Welcome To Our Blog!

The Sisters Wade was started to give voice to a young, fresh, conservative perspective. We invite you to dialogue, debate, disagree or applaud our efforts. Hope you enjoy!

Thursday, February 14, 2008

I'm a bit confused

I am increasingly disturbed by the gross inconsistencies I see evidenced in much of the western world. I can at least respect a worldview that is consistent, but a belief system that contradicts itself at every turn is hard for me to stomach.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, the principal leader of the Church of England, recently made some unsettling comments. In the name of tolerance and diversity, he actually believes that sharia, or Islamic law, should become part of what he calls “plural jurisdiction” in Britain. This, he says, would help “maintain social cohesion”.

But what, I might ask, is “social cohesion”? Is punishing a woman because she was raped social cohesion? What about allowing a man to beat his wife? Or maybe forcing a 9-year-old girl to marry a 60-year-old man brings about social cohesion. And since when is sentencing a homosexual to death considered tolerant? All of this and more would be ushered in under sharia law.

This is why it’s confusing to me when I hear liberal feminists calling for tolerance and supporting the idea of Muslims instituting sharia law in the West. Do they not know what life is like for women under this system of warped justice?

It’s why I was a bit perplexed when a pastor in Sweden was recently thrown in jail for calling homosexuality a sin. The leader of the Church of England calls for sharia law (under which homosexuals would be killed), while another church leader is imprisoned for merely calling homosexuality a sin.

You can’t have it both ways people.

And therein lies the problem with trying to serve the god of tolerance—tolerance of one person is often a direct violation of the rights of another.

Or maybe its just Christians for whom modern pluralism has no tolerance.

But even so, can someone please enlighten me as to how it’s possible to create a society that’s simultaneously safe for the homosexual and tolerant of the Islamic extremist who wants to kill him? Or how it’s logical to tolerate Islam’s belief that the homosexual should be killed, while ranting and raving because a Christian said that the practice of homosexuality is wrong?

But then again, maybe the Archbishop is onto something with his concept of multiple legal standards. I mean, I myself might develop a proclivity for driving drunk on the wrong side of the highway at 100 mph. Why should I be restrained due to the bigotry and intolerance of the rest of society?

11 comments:

Kelley said...

My sister is smart.

Brynn said...

You need to run for office---perhaps the Presidency!! We know you learned this form of reasoning and thinking from us (and perhaps some from Chris too) Keep the thoughts coming!!
Love,
Mom and Dad

Clayton Bell said...

Awww, mom and dad are here! I know my mom reads my blog, but I've never got a comment from her...

When I get turned around in my mind about the illogic found in the arguments you've presents (and the ones that were presented on my abortion post on www.ClaytonBellOnline.com today!) I have to remember Ephesians 6:12-

"For we are not fighting against people made of flesh and blood, but against the evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against those mighty powers of darkness who rule this world, and against wicked spirits in the heavenly realms."

No amount of logic will win the day. We should still give a defense of the faith that we hold, and it should be a good defense, but it won't be with wise and persuasive words that we see the world changed.

Sometimes, as a fellow blogger, it's really hard to remember that...

portorikan said...

Kelley (mom and dad), your sister/offspring is smart.

That's very well written.
Thank you for sharing.

Ross Middleton said...

All you Wade ladies are smart. To bad there weren't more of the Wade ladies to fill the earth.

justin said...

Wow. What a privilege it is to know these Wade sisters. If it wasn't for your mom happening over to my blog I would have never read such great thoughts.

The situation with Archbishop Williams is tragic. It is even more tragic that in years past there were great men of God who held the position he did, like Cranmer and Ryle.

What is interesting, particularly here in America, is how does a religion that claims universal and exclusive truth fit into pluralistic societies? For most tolerance is not stepping on their toes, but they do not care if they step on yours.

Great thoughts I look forward to following your thoughts.

Justin Sok

PS: As one who has blogged for almost three years, it is hard to keep up with it. But it can be rewarding if you hang in there.

Amy Middleton said...

wow, that is so well said. I'm glad there are people like ya'll to point out the world's insanity, somebody's gotta do it. You got my vote for office!

Michele Kenyette said...

Kacey, Well said!
Hey Kelley!!

b. sok said...

I'm glad this blog was recommended to me... good stuff wade sisters.

p.s. I miss middlesexway

snowhite197 said...

Wonderful post. Might I point out that Archbishop Williams did not actually suggest that sharia law be adopted 'as is' and stated that he did not endorse 'the kind of inhumanity' associated with sharia law in some Islamic states?

I do think it is still a cause for concern, even after his 'mea culpa' address (which was NOT an apology) in which he took responsibility for "any unclarity in either the text or in the radio interview, and for any misleading choice of words that has helped to cause distress or misunderstanding among the public at large and especially among my fellow Christians."

I do think the Archbishop's remarks in his original speech further confirmed disturbing trends in Britain (and Europe) including the degredation of the family unit.

For example, "under Islamic law polygamy is condoned, allowing a man up to four wives and giving him the primary right to call for divorce. This means he can leave his first wife, refuse her a divorce and remarry, yet still consider himself living in accordance with his faith." If the British court decides to honor this aspect of sharia law, all good Christians (and good feminists!) had better have a problem with that.

What the Archbishop said that disturbed me the most was that introducing certain aspects of sharia law into the British legal system seemed inevitable if Britain wants to accomplish social cohesion "in which groups of serious and profound conviction are not systematically faced with the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty." (Williams)

(BTW, It's also interesting that he, a Christian, would say that, for a totally unrelated reason. It makes me wonder if anyone ever showed him the bit about being salt and light...)

ps all quotes were taken from the guardian.

Kelley said...

Welcome Sok brothers.

Justin, I'm glad someone like you is working in Washington.

Brandon, I miss Middlesex Way too.

Good to hear from you both.