>>>The basic idea is to solve certain conflicts according to the religion of the people involved, which seems a good idea in principle (Christians being able to apply Christian laws, etc.).
>>>
>>>The protests have been mainly because Sharia can conflict with women's rights. But the proponents of allowing Sharia for Muslims say that that will not be allowed. In other words, it seems that the applicaton of Sharia would be limited.
>>
>>A good idea? Not here! Separation of Religion and State (here called Church and State) is a basic idea of democracy. Practice religion at home and Mosque, Temple, Church, not in the Courts. Stoning someone, even though it is OK in the Bible and Koran, is still a crime in any modern country, including Bolivia. Unfortunately not in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran or Nigeria.
>
>Well, I think that many people are fond of their religion, including its laws. Now, I wasn't exactly suggesting that people should be stoned, and I don't think the Canadian law - if it is ever approved - would go that far.


For some reason we have laws and sometimes some citizens are subject to them. Then again for a number of reasons some people are not.

A few years ago we had a large number of dogs disappearing around Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. The Police found out that people from Laos, were killing dogs, would bury them for several days for the meat to age, and then eat them. Mayor Feinstein had the District Attorney drop all charges citing we must be sensitive to the customs of other people. After all, who cares about a few dozen dogs and laws?

My first thought upon hearing this from our “good Mayor”, was that of the Yonomono Indians, who live between Brazil and Venezuela. Many a soldier had been killed trying to exterminate these people. The Yonomono have some interesting customs and I wondered if they moved to San Francisco, what would happen if they were to practice such things as murder, shrinking heads, and cannibalism? After all, we must accommodate the cultures of others.