What do you do with a problem like Sharia?

So apparently the Archbishop of Canterbury is all for integrating Sharia law into the British courts, and his saying so publicly has drawn a barrage of criticism from just about every direction.
Frankly, I’m not prepared to take a stand one way or the other (well, yes I am, in the sense that it’s pretty clear to me that a secular, democratic nation, be it the UK, the USA, Canada, or any other nation that claims to be one, should by definition remove any non-secular references from its legislation, beyond the inclusion of religious belief being a fundamental right of the citizenry – but I digress). Nor do I want to make any comment along the lines of “isn’t it funny how a nation whose history over the last half-millennium has been primarily shaped by its rejection of the papacy sticks a different funny hat on a different aging priest, particularly one whose eyebrows are, frankly, outrageous, and considers it front-page news when this guy throws in his two pence.”
My actual rant is about the Prime Minister (theirs, not ours), who in reference to the A of C’s “support” of Sharia law in Britain said that “British laws should be based on British values.”
Ahem.
It seems to me that if there are enough people in Britain for whom the Sharia issue is relevant, which is a fair assumption, then perhaps, just maybe, the PM might consider that the values of these people – traditional (read white Christian) values notwithstanding – are, at least in part, British values. No?
As I said, I am not trying to get into whether or not there is a place for religious law in national courts. In fact, there seems to be a fairly strong indication from vocal religious groups that they’re not really interested in redefining British law. But to arrogantly say “we’re not doing the Sharia thing cuz it’s not British” is tantamount to saying “you can be Muslim, or you can be British, but you can’t be both.”
Harumph.
Ok, I’m done now – told you I’d find something to rant about.