I wanted to add a few furter thoughts on the row surrounding Dr Rowan Williams after I mentioned it briefly last time.

I don't think I disagree with his main point - that in some circumstances it might make more practical sense to allow elements of Sharia law to be carried out if those involved are all willing.

I think this already happens in some Islamic communities, and that if it is going to happen anyway, it would be safer if it happened in the open (see drugs, prostitution).

I think its especially worth noting that we already have elements of Sharia law in the UK, especially in areas of finance and business. Most of Sharia law isn't about stoning homosexuals or jailing women for being raped. And I don't think that those aspects of fundamentalist Islamic laws where what was being advocated in any case.

I don't think he ever suggested that we should adopt two completely distinct legal systems. That said, I think the idea that there is currently one law that applies to the people in the UK is laughable.

I think, for the amount of news attention it is getting, it is worth remembering that as Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Williams is not actually empowered to actually change the legal system of the country, and as such should probably be able to express any opinions he may have on the matter without people asking for his resignation.