Yesterday I caught the tail end of a CTV piece on how Ontario is considering allowing the use of Shariah Law (Islamic based) to settle family disputes. I thought the idea was stupid, but before blogging thought I should do my research. This FAQ from the CBC really helped to clarify the history and situation.

How did Shariah come to be considered in Canadian jurisdictions?
In 1991, Ontario was looking for ways to ease the burdens of a backlogged court system. So the province changed its Arbitration Act to allow “faith-based arbitration” - a system where Muslims, Jews, Catholics and members of other faiths could use the guiding principles of their religions to settle family disputes such as divorce, custody and inheritances outside the court system.

It’s voluntary - both parties (a husband and wife) have to agree to go through the process. But once they do, the decisions rendered by the tribunal are binding.

People who are protesting the use of Shariah law in these situations point to the law’s unequal treatment of women.

The key argument by supporters of this idea is that if Christian and Jewish groups make use of this law, so should Muslims.

And I think the supporters are 100% right.

The real problem is Arbritation Act itself! Why are people only getting upset because it’s a Muslim based Law system? Some Christian denominations are as repressive, if not more so.

No religion, whether Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, or otherwise, should be given that kind of legal powers. It is much like the Bush Administrations decision to funnel Government money into faith groups, except worst! Down this path lies theocracy.

Strike down the act.