cherries wrote:

HomerJay wrote:

cherries wrote:i don't think that muslims who advocate sharia are extremist or radical,they are fundamentalists but so are all muslims in theory.

The situation is sufficiently confused that it may be difficult to tell if they are extremist or not.

If by Sharia they mean theocracy, then that's extremist.

If by Sharia they mean don't eat pork, that's not fundamentalist, extremist or radicalised.

If someone says 'we should live by Sharia' but doesn't qualify if that means diet or theocracy then we can default to saying it sounds like an extremist position, until it is clarified and qualified.

i think muslims are extremists if religion is set before everything else,even if it means suffering and deprivation for people.
so yes a theocracy like for example iran is run by extremists but some other countries which apply sharia law but also secular law can be moderate.

This is rubbish. I can't name a single country in the world that has a dual Sharia/secular legal system, or for that matter, one based almost completely on Sharia that I would consider "moderate".

well in malaysia for example the law is based on both systems,the sharia law there does not involve cutting off limps or stoning so compared to other forms of sharia i'd call it moderate.

cherries wrote:well in malaysia for example the law is based on both systems,the sharia law there does not involve cutting off limps or stoning so compared to other forms of sharia i'd call it moderate.

Is it a separate form of sharia, or just the sub-set they can currently get away with? Can Allah's slaves really pick and choose which commands they obey, or are they just following the injunction to take it easy until they have full control?

cherries wrote:well in malaysia for example the law is based on both systems,the sharia law there does not involve cutting off limps or stoning so compared to other forms of sharia i'd call it moderate.

Well, see thats the problem. Compared to "Stonings" and "handcuttings", which are beyond barbaric, its "moderate", but compared to any secular western society, or even countries with large religious populations like the US, Latin America, and the Philippines, Malaysia is basically a theocratic police state (and it is becoming more radical, not less). Instead of executions, they put apostates into prison systems or into mental institutions to try and get them to "repent" in addition to having a national ID card that states a person's religion, and in order to renounce Islam you have to get "approval" from Sharia courts. Zero freedom of conscience. A government basically keeps track of and dictates whether or not you can or cannot believe or not believe in something. How "moderate". Oh and they have whippings for alcohol consumption and extra marital activity (usually applies only to Muslims but that's irrelevant). But hey, at least they don't stone, hang, or behead people like they do in Afghanistan, Iran or Somalia, right? How moderate!

I just don't think "moderate" is the appropriate word to use regardless of the context to explain the shithole Malaysia is. It's like saying racism, segregation and Jim Crow laws are "moderate" because the US had slavery a few decades prior.

your right