Not the bad-crazy hand-chopping shari’a, of course, just the good-crazy stuff governing family matters and finances. Parallel legal systems as a pathway to multicultural “social cohesion”: What could go wrong?

The Archbishop of Canterbury says the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK seems “unavoidable”.

Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4’s World at One that the UK has to “face up to the fact” that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

Dr Williams argues that adopting some aspects of Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion…

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

He stresses that “nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that’s sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states; states; the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well”…

“We don’t either want a situation where, because there’s no way of legally monitoring what communities do… people do what they like in private in such a way that that becomes another way of intensifying oppression inside a community.”

In case that last paragraph is too oblique for you, he’s talking about cheery phenomena like this. What makes this sort of thing ominous isn’t that it’s coming from Williams, whose idiocy (useful and otherwise), is well documented. It’s that for every show of resistance to Islamist cretinism by the British government — the latest righteous example coming just today, and met with the obligatory whining by British Muslim groups apologizing for their hero’s barbarity — there’s a story like this, or this, swirling somewhere on the wires. I cop to dereliction of duty as a blogger: It’s so common and dispiriting that I don’t know what to say about it anymore.

Exit question: Which type of shari’a, the good-crazy or the bad-crazy, does this little arrangement fall under?