There’s no use arguing with you, you are bent on one thing only, and I’m not going to continue to “entertain” you.

[Oxymoronic] fools??! Says who? You’re not even worth an answer on that one!

The moral of that hadith is to lay the foundation of social justice. Where there is no preference based on class, wealth, influence ..etc

I think you already have your mind set and I think no one will change it. But allow me to tell you that you have completely wrong ideas about both Islam AND secularism..

There is such a thing as religious preemption and as long as it doesn’t interfere with the law, it’s usually allowed under secularism.

Islam as religion has in it the seeds of change and progress more than any other social system. And I’m not here defending Islam or bashing anyone else, but the fact remains that there are many things that are up for interpretation, even things mentioned in the Quran. For Quranic rules there is Interpretation and Explanations. These were eluded to by Ibin Rushed.

I think Freedom of religion under secularist regime can work and be very successful. Because if you ctually realize what you’re saying it is actually way worse than enforced secularism. It’s closer to Stallinic communism being shoved down people’s throats

Over here in the US, the state allow people to get married however the hell they want to get married. Most opt for a religious ceremony, which is to be authenticated by the state. This is an example of something that worked well between the state and the people.

Apart from declaring holy war at other people for desecrating a religious figure, there isn’t a single reason ANY religion can’t coexist under any umbrella that doesn’t call for restricting the freedom of belief, which is a basic human right.

First, read what I said again, I said Secularism doesn’t interfere with Islam, not the other way around. Everyone wants to rule the world and Islam is not different than anyone else.
Secularism can encompass provisions to allow even the most demanding of religions. There’s nothing that says that they can’t coexist. Except in the extremist minds of the likes of Bin Laden and the Wahhabi’s regimes.

The fact that Islam has actually a viable social structure, can augment secularism. For example, there’s nothing wrong with giving charity to the poor. Similarly, the same can be said about crime and punishment, although in certain cases we really need to be creative to understand the spirit of issue. For example, cutting off the hand of the thief. This is the Quranic rule, but these can be overruled by the proper interpretation. For example, in common Arabic language when we say “Okotlo” it translates directly to “kill him” when in fact it means “beat him”. The same context can be applied for cutting off hands. The interpretation must be acceptable in a contemporary sense.
Other very progressive Shariah rules include Marriage and inheritance, where there are very intricate details that can be applied to the social life of people

Secularism doesn’t mean that you can not take certain aspects of the religion and apply them as the laws. In fact, every set of people can have their own religiously inspired laws under secularism and it would still be fine

From my point of view, both can coexist, Islam under the Secularist government. They do intersect in the social areas, but we can leave the choice in these areas to the people themselves. Either one can borrow from the other, with absolutely no problems what so ever.

As for the HR thingy, long time ago I realized that the society itself doesn’t want its rights. Who to blame for that? Well, go figure!

See, the government isn’t as bad as people think, you just tend to blame the government for everything. Just try to be fair and not too judgmental :)

Secularism and atheism are not synonymous