I found this rather horrific article at DhimmiWatch.com, about calls for the incorporation of shari’a law into the Canadian legal system.
Not only does [a muslim essayist]affirm there the traditional proposition that apostates must “choose between Islam and the sword,” but he argues that, if Canada is to be true to its own Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it must allow the country’s Muslim community to punish those of its members who renounce or traduce their faith.
“[W]hat such a large segment of the Canadian minority believes as a precept of their faith/religion ought to be fully recognized if the Charter’s provision respecting freedom of religion are [sic] to have any real meaning. . . . Failing [to incorporate Islamic law concerning apostasy and blasphemy into the laws of Canada] will be a flagrant breach of equality rights. . . . Failing to interpret the guaranteed rights and freedoms of Muslims in accordance with the true spirit of multiculturalism results in the effective denial of this fundamental philosophy of the Canadian constitution.”
What struck me about this was the implication of “frredom of religion” as pertaining, fundamentally, to the community as opposed to the individual, and the kind of conclusions that flow, plausibly, from such a premise. It’s easy sometimes to read Ayn Rand discuss this kind of phenomenon and think, “Well, she’s just exaggerating.” But when you read something like this, it becomes pretty clear. It provides an outstanding example of the fact that she was absolutely right about the results of collectivizing rights: that they become the rights of some at the expense of others, or worse, the right to violate the rights of others.
It also drives home why the libertarian approach to rights, i.e. without any basis in moral principles, is intellectually bankrupt. To combat something this vicious requires a thorough knowledge and defense of the nature of rights, something sorely lacking in today’s political discourse, and which the libertarians certainly don’t bring to the table.
Lastly, and in that same vein, it points how how desperately we need Ayn Rand’s work.