McClelland, “No place for Sharia in Australia.”

I am not sympathetic towards Labor as my regular readers can attest to. Tonight though, I am willing to grant our Attorney General, Robert McClelland my highest praises for his outspoken rejection of calls for Sharia law to be implemented here. This should be par for the course in any western democracy, but of late PC-whipped excuses for leaders have prevaricated on the issue to the point where we have real reason for concern.

There has been a push for some time here by Muslims to allow the implementation of theocratic law, both as an adjunct to the law of the land, and as a replacement to rational law. The latest buzzword is legal pluralism, which demands that religious law be allowed in arbitration matters.

McClelland however has emphatically rejected this:

But Mr. McClelland said there was no place for sharia law in Australian society, and the government strongly rejected any proposal for its introduction.

"As our citizenship pledge makes clear, coming to Australia means obeying Australian laws and upholding Australian values," he said. "Australia's brand of multiculturalism promotes integration. If there is any inconsistency between cultural values and the rule of law, then Australian law wins out."

We were blessed to live in a stable democracy underpinned by the rule of law, he said. "People who migrate to Australia do so because of the fact we have a free, open and tolerant society where men and women are equal before the law irrespective of race, religious or cultural background.

"Indeed, all applicants for citizenship swear collective allegiance to the people of Australia, and undertake to respect our customs and abide by our laws. The values underpinning those principles will not be changing."

Theocratic law has long been rejected in the west as result of centuries of struggle against the tyranny of people who believe that their chosen Deity frees them from reality and allows them carte blanch authority to inflict savage retribution against anyone who transgresses what they perceive as the will of that Deity. It is in other words schizophrenic jurisprudence.

A great debt of gratitude is owed to the US for enshrining the principle of separation of church and state in their Bill of Rights under the first amendment. This has become the model for the rest of the civilized world.

While people from other cultures have different ways of settling disputes and may continue to do so after arriving here, once the matter is referred to the legal system it has to be dealt with according to the law of the land. There can be no excuse for an apartheid system of law to exist in this country, and fortunately, we have an AG who understands that.