Britain feels it is going to the dogs, says Archbishop of Canterbury

BBC NEWS | Wales | UK needs help, warns archbishop

The above link got me thinking. The people of this country must be pretty confused when they hear some statements from the Archbishop of Canterbury. A while ago, the honourable gentleman suggested that the country would eventually have to accept some aspects of Sharia Law; and yet one of the things Sharia is most insistent upon is that dogs should not be kept as pets or as working animals because they are unclean.

Apparently, dogs are to be despised because they eat their own vomit. I gather this is required by Allah, the god of Islam. Strange, that. Why are camels not considered unclean, also? Camels vomit their food back into their mouths, re-chew it and then swallow it again. Is it that dogs can be seen eating their vomit but camels cannot? I would have thought that an all-knowing god would understand the inner workings of the creatures it has created. Or maybe the statute was actually written by a human being and not a god?

The banning of dogs from households would mean that dogs could not be used as guide dogs for the blind, wouldn’t it? Or would guide dogs be a special case? Perhaps we need a clarification from the Archbishop as to what parts of Sharia Law would be acceptable to Christians and other denominations and what wouldn’t? Otherwise, wouldn’t such statements from the Archbishop merely serve to confuse people? Maybe the Archbishop of Canterbury should look at his own role in helping the people of this sceptered isle feel that they are going to the dogs? Or not, as the case may be.

Powered by ScribeFire.

%d bloggers like this: