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?