>>You missed the point entirely. Any implementation of the sharia (except in a very few countries like Iran, saudi ariabia and nigeria) could not violate the national law. IOW if it were to be implemented (I don't agree with) it would never conflict the national law (read about the ontario implementation). If any of the parties involved in an issue disagrees with the outcome they can escalate the issue to the national law.
>
>Walter, there is no Ontario Implimentation. It was shot down. Rightfully so, imho.
>
>You said in another post that we need to look at this not from a western pov. The problem is that we are a western nation. Why would somebody immigrating to a western thinking nation expect the people of that nation to suddenly stop seeing things from a western pov. Thinking from a western pov is made us what we are - a country into which others want to immigrate.
>
>If people want to immigrate to Canada, I'm all for it. Diversity is the spice of life, but there is certain baggage that I feel needs to left in the old home. Canada has laws that protect us. Sharia is an add on that obfuscates the rights to which everyone in this country is supposed to be entitled - including muslim women. They don't have to change much in their lives in order to live here, but they should, at the very least, expect to have to live under a new sort of legal system without trying to jury-rig it into something they left behind.

I'd call for reciprocity. The foreign laws should be applicable for citizens of country A in country B only as much as the laws of country B are applicable to its citizens in country A. For example, their women should be allowed to walk fully covered in Canada only if Canadian women are allowed to walk in mini skirts in their country. And whenever anyone asks for something like that, run this test. If it fails, deny the request.