I heard the Religion Report on ABC's Radio National that you refer to, Irfan.

It was interesting that the person chosen to discuss the speech was none other than Melanie Phillips, author of Londonistan. No bias there!

To be fair, they also asked a Muslim scholar's view; he just happened to be a muslim scholar who opposes sharia law.

But I can't say I have much sympathy for the idea the archbishop supposedly suggested. I, personally, would be opposed to anyone who tried to introduce separate legal systems for different groups. It goes against everything I believe in.

Cheers,

Rhys.

I don't care what one middle eastern superstition says about another. I don't believe that any middle eastern superstition has any place in the administration of secular laws or the running of a modern democratic State. Why not include Hindu and Buddhist laws if we are going to involve superstition in our legal system? Churches of all kinds have demonstrated for the last 3000+ years that all they care about is the power of their priests and amullahs and rabbis and whatever.

It seems only fair to me as an Indigenous person in Australia for Islam to impose its religion on the English, giving they imposed there's through the sword and the gun on every Indigenous people's around the world the invaded.

The western world should not fear Islam but rather concentrate its efforts to remove all form of fundamentalist religion that endanger our secular societies. Personally I am more concerned with the rising rich christian fundamentalist religion in America, than I am with some poor Islamic farmer in Iraq

Its pretty clear what sharia means.

We just have to look how Al Quaeda and Hamas act in areas under their control to understand that.

In countries at peace under Sharia, we can see too.

MMM, mm. Oppression of women, execution of political opponents and gays, suppression of free speech.

When did become ok for op-ed writers to write blustering articles about speeches they didn't read, and other writers to respond to those articles but still not engage with the issue? It's like report the controversy and respond to the controversy. Bugger the truth as long as we can engage in meta-hypothetical rant.

When did this become accepted journalism?

I mean, I can appreciate the humour of the picture of the disarrayed Islamic polity, juxtaposed next to the caricature of Islam as a monolithic menace, but it's still a superficial piece that unwittingly confirms the contention that sharia law was ever proposed in the first place.

I wish Rowan Williams was our Archbishop, what an ingenious way to get the Press in every English speaking country to say something to stir up circulation!They'd have to be paying him! "Wouldn't they?" Hey another thing- "Isn't the QUEEN the head of the Church", What a pity Dave Allen the Irish T.V. personality is not still sitting on his chair. He used to say "Goodnight and YOUR God be with you!" It's just like Rugby or Aussie Rules, bugger the rules, your Team is always in the right!