Originally Posted by
protonitron
Ele, I am skeptical about the relevance of your assumption that intent is less important than effect to this matter.
Effect is always more important that intent, in any matter. If someone says they'll do something, but then ends up doing something entirely different, then it doesn't matter what they said, does it? What matters is the actual effect it's had. That's why quoting the Quran and saying it proves women have equal rights is ridiculous.
Originally Posted by
protonitron
Islam as a collection of scripture seems to be acceptable to you (not saying it is or it isn't, this point is entirely focussed on your ideas about intent and effect which should be the same regardless of whether Islam is good or not)
Yeah no, it's not acceptable to me. Don't know where you got that from. I was saying 'even if Islam is all sunshine and roses, that doesn't matter when you look at the result'.
Originally Posted by
protonitron
it seems like Sharia is partially dependant on a lot of factors which are not Islamic (one of the many secondary sources for Sharia listed was 'logic' for example).
If you're argument is 'how religious is Sharia, really?' then you've screwed yourself by posting that link in your next post. In its conclusion, it says "Finally,
although Islamic law remains religious, as it has evolved in the modern era it has some characteristics that are not dissimilar to western codes."
Then there's the fact that the OIC countries all signed up to rule under the Cairo Declaration which enshrines Sharia. 'How religious is Sharia, really' doesn't matter when the OIC countries agree that all the rights in the Cairo Declaration are to be filtered through Sharia-lens. These Islamic countries are complicit in supporting Sharia, whether or not it's a primarily religious body of law (which, as your link suggested, it remains).