Of Canadian Sharia And Tolerance

8 January, 2007. 773 words.

Elle at In-Politically Correct, one of the Virginia SWAC Bloggers, wrote this surprisingly good post: Sharia Law in Canada?

I have a few points to challenge, though. And no, this is not a defense of Sharia.

Elle begins by saying, “There is a general misconception by our liberal friends that if you display tolerance everyone will live peacefully side by side. It is the Kumbiya syndrome.”

This touches on a pet peeve of mine, which is the redefinition of the word “tolerance” as a bad thing. I can only speak for myself, and I don’t really consider myself liberal in the accepted political sense of the word, but I do consider myself liberal in the sense of “open-minded.” What seems to be misunderstood by many Leftophobic* bloggers is that the word “tolerance” does not mean “acceptance” or “endorsement” or even “surrender.” It just means “tolerance.” One can be tolerant of something and still dislike or even despise it. It’s like that old saying, “if you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.” That’s tolerance. At least, that’s what it’s supposed to be.

What about “intolerance?” This is where some of my libertarian tendencies show through, but in my mind, the opposite of tolerance is your basic authoritarianism or “telling people what to do and how to do it.” Some Leftophobics (for example, the one named Ann Coulter) might like that idea, but as a government model, that seems to contradict the free society our forefathers built in the United States. Even in this past century, we were led to believe during the various Cold and World Wars that authoritarian governments were a Bad Thing.

Elle continues, “As I’ve said before, I do not promote discrimination, but I do condone careful consideration when “tolerance” starts to impede upon the values that our nation was based upon.”

Remember that first part for later. :) On the last part, there is a lot of room for interpretation. As Elle should well know, opinions vary widely on just what values our nation was based upon, so it would have been helpful for her to be more specific. Given the general nature of the SWAC Bloggers, I would speculate that she meant Christian values, but I won’t get into the wide varieties of different Christian values or whether the United States is a Judeo-Christian nation or not. I’ll just assume she meant “non-Sharia values.”

On the general topic of her post, which is that a local Muslim community in Canada is lobbying for more rights to practice Sharia law, I don’t think there’s much cause for alarm. (Not enough to justify, say, banning all Muslims from the country.) Even if a local community adopted Sharia here, it would be just that: A local community. I’m pretty sure local governments are responsible for setting the social customs that are acceptable in their community, as long as they all adhere to national and state laws. For other examples of this, there are Amish communities in Pennsylvania, Mennonite communities in Virginia, and there’s Ave Maria, a soon-to-be strict Catholic town in Florida.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t want to live in any such places, and I would fight if anyone tried to impose religious laws of any flavor where I currently live, but I don’t have a problem if some other community wants to live under Sharia law (minus the beheadings and stonings, of course), as long as everyone living there agrees it’s a good idea.

Elle concludes, “We as a nation must be careful in our cries for tolerance. Muslims have been insipid but determined in their quest to govern under Sharia Law. If we continue to look the other way, the United States will be addressing these same issues within a decade.”

I agree with the first part, that we must be careful. The second part shows some of the discrimination that was disavowed earlier, though. Elle makes the assumption that all Muslims want Sharia, but the truth is that only some Muslims are fighting for Sharia Law. (And I would argue that it’s the more “intolerant” Muslims doing so.)

On the last part, the Amish, Mennonite, and Catholic examples I cited above shows that we are already facing these same issues in the United States, and probably have been since the country was founded. The only thing that’s different now is the strongly negative public perception of Islam.

Leftophobic is a new word I’ve adopted to describe rightwing political bloggers who take particular delight in attacking left-of-center positions.

Thomas Krehbiel writes The Krehbiel Strikes Back, a generally centrist commentary on news, media, politics, and culture.

Related