Would be a good opportunity to meet the regulars of this site.

  4. Shargraves says:

    I liked him on that Dawkin’s program where he basically admitted that he spoke vacuous, florid, guff that was impossible to define.

  5. newspaniard says:

    The trouble with being an Arch-Bishop is that he’s forgotton his basic training. He should be on a big horse; wearing armour emblazoned with the cross of St. George; wielding a big sword; leading hordes of screaming christian fundies against the fundies in Regents Park mosque. NOT trying to give away our hard won freedoms to people who think it’s still the seventh century.

  6. Wurble says:

    I love the picture! It hardly seems necessary to comment on the stupidity of his views when he looks like that. I know you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover but when the cover is that funny you just know the content will be absurd!

  7. Broga says:

    There he is, dressed up like clown, that little smirk, and clumping along with that big stick in front of him: but what is he trying to do? Intellectually brilliant and with zilch emotional intelligence. Utterly detached from reality: reminds me of that other great believer Charles “Mogabe” Windsor who prates on about the environment and serving his people while flying around South America (£300,000 for the trip) to inform himself about the environment.

  8. H. Davids says:

    Let’s assume the British system enshrines some aspects of sharia. What’s next: fundamentalist Hindus claiming it’s okay to have widows leap onto funeral pyres, and if they don’t want to do that, give her a helping hand? It’s going to be a race between fundis this way: crazy christians, muslims, hindus, jews etcetera to make the lifes of the rest of the world as miserable as possible.

  9. Rozi says:

    Clowns to the left of me, fundies to the right, here I am…

  10. Rozi says:

    Stuck in Sharia with you.

  11. remigius says:

    Looks like Rozi’s given up on the medication again.

    Still if you can’t beat ’em…

    ‘How do you solve a problem like sharia?’

  12. Bendigeiduran says:

    H. Davids, this might interest you.

    Sir Charles Napier, of ‘Peccavi’ fame, comes to mind.
    I copy and paste the following from Wikipedia,

    “A story for which Napier is famous involves a delegation of Hindu locals approaching him and complaining about prohibition of Sati, often referred to at the time as suttee, by British authorities. This was the custom of burning widows alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands. The exact wording of his response varies somewhat in different reports, but the following version captures its essence:

    “You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.””

  13. quedula says:

    Brilliant comments here guys. Funny, biting, accurate. Does anyone know the archprick’s email address so we can forward them.

  14. Gloworm says:

    Swing Lo, sweet Sharia, coming for to divide the whole of British society – nah doesn’t quite scan.

    If I get into a spot of bother with the law, I will insist that I can only be tried under the supreme laws of the Flying Teapot as I fundamentally refuse to accept British law over Teapotism.

  15. dead yeti says:

    i would love to know if the bish thinks only Muslims should be able to use sharia law in deciding things like wills? and does he believe that if they are a muslim that sharia should be imposed on them even if one party wanted common british law? such as maybe in a divorce
    would we be able to pick and chose depending on what we think may have the most favourable outcomes?

    anyway David L i will almost certainly be on that march, so if there is a meet up count me in (though i know i’m probably to new to be counted as a regular), and remember its now illegal to take photos of the police so be careful where you point your camera

  16. Godless not gormless says:


    ‘How do you solve a problem like sharia?’

    LOL Brilliant!!! 😮

  17. Stonyground says:

    Mrs Stonyground has commented that Sharia sounds more like a girls name than a system of justice. As for Rowan, he seems to be doing a good job of being a worse arch-bish than his predecessor, much like Pope Ratty is doing for the Catholics.

  18. Alun says:

    Can someone tell me how I can get the header pic for this article turned into a christmas card?

  19. Theo says:

    He can even make it Anglican church law. the hell I care!