Demented loon Madeleine Bunting says the Archbishop was "brave" but should have been more nuanced so as not to alarm Joe Public:

Sharia is an inextricable part of the religious practice of every Muslim, even if there are hugely varied interpretations across the Islamic world of its many dimensions, from diet and family law through to crime. It has no applicability to non-Muslims - it's got nothing to do with them. But many of its precepts are not that alien, indeed they even converge nicely with Gordon Brown's "British values"; as Asim Siddiqui pointed out yesterday on the Guardian's online Comment is free, many fundamental sharia principles such as protection of life, dignity, intellect and property are already incorporated into British law.

[...]

Sharia has become the totemic issue for both Muslims and non-Muslims; the persistent ignorance and misunderstanding of sharia is a deep irritation in the Muslim community, while hostile non-Muslims cite sharia as evidence of a barbaric faith. Williams has squarely put the issue in the public domain to be debated. He's not denying there are real difficulties with sharia, for instance apostasy or discrimination towards women, but he is insisting we have a much more informed discussion. Whatever his detractors may say, that is brave. But will it achieve any of his other objectives? One fears that by the time some more considered thought is given to this issue - and a few sensible voices are now audible in the cacophony of horror - most people will have moved on, and the coverage will have only reinforced their prejudices. The speech may even prove to be counterproductive, which raises the question: was it wise?

Kicking off a constructive debate about sharia is a noble aim, but because it is such an explosive subject you have to be crystal clear about what you are saying and what you are not. You have to go to great lengths to reassure people and allay their anxieties.