Only one arm tied now...

David Cameron isn't the first European leader to say that Multiculturalism (as a policy) is dead, but the backlash from the usual suspects wasn't long in coming. First, Cameron:

"Let's properly judge these organisations: Do they believe in universal human rights - including for women and people of other faiths? Do they believe in equality of all before the law? Do they believe in democracy and the right of people to elect their own government? Do they encourage integration or separatism?

"These are the sorts of questions we need to ask. Fail these tests and the presumption should be not to engage with organisations," he added.

So far, so good. However, look at the list of traits we're validating here, and it's pretty obvious that there is a major religious group whose very basic tenets specifically deny those "universal human rights". Again, guess who. Well, here's part of the other side to spoil your fun figuring it out:

Meanwhile, the Muslim Council of Britain's assistant secretary general, Dr Faisal Hanjra, described Mr Cameron's speech as "disappointing".

He told Radio 4's Today programme: "We were hoping that with a new government, with a new coalition that there'd be a change in emphasis in terms of counter-terrorism and dealing with the problem at hand. In terms of the approach to tackling terrorism though it doesn't seem to be particularly new. Again it just seems the Muslim community is very much in the spotlight, being treated as part of the problem as opposed to part of the solution."

"Part of the problem"? Who keeps blowing things up and killing people for insulting their religion? Muslims, that's who. Any other groups are vanishingly small statistical anomalies in the group violence which threatens our transport and general security. Until that changes, the spotlight is where it should be.

Or is it? Later from Cameron's address:

"We need to be clear: Islamist extremism and Islam are not the same thing," he said.

And this is where he loses focus and the spotlight gets wobbly. Not everyone who goes to the Mosque on Friday is a terrorist, but the religion puts itself ahead of everything else. There is no “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” in the Koran or the Hadiths. Speaking of the latter:

42 Al-Miqdad heard Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) as saying: There will not remain upon the surface of the earth a mud-brick house or a camel's-hair tent but Allah will instill into it the word of Islam, bringing both mighty honour and abject humiliation. Allah will either honour them by making them worthy of it and those whom He humiliates shall have to render submission to it. I said: The religion will then be entirely for Allah.

This is what we're up against. There is lots of foolishness in (especially) the Old Testament too, but Christianity (and Hinduism, Sikhism, and especially Buddhism) doesn't have a problem with secular governance. Alone amongst the major religions, Islam is NOT compatible with Rule of Law. It's a fundamental problem (not just "Islamic extremism" or other convocations of Islam) and it can't be danced around.

Let me be clear about what I'm saying here. You can believe WHATEVER you want, as long as it doesn't become MY problem. Forcing your religion on me violates that right out of the gate, so keep what you believe to yourself, and certainly out of public policy that I as a taxpayer am paying for.

I don't see Stephen Harper saying anything like this in the near future, but we don't yet have the sort of problems with multi-culty that Europe and the U.K. do . Hopefully they can manage their problems with this and we can avoid ours getting worse. This is a good start for the U.K. but Cameron needs to drop the gloves and tell everyone flat-out that Religion (that means yours too, Jack!) and the State will remain separate. Have no fear though; even if we whip this problem (not likely) there are plenty left to keep life interesting.