I wonder if the points of difference between Islamic and western law can be specified?
Most Muslims do not seem to see a serious conflict between their religion and western societies. They don't see Islam as incompatible with democracy. So is there a distinction to be made between Islam (which is compatible) and Islamism (which conflicts)?
Some of the various versions of Islam or interpretations of Sharia are clearly incompatible with universal human values and western laws.
One Law for All (1LfA) is the idyll. If what is compatible is called Islam and what is incompatible is called Islamism then it might be possible to identify where Islam ends and Islamism begins using a list similar to the one below.
Some Muslims do not agree that some of these “Islamisms” are anything to do with Islam. They argue they are cultural or ethnic traditions and unrelated to religion.
If agreeing with one of the statements below is considered Islamism, it might be a rough measure of how "Islamist" a person's views are?
Sympathy with, but no enforcement for numbers 3 to 5.
Sympathy with, but no enforcement for numbers 6 to last.
Women to wear headscarfs
Women to wear full face veils or burkahs
Halal slaughter of animals
Religiously motivated circumcision of boys
Religiously motivated circumcision of girls
A woman’s court testimony in law to be worth less than a man’s
Banning of cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in satirical magazines or other suitable publications
Children to attend only madrassas or religiously denominated schools where available
Imprisonment for homosexual or LGBT behavior
Fewer rights for LGBTs
Fewer rights for non-believers or for non-Islamic religionists
A woman having fewer rights than a man in divorce law
Whipping or public humiliation for blasphemy
Whipping or public humiliation for theft
Cutting off of hands for theft
Stoning to death for adultery
So-called “honor killing”
Stoning to death or beheadings for certain very serious crimes
Public executions for very serious crimes
Count the question if you agree that numbers 3 to last should be enforced by law. A score of more than 2 or agreement with any statement 3 or above might indicate that your views are probably incompatible with western laws and/or mores.
Important note: anyone rejecting One Law for All is potentially a problem, whether for religious reasons or otherwise. Jews (for example) often have their own courts, erivs, schools and concepts of blasphemy and kosher which might conflict with 1LfA. Not everyone agrees on what the law should be and speeding in a car might be seen by some people as less respectful of 1LfA than making women wear headscarves or even mutilating a boy’s genitals.
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I would stick with Human Rights that can be easily modified based on consensus and shifting moralities in society any day....
Gods seem to favour bronze age morality and medieval torture techniques too much...