Originally Posted by robot lenin
The Archbishop of Canterbury (the most senior member of the Church of England) recently stated that he supports the introduction of some aspects of Sharia Law (the religious law of the Islamic faith) in the UK, so that Muslims do not have to decide between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

Now, I'm against all organised religion in equal measure, so why does the western legal system - which is clearly based on the Judeo-Christian faith - have primacy over the legal system of another faith. Admittedly, I find any kind of legal code which supports amputation of limbs - no matter how rarely - and stoning to death (see the Wikipedia entry) abhorrent, but maybe that's because I was brought up as a Christian and have therefore been brainwashed into supporting western values. I was just wondering if anyone had any views on the subject of why one legal code is seen as better than another in the west.
They have tried to do this in Canada as recently as lika last year sometime. Some mUslims in Ontario, I think it was there, wanted to govern themselves under aspects of Sharia law but our government wouldn't allow it.

Yes Christianity has a long long history of believing their religion is the right one and everyone else is going to hell. At the time I heard of this, the imposing of one religion over another was not what bothered me the most. What bothered me is that Sharia laws are very dangerous, to women for example. I agree with the Canadian government disallowing any kind of a code that violates human rights.