I’ve been getting (over)involved in the discussion of this topic on a thread at Jake’s Place (posting here, comments here). When it all looked as if it was going to end in tears ((Leaving a lot of us rather confused about the positions that some of us had taken)), I decided to visit the blogs of some of the other contributors. I found the following gem over at Lady of Silences:
Whether and when civil law in a democratic society should accommodate fundamentalist religious views may well be a serious topic for discussion. But what person in his or her right mind could take seriously as a working hypothesis for the legal accommodation of Muslim and Christian fundamentalist religious views,
“the construction of a moral framework which could expand outside the boundaries of particular narratives while, at the same time, respecting the narratives as the cultural contexts in which the language … is learned and taught”?
Only someone hopelessly lost in a post-structuralist fog.