Disagreeing with the Archbishop : Part II
Before I quote some of the reactions, however, I must also set the facts right. Lot of people have tried to take a high moral ground [including most politicians] saying that there can not be different laws for different people. Which is grossly incorrect, as Jewish courts are in existence in Britain [Read http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7233040.stm] and I would refuse to believe that the high-sounding politicians are unaware of their existence. Dr. Williams, in his speech, asked for no more than a consideration of a similar system for Muslims.
Now, consider this reaction: 'Alison Ruoff, a Synod member from London, said: "Many people, huge numbers of people, would be greatly relieved [if he resigned] because he sits on the fence over all sorts of things and we need strong, Christian, biblical leadership right now, as opposed to somebody who huffs and puffs around and vacillates from one thing to another. He's a very able, a brilliant scholar as a man but in terms of being a leader of the Christian community I think he's actually at the moment a disaster."' [BBC News Item]
So, the British Christians need a Pope, it seems. Or, do they need someone like Mullah Omar - his Christian equivalent. Or, a person like Pat Robertson, the evangelical preacher who changed America!
Or this: 'Colonel Armitstead, a Synod member from the diocese of Bath and Wells, said Dr Williams should move to work in a university setting instead of leading the Anglican Church.
"One wants to be charitable, but I sense that he would be far happier in a university where he can kick around these sorts of ideas." ' [Same BBC News Item]
One gets the sense that it is not okay to be flexible for a religious leader, not okay to talk about new ideas, not okay to talk about engaging another community. Where are we going here?
A Masih from Birmingham comments : "I am sad to hear that a Christian is saying this. Someone who knows the Bible would never say this. Becuase for Christians everything that they believe is based on the Bible. I think he should resign because as a leader he is not leaving a good example for other Christians to follow. Britain is blessed as many of its laws are based on the Bible."
The question he has to answer is why it is okay to have laws based on bible, but not on Koran/ Hadith. Remember, we are talking Britain here - a modern, educated democracy!
Another reader comments that she stayed in Singapore and had to follow their laws. So, why would 'these people', who have come to UK, would not follow UK laws? Well, yes, indeed.
Dr. Williams has done a great job at uncovering the key issues obstructing social cohesion. For all the talk of British Muslims staying in the ghettos and not trying to integrate, it seems that most people - all politicians, all the media, almost everyone who cares to post a comment - believe that such integration must be on 'British' terms. So, anyone subscribing to another faith in Britain must behave as a guest, even if they are born and brought up here. So, integration essentially means being on your knees - all immigrants and anyone different [even if they are British] are still the barbarian who this great white race will need to educate in 'their ways of life'.
It is more of a purity of blood and faith issue [someone reading Modern European history will remember another country with such false sense of identity] and anyone even suggesting flexibility and engagement is not fit for a public role.
Dr. Williams made a serious mistake, however: He did not know how xenophobic the British public have become.