Archbishop Rowan and Islamic Law

Apparently, the Archbishop of Canterbury has suggested that it would be a good idea if the British government were to defer to Islamic law in some instances within the Islamic “community” of individuals living in Great Britain. Many are outraged by this suggestion, among them the frequently outraged Christopher Hitchens. In this case, I agree with Mr. Hitchens. Here is his recent Slate post about this, and here is his description of situation that might arise if the Archbishop were to get his wish:

• Picture the life of a young Urdu-speaking woman brought to Yorkshire from Pakistan to marry a man—quite possibly a close cousin—whom she has never met. He takes her dowry, beats her, and abuses the children he forces her to bear. She is not allowed to leave the house unless in the company of a male relative and unless she is submissively covered from head to toe. Suppose that she is able to contact one of the few support groups that now exist for the many women in Britain who share her plight. What she ought to be able to say is, "I need the police, and I need the law to be enforced." But what she will often be told is, "Your problem is better handled within the community." And those words, almost a death sentence, have now been endorsed and underwritten—and even advocated—by the country's official spiritual authority.
• You might argue that I am describing an extreme case (though, alas, now not an uncommon one), but it is the principle of equality before the law that really counts.

This is, for me, an extremely sticky point. My overall outlook and attitude is one of due respect for cultural and religious differences. However, I cannot abide the argument that we (i.e., any government of which I am a citizen) must defer to harmful, cruel, and oppressive practices if and when they are defended and justified by reason of culture/religion.

A few weeks ago there was an article in the NY Times Magazine about the genital mutilation of young girls, the practice often euphemistically known as “female circumcision.” The only part of the article that I saw was the photograph of a young girl’s face, as she was held down, screaming, as she was being savagely, irreparably mutilated; and I found that I could not bear to read the article. I hope that some people did read it, and that it accomplished some good. Knowing that this and other brutal practices are, if not defended, ever tolerated or justified because they have “cultural” or “religious” antecedents is absolutely abhorrent to me. So, Christopher Hitchens, I don’t always agree with you… but on this one, I do. Archbishop Rowan, please give this a little more thought.