I don't really have an argument, and this is no environment for a reasoned debate. I was invited to disprove the proposition that all Muslim countries enforce an unequal distribution of inheritance between sons and daughters which is what I did. It's perfectly true that Sharia law is not the exact same thing as national law. That's precisely what makes it a red herring to begin with.
There's possibly a few examples where wider implementation of Sharia law would be a good idea. For example, the legal recognition of Muslim marriages. But can you be specific about what you are referring to? Who exactly is proposing what?
I wasn't trying to have an argument at all either, don't worry. It literally just sounded to me in reading the thread that like neither you nor the other poster knew that you were both talking at cross purposes.
I don't know what you mean by saying that sharia law is a red herring. There is nothing red herring about it. Not to communities who wish to implement it and who wish to hold all of their constituents accountable to it, and not to any human rights supporters (on any level), or to normal citizens who hold standard universal western values, who for the obvious reasons of sharia law's doctrines therein, wholly reject it and fight to stop its use and its implementation in the modern age, particularly in those societies and in our own Western culture which is built in the premise of valuing life, and of valuing human rights in an exigent and foundational way at the core of our own cultural values as human beings in a developed and enlightened and thinking civilization of the 21st century.
To answer your question of 'who exactly is proposing what', I'll make this brief because you don't sound even superficially informed, on what is a very broad subject that encompasses too many different facets and issues, for me to be able to answer your question in any real or cogent way that would even begin to address them all. You would just have to immerse yourself a bit more deeply in current events - and this is no criticism. I'm simply preceding my own reply to you by stating that your question shows a real lack of understanding of some of the truly foundational issues that are at the heart of current political debates the globe over.
However to give you a very short and narrow answer to only that one question that you posed, and to answer that question in complete isolation to anything else - there are large communities that are majority-muslim. This is the case in the United States, in Britain, and in many Western European countries. None of these communities would consider themselves extremist communities, they are often the very definition of 'moderate muslims'. They live peacefully, they are not terrorists. They run for political office, and they abide by the western laws of whatever country and culture they are in. However there has been a real push in recent years, where many,
many communities that are
majority-muslim, are communities where on the
basis of being
majority-muslim, many people who are either running for office, or who are actively in office in those communities, are now lobbying for sharia law to be "recognized." This means implementing it, and it means sharia law becoming the governing law.
The problem with this, is that you can't pick 'elements' of sharia law that you like, or dismiss those elements that you 'think' no 'moderate muslim' would enforce, due to your 'thinking' that 'moderate muslims' would have more moderate views on the subject of, for example, stoning women to death for having looked at someone the wrong way, the horrific and often court-ordered rape as punishment for any perceived transgression (yes, these things actually happen), the torture and murder of innocent people, even for the mere
accusation of being gay - nevermind if the allegation is even true or not, child abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, genital mutilation, and I'll stop the list in the interest of time.
But the point is that there is a real problem in the fact that sharia law is not compatible with our own western culture and our cultural values, and there is therefore a real problem, when communities in the west lobby to implement it. It cannot and does not exist side by side with the doctrines and norms that our laws dictate and uphold, and so as you can imagine, there has been an enormous upswell of a contingent now (somewhat belatedly) trying to fight to keep this trend from continuing, or taking over.
That's in a nutshell, the shortest answer I can give to your question. I thought you asked a genuine question and you were also polite about it, so I answered. But I'm aware this isn't really the ideal site on which to get into any of this.
I thought it was worth answering though, because I think there are a lot of people lobbing insults here regularly, on subjects that many people aren't even basically informed about - on even the most superficial level.
Again - not a criticism of you. Simply my comment on the generally hot-headed and very antagonistic retorts we often see here on these subjects in general.
Live and let live in my mind is always the best policy. However that isn't the outlook of the feeling for a lot of people, and the reason this is such a sensitive subject, is because a lot of people think Islam is being unfairly 'discriminated' against. There are not two Islams. Everyone should be free to practice whatever religion they choose. However there is one ideology that doesn't permit that, and it is that same ideology that does not in any way allow conformation to Western values, laws, or dictates.
There is also, certainly on this site, a very real problem in discussing anything in an intelligent way at all, given that many posters don't even know the difference between 1. religion 2. race 3. ideology 4. doctrine 5. dictates 6. sovereign law.
In any case, I hope this helped a bit. The name calling on this site obviously brings everything down to the truly lowest common denominator, which is that of a complete lack of education in even knowing how to behave or how to interact on even the most basic level.
