>>As you have learned from alan: Canada.
>
>That will be tolerated until the first stoning. There is a great deal of opposition to it from both outside and inside the Muslim community.

You did not read the ontario implementation...


>>Have you looked at your own country and how its laws are based on cristianity??
>
>What's your point here? Both the US and most of Europe functions under laws that have been influenced to varying degrees by Christianity - but not controlled by it.

Again most muslim countries neither. The sharia is an addition to the national law, not a replacement. Stoning is only done in a very few countries.

>Interpretations of sharia are - as we've seen in the news over, and over, and over again - done by imams, not politicians. Kind of an important difference.

The sharia indeed is not controlled by politicians as they have limited control over it. They have control over the national laws which might have consecuences for the sharia law.

>>Dan you've written no single word about the sharia that gives me or any other reader that you understand what the sharia means. In those few messages you made various assumptions that are simply not true.

>No, Walter, what clear is that you are ignoring the reality of sharia as it gets put into practice. Read your own Wikipedia citation, and tell me: is that the kind of thing you'd be okay with having imposed in your country, even if just for Muslims?

Again you fail to read my messages. I've told you at least three times my standpoint. As long as you fail to read what I say there is no point in continueing this discussion, which BTW was created by yourself to distract from the original post.

Walter,