Posted on 09/09/2005 8:56:41 PM PDT by Allan
Fear not Sharia in Ontario
The ongoing brouhaha surrounding Ontario's possible approval of Sharia law
as a basis for legal arbitration of family disputes reflects the suspicions many Westerners harbour toward Islam
in the wake of 9/11 and other terror attacks.
With activists fearing any validation of Sharia in Ontario may lead to similar moves elsewhere,
the issue has attracted international attention:
Yesterday, protest marches took place not only in Toronto and Ottawa,
but also in 10 other cities among them Montreal, Ottawa, Paris and London.
" But while critics are correct to guard against the validation of extreme religious practices,
there is no such risk imminent in Ontario.
Despite all the shrill protests,
Dalton McGuinty's provincial government should "approve the use of Sharia in arbitration,
as recommended in a report by former Ontario attorney general Marion Boyd
nine months ago.
To listen to protesters, such a move Willleave Muslim women victimized
by the overtly sexist principles encoded in centuries-old Islamic law.
According to the most breathless accounts,
women will be kept as virtual slaves, denied divorces, separated from their children,
cheated out of inheritances and devalued as witnesses.
None of this will happen.
To begin with, as with all forms of voluntary arbitration,
Canadian Muslims must opt in before they are bound by Sharia.
The majority of women will not do so if it would mean being transported back to the Middle Ages.
Secondly, any application of Ontario's Arbitration Act is subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,
which means judgments discriminating against women would be struck down.
Thirdly, even absent Charter protections, the McGuinty government -
as well as both of the province's opposition parties -
has signalled that implementation of Sharia would be conditiona
l on the protection of women's rights.
(Consequently, as we see it, whatever Muslim arbitration code comes out this process will be so watered down by equality dictates
that it will be a stretch to call it "Sharia" at all.
But that's not the public's problem.)
Fourthly, it is important to remember
that this would not be the first time a traditional religious group has used Ontario's Arbitration Act
to apply its doctrines in the legal sphere.
Orthodox Jews - no great friends of feminism
have been doing so for years,
with little complaint or notice until Muslims decided they wanted the same right.
The fact that such an inconsequential fight has brought Ontario on to the world stage
illustrates how much has changed since Sept. 11, 2001.
Four years ago, most Westerners saw Islam as just another major world religion.
Now, even the most severely bounded application of its tenets is seen as a threat to human rights.
Notwithstanding the barbaric acts
committed by those extremists who purport to be acting in the name of Islam,
Canadians and other Westerners should get beyond this knee-jerk reaction.
In Ontario and elsewhere,
Muslims should enjoy the same legal rights as everyone else.
This was really inevitable from a fairness point of view. The Ontario government already sanctions Christian arbitration, or Jewish arbitration, and now their being asked to sanction Sharia. Of course they are... from they day they decided to name sanctioned religions in their arbitration act, it was inevitable that they would have to sanction everything. Scientology will probably be coming up soon, or maybe the Raelians. Adding Sharia is just an additional mistake following the arbitration act... a perfect example of why government should stay out of religious affairs, and religions out of government affairs.
Orthodox Judiasm doesn't sanction wife beating, polygamy, child marriage, honor killing, clitoridectomy, the list goes on and on. What a deluded fool this writer is.
Personally, I find the Sun chain of papers to be more supportive of the Conservatives. Yes, the National Post used to be THE Conservative periodical. However, I don't believe that is completely true anymore.
Individual liberty before God vs. rule by those who claim to speak for God.
The Post was bought a few years ago from Conrad Black by the Aspers (bigtime Liberal party supporters). The changes in the beginning were subtle but it has been a steady decline since. Bye the way, this is why Steyn left - virtually coincided with the day the Aspers took over.
"Four years ago, most Westerners saw Islam as just another major world religion."
Then we woke up, and came to realize it is actually a Cult of Oppression and Death.
Muslims should enjoy the same legal rights as everyone else."
They do. They want extra rights.
No harm comes from a legal code attempting to return us to Arabia circa 600 and something? Gee, we didn't know. We mean, just look at all those prosperous countries under Sharia law. What, you mean if you take away the oil, their collective GDP is less than that of Finland?
The Post was bought a few years ago from Conrad Black by the Aspers (bigtime Liberal party supporters).
Any chance Rupert Murdoch is interested to start a major broadsheet in the great white north? This Australian bloke does have his actue business sense to start conservative alternatives to the leftist groupspeak among the established media in many Western countries. A new national paper with an editorial stand essentially similar to The Australian will attract some new readers (Hey, it even has Mark Steyn!) although I do know it will be a redneck paper outside Alberta.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.