This version argument is fake - in fact religion aligns people more readily than would a secular state hope to achieve … Yes there are differences … but Islam teaches us to come to common terms - aspects of Islam that we can agree on and we act accordingly.
It’s fair enough for me that everyone’s treated equally under a system. Morality is subjective. Your morality will not define mine. law enforcement cannot stop someone from committing a sin but they can stop someone from committing a crime. I cannot sacrifice justice for morality’s sake.
Ok my morality will not define yours … but at least we can talk about those moralities that we share … instead of trying to show that one position is wrong.
Forget about the Muslim world … let’s talk about you and me … If we can’t agree how can we get more support?
So I want to concentrate on common values between us …
Islam says the maximum punishment for murder is to be killed by the state after trial now do your values agree with this or disagree … and if they agree then we can tick that off and move on … but if they do not then let’s simplify it a bit and see if they do agree.
Ok Islam says “retaliate equal to what was taken, but if you forgive that is better” so as long as we agree the maximum penalty for killing is death then all other lesser sentences for killing will be less than death sentence. I think we are in agreement … So this is your personal value it is in agreement with Islam … let’s move on.
I believe the maximum punishment for theft is to have the hand severed … what would you say to this?
This is a false justification to bring secular law. Reasons may include but not limited to:
The rulings about System of Justice in Islam is largely the same across different schools of thoughts, it’s the same Quranic commands that everyone follows. For minor difference of understanding, there is enormous room for ‘common grounds’ as, for example, it was adopted in Baghdad.
Even if there is major difference that may perhaps come in case of Shia and Sunni in some issues, it is very easy to see that the ruling will be according to the faith the defendent follows.
Funny that you put monorities and women in the same question. Anyway, as I said earlier that laws concerning minorities can be devised according to the faith defendent follows.
Thank you for saying that. Because, then, whatever a muslim criminal gets as a punishment should be the same for non-muslim. What’s your argument? Why even treat non-muslims differently and as Islam prescribes, according to their scripture? Because this is the only just way to make a law.
It does not matter what I believe in, what matters is that the world has changed VERY MUCH since the 7th century. You talk about adultery, even the most hardcore Islamic nation aka Iran has put stoning on hold.
Nice way to dodge the simple valid questions. Your example of Iran is more ridiculous than your dodging the question because Iran is no authority on Islam, so, if they do anything against Islam does not automatically makes it a ruling in Islam all of a sudden.
It is utter stupidity to assume that a blasphemy law like that in Pakistan won’t be misused. Why? Because it’s easy as hell to twist it to suit your purpose.
They are very selective laws against gambling, drinking, etc in USA. And yes, because not all sins are crimes, not all sins at social level can be stopped without a law and only religious laws can take care of that.
Secularism will give you an Islamic Justice System. May sound contradictory, but look at Europe and the US. A common man has MUCH GREATER chance of getting justice in the US than he does in Pakistan.