Report comment

Being one who has studied the monotheistic faiths in depth I can say that none of them should be the basis of a legal system in a secular state in the 21st century.

I have read the Talmud, the Bible and the Koran and studied the tenets of these faiths in detail, while they may form the basis of personal faith they have no part in the legal system of a state where the majority are in fact adherents of none of these religions.

In a pluralistic democracy we can have many beliefs but only one law for the very obvious reason that multiple systems will result in conflict. Secularism is not a religion, secularists do not insist that they are the 'chosen ones' or call on the authority of a deity (their deity) to enforce their particular cultural demands.

It is not the similarities between Shari'a and secular law that matter, it is the differences. The law governing personal matters cannot be separated from the law governing human rights as a whole. The suggested underlying objectives of Shari'a may very well look like the other developed legal systems in the world but it is not the underlying tenets that matter, it is the proscriptions and methods of enforcing these 'preservations'