Ontario Sharia Tribunals Will Not Be

Ontario’s Premier has announced that the idea of establishing religious Sharia tribunals to deal with Muslim family disputes in Ontario will not come to be. In the process, all religious tribunals will be dismantled.

Dalton McGuinty doesn’t seem to have understood the message from some of the opponents of the Sharia tribunals. Instead, he has identified all religious arbitration as inherently harmful, whereas yesterday such tribunals for Jews, Catholics, Jehova Witnesses and Mennonites were just fine. But suddenly today, McGuinty said religious arbitrations “threaten our common ground.â€? “There will be no Sharia law in Ontario. There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario. There will be one law for all Ontarians.â€? Of course, that’s nonsense. By McGuinty’s statement, one would think that Ontarians have been under more than one law, and it has taken him this long to figure out the presence of a threat!

Many of the most vocal opponents to the Sharia attacked the idea arguing that it would legitimise a tradition that is unfriendly to women’s rights. The debate shows once again how unworkable is the Canadian multicultural premise. Clearly, all cultural values are not equal. In this case, women’s liberties are seen as incompatible with aspects of the Muslim culture. Such cases expose the lie of multiculturalism: the belief that of all values are equal and that all cultural values are mutually harmonious.

Unable to admit that Judeo-Christian arbitration was accepted and worked because the background to our legal system is Jude0-Christian in origin, McGuinty simply veers completely in the other direction, looking to outlaw all religious arbitration. The move shows that liberal tolerance is baseless and aimless, and it typically fails to recognise that one cannot tolerate all things. And what is more, the contemporary liberal theory of tolerance seems less and less able to demonstrate why some things ought to be tolerated and others not. Such stand would require a defined set of beliefs other than liberal ideology, and alas, McGuinty cannot provide it. Instead, it is simply convenient to outlaw all religious tribunals. But such convenience amounts to an intolerant position toward religion.

McGuinty’s actions show three clear things: a) By how own admission, he is rather slow in recognising violations to the Rule of Law. b) His own understanding of liberal tolerance and multiculturalism is very limited. c) McGuinty’s multiculturalism is only an expedient policy and not a strong conviction; it is to be shed when the political heat rises, when its contradictions become painfully obvious.

Related:
Trampling on Religious Freedom in Canada
Spooking the Multiculturalist Borg
Pettigrew’s Pettiness
A Triumph for Humanity

Crossposted from Civitatensis