In response to this article in The Australian, I wrote:
We must seriously examine the issue of the nature of Islam, and what effect does a significant minority of Muslims have on any society. Islam is not just another religion. It is a completely supremacist religio-political system that seeks to dominate and control any society.
Unlike Christianity, Islam cannot accept the rule of a secular government. Jesus validated secular governments when he said ‘…give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s…’ Muhammad said no such thing. He commanded his followers to fight – jihad – until all were subject to Allah and his prophet.
How can a modern democracy deal with such a supremacist religious political system? That is what we as a nation, and western nations generally, need to seriously and thoroughly examine.
__________________________
A comment from Jennifer, to this article in The Australian, 22 December 2016:
While mincing words about Syria over sherries in crystal glasses, and trucks run over festivities in Nice and Christmas markets in Germany, for the rest it comes down to the crux of the matter, whether you support democracy or sharia law and theocracies.
Islam is not just a faith but a system of law and government that does not tolerate other systems. (emphasis added) The problem then is that Sharia Fifedoms (sic) set up in democracies, as was noticed in Europe and the UK. It’s noticed here too when people fail to stand for a judge. They consider themselves unanswerable to our systems.
There needs to be a detailed comparison of a Sharia based theocracy versus a secular democracy, which occurs in literature but not the press, unfortunately. And we’re noticing it.
…
And another, from Greg, in response to the same article:
“The term “Islamist” is in common use to refer to Muslim individuals and organizations that adhere to Islamic law’s political aspects (most notably its denial of any legitimacy of a separation between religion and the state) and consequently most fiercely oppose America, Israel and the West in general. The implication is that Islam itself, in its authentic form, has no requisite political aspect, and no incompatibility with Western values or democratic government.
The problem with this is that it is a Western, artificial distinction, imposed by non-Muslims upon the Islamic world and lacking any real substance with reference to Islamic law as it has always been formulated by the Sunni and Shi’ite madhahib (schools of jurisprudence). Islam has always been political, and the union of religion and the state has always been essential to its political program; the idea that all this can and should be separated from Islam proper is the wishful thinking of Western analysts who do not wish to face the implications of the fact that these ideas represent mainstream Islamic thinking.”
______________________________