From the Guardian

The House of Lords today drew stark attention to the conflict between sharia and UK law, calling the Islamic legal code “wholly incompatible” with human rights legislation.

The remarks came as the Lords considered the case of a woman who, if she was sent back to Lebanon, would be obliged under sharia law to hand over custody of her 12-year-old son to a man who beat her, threw her off a balcony and, on one occasion, attempted to strangle her.

The woman was seeking asylum in the UK to avoid the provisions of sharia law that give fathers or other male family members the exclusive custody of children over seven.

In the most high-profile UK criticism of the family law provisions of sharia law so far, the Lords stated that these provisions breached the mother’s rights to family life and the right against discrimination and were severely disruptive to the child.

Contrast this reasonable and clear-sighted view of reality on planet earth to that of Rowan Williams, the Mr. Bean of the Anglican church:

From the BBC:

Dr Williams argues that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.

For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.

He says Muslims should not have to choose between “the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty”.

Not only does Rowan think parts of Sharia might be a Good Thing, he picks the bits that would allow a demented Muslim husband to abuse his wife and child.