[Skybird]

This is the part that raised rang my alarm bells firts in the german translation:

"The rule of law is thus not the enshrining of priority for the universal/abstract dimension of social existence but the establishing of a space accessible to everyone in which it is possible to affirm and defend a commitment to human dignity as such, independent of membership in any specific human community or tradition, so that when specific communities or traditions are in danger of claiming finality for their own boundaries of practice and understanding, they are reminded that they have to come to terms with the actuality of human diversity - and that the only way of doing this is to acknowledge the category of 'human dignity as such' – a non-negotiable assumption that each agent (with his or her historical and social affiliations) could be expected to have a voice in the shaping of some common project for the well-being and order of a human group."

And then I started thinking about what this would mean if terms like "dignity" and "freedom" and "diversity" would be used by two groups in totally different meanung, thus using the same word for different things, as I see it being the case with western culture, and islam. And as I already said, and other critics in the media made clear in ,much better verbal expression than I can, Sharia law is not of the lkind that accepts to be split into pieces, some of which you follow, and others you refuse. It's either all (you are Islamic, fully), or you are nothing at all (then you are a heretic to Muhammad's teachings and policies, or are an infidel, and both must be overcome). The Bishop makes a lot of intellectual gymnastics - but he lives in an isolated bubble indeed, having lost contact to reality and the object of his anaylsis., thus he is analysing his own fnaatsy of what it should be - but unfortunately is not. He wa nts to remain in control - by bending it to such degree that his tools and means and thoughts can manage the task, while in reality, it is beyond his abilities, and by far so. a typical example of ignoring the venomous snake in your house - and concluding that this is enough to ban the danger.

Nuts, completely. And nhow it coincides with the Erdogan visit and the furor it caused. Erdogan also demanded Germany to see the diversity of mankind, and aplying different rules to different people, instead of German rules for all people who wanrt to live in Germany. Summarizing it, Williams said: "We may all have the same passport, but we shall not fall under the same law." Erdogan said to the Turks in Germany whom he warned against adapting and assimilating, and whom he recommended to learn German only for their own opportunistic advantage, but to stay Turkish indeed: "You may live in Germany, but the Turkish nationality must be your guiding principle you must try to anchor in Gemran society." Or as a german newspaper put it: "You may live in gemrany, but I, erdogan, are your true prime minister." One good consequence erdogan'S arrogance has had: the rejection of a EU membership for turkey has grown significantly, while always having seen a majority of Germans being against it. He also has dmaaged the interest of Turks living in germany - that is why several different Turkish-german spokesmen rejected his proposals alltogether.

I must refuse your subtle intention to calm it all and declare it harmless, Konovalov. It isn't at all. Naturally, your sympathies towards Islamic interests are different than mine. that you rate it differently then, is natural. But that does make the bishop'S clever thinking not less divorced from reality.