>Alan,
>
>>>>>>>>Walter, I think you are missing Dan's point. Would you accept sharia law even if only for muslims in Holland. In principle do you think sharia law is ok for those who wish to live under it in Holland?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I think that legal systems within legal systems aren't that uncommon. You become a member of a club, or sign a contract with some entity, and the membership rules or contract clauses pretty much become law for those who signed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>However, there's a huge difference in status - once a specific group's internal laws are recognized as laws, they become much more than club rules. If such a status change was allowed anywhere, that'd be, IMO, a mouse hole through which elephants can walk later. It's the beginning of the end of the "everyone is equal in court" axiom.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well said. I was also thinking about how Walter would feel to see the first stoning for adultery in a public square in Amsterdam? But involving only those who wanted to live under sharia, of course.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>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,
>>>>
>>>>Walter, there is no Ontario Implimentation. It was shot down. Rightfully so, imho.
>>>
>>>I meant the proposed implementation.
>>>>
>>>>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.
>>>
>>>I agree in that. However, having all kinds of comments on the sharia and refer to human rights at those countries that have implemented that, is way over the edge. If you want to look at issues in other countries you'll have to look with eyes of their culture and not with our western eyes. That is the biggest mistake the western world makes currently. We like to judge everyting from a western perspective without respecting other cultures.
>
>>I understand what you're saying, and if I were going to live in a muslim country, I'd agree that I have to change my perspective, but in this case, they are coming to live here, and for my money, they are the ones who have to change their perspective. They have to look at it from a western point of view in terms of human rights etc, not the other way around. If they want Sharia, then they should be emigrating to a country in which that sort of culture is acceptable. To come to a country where the culture is entirely different and expect their new countrymen to somehow be ok with their interpretation of human rights, or the lack of it, is simply expecting too much.
>
>>Bottom line is that if I go there, my pov has to shift. If they come here, then it's the other way around.
>
>In principle I agree. But tell me what happenend in Holland. In the 60-ties and 70-ties we had a shortage of workers, so we invited workers from Turkey and Marrocco and some other countries to do the 'dirty work' no-one else was willing to do. They were called somethink like 'Guest workers' (in dutch gast-arbeiders'. The intention was that after a few years of working here they would return to their homelands, so there was no plan to educate them or letting them learn the language and culture.
>
>You know as well as I do that if you clump foreign people together, they will create their own little world and live by their culture and rules. Even in Toronto you have large communities of ethnic groups (e.g. chinese) which largely live under their culture (BTW, I'm writing this currently in Toronto).
>
>Bottom line is that if you want large groups of foreigners to integrate into your society, the government has to make sure that they will. In North America this is less of a problem AFAICS as esspecially in the US, it is either accept the culture or starve to death. In Europe this is less the case. Our border was way to open for refuguees and other people (union of family) without any restriction and no obligation to adapt the dutch culture and laws.
>
>So, in holland we are guilty of not having enough done on making sure integration succeeds. The current administration finally has more eye to that and are trying to do something about that.
>
>
>But to come back onto your argument. I've met someone from marrocco who has been in the country for about 6 years at that time and unlike fellow country men, did not live in his own world and decided to integrate by working with dutch and building up dutch friends. He spoke dutch fluently despite he must have been in his mid 30-ties at that time. He now has a respectable job at our city hall.
>
>But this would have been much different if he would have stayed in the marroccan society. There would be a fair chance he would be criminal soon after.
>
>What I mean to say here is that if you go to a muslin country on your own, I agree you will likely integrate quick because you have to. If you take a hundred other torontian friends with you, it certainly would be less of a success.
>
>But bottom line, I agree, foreigners should integrate, but I certainly think that they should be helped by the government to make sure they integrate. If you don't do that, don't be suprised that they will stick to their own culture, laws and morales.
>
>Walter,

I agree that one of the governments jobs must be to help to integrate immigrants, but I disagree that one of the ways to do it is for the government to allow them to live by their own laws. How would implimenting Sharia help muslims to integrate into Canadian culture? What it would do would be to disincent them to bother to integrate. It would be entirely counter-productive.

I don't care if immigrants never learn to speak English, nor do I care if they never learn to like big macs with ketchup (I shudder). I do care that they learn to abide by the laws of the land in which they've chosen to live. If a law that is a remnant of their old country, conflicts with Canadian law, Canadian law must prevail. In fact, the question should never arise. I one chooses, of their own free will, to live in a country, then they must choose also to abide by that country's legal system. They have to learn to see their old legal system as null and void. Anyone who cannot do that should be asked to leave.