"the Shariah as a system of personal law can co-exist with the Australian legal system."

If this is the case, why doesn't Islamic leadership in Australia get on with declaring our system "100% Sharia Compatible"?

If our current legal system can accomodate Sharia law, I for one am over the moon. I am a little confused as to why Islamic leadership consistently state that they are seeking changes to accomodate Sharia law if it can coexist with the Australian legal system but what the hell let's get on with it.

This statement indicates compatiblity with "the Australian legal system". This indicates that no changes are necessary to the Australian legal system, otherwise it would be another Australian legal system. If there are changes necessary, this statement is incorrect. To make changes to our legal system to make a minority of 1.5% of our population feel comfortable is ridiculous. It brings to mind the proverb about a man of middle-eastern appearance and the mountain.

If the statement "the Shariah as a system of personal law can co-exist with the Australian legal system" is true, you have won the arguement for me. Let's get on with it, get our Sharia certification and lay this issue to rest.

This article reminds me of the arguments used to justify communism. Namely that there was nothing wrong with communism per se, the problem was in its implementation...

Exactly.

Wizbang said it best:

* I believe any legal system that permits a man to complete a divorce by reciting "woman, I divorce you" three times, but gives no such option -- in fact, hardly any option -- to the woman is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that gives women almost no say in who they marry, when they marry, is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that makes such private, consensual acts as homosexuality, adultery, and fornication capital offenses is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that includes such penalties as physical maiming is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that requires an allegation of rape to be supported by at least two male witnesses is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that punishes women who claim to be raped, but do not provide those two witnesses, to have confessed to adultery or fornication and punishes them as above is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that values the rights and testimony of the adherents of one faith over others is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that mandates women to cover as much of themselves when in public is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that mandates women be accompanied at all times by a male relative is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that mandates adult women of any age need their male guardian's permission for ANYTHING is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that presumes that men are filled with uncontrollable lusts that can be unleashed by the slightest provocation by a woman is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that blames the woman for provoking those lusts in a man is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that is based purely on the tenets of a religion, and mandates that all must obey those tenets regardless of their beliefs, is uncivilized.

Part II...

* I believe any legal system that says men may marry outside the faith, but women cannot, is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that tolerates "female circumcision" -- the removal of the clitoris and, occasionally, other tissue -- is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that makes apostasy -- leaving one's faith -- a crime and punishes it with death is uncivilized.

* I believe any legal system that punishes those who proselytize any faith besides Islam, and rewards those who promote it, is uncivilized.

” Based only on the information available in the media, it is not surprising that the ordinary Australian believes that the Shariah is cruel and barbaric and has no place in Australia.”

It is unlikely that an academic would have the slightest idea what “ordinary Australians” believe about Shariah law, particularly as this one believes that these ordinary types accept everything they read, hear and see in the media as the gospel truth. Ordinary Australians are very cynical about the media, and academics.

Shariah law is, Hussain says, one of the world’s great legal systems, and “an alternative to Australia’s British derived Common Law”. Well, it is not an alternative to Australian law, madam, because it is based on religion. It may very well work in Muslim dominated countries, but not here where 1.5% of the population follows the faith. Even our pathetically weak politicians are not going to give it any credence.

The idea of personal “law” is nonsense. All people in Australia are required to abide by Australian law, and Australian law protects them – even from mad mullahs.

The real objection to Shariah Law is not its compatibilty or lack thereof, or our misunderstandings about its values and benefits...bla bla bla...

No amount of sugar coating and “media selling" will change or disguise the fact that Islam is NOT an acceptable religion by our Judeo-Christian / Democratic standards to begin with.

A fact that our political leaders are finally accepting.

The notion that Islam is allowed to exist and to prosper in our free society does not necessarily mean that it’s acceptable as a legitimate and non-intrusive beast.

Its Origins, its Prophet, its Books, Revelations, Customs and Tenets are ALL highly questionable to the thinking person and theologians alike – and no amount of sweetening will ever change those contentions.

How can we even pursue any dialogue with such a system when its very FOUNDATION is unauthentic and doubtful at best?