How could Muslim and Non-Muslim relationship be improved?

[ray245]

A lot of recent issues deals with the Muslims being seen as a boogeyman in non-Muslim majority countries, with fear and hatred of Muslims being routinely expressed publically and garner significant support. While there have been efforts to improve the perception of Muslims, all that is needed to undo any progress made in the past few years is another major terrorist attacks by an Islamic terrorist.

What are some of the efforts your countries is making in improving the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims? What are the ways you think this could be improved?

[Elheru Aran]

The biggest problem is a lack of understanding/education on both sides of the fence, but in the US at least, it's far worse on the non-Muslim side. Regrettably it's often coupled with a massive amount of racism and xenophobia. For example, pretty regularly some school or other will get in trouble for trying to teach their students a little more about Islam, which gets labeled "indoctrination" or some such bullshit...

[biostem]

The solution is simple: Moderate Muslim groups need to come out and clearly state that they do not wish for homosexuals, apostates, rape victims, or adulterers to be killed. They need to state that they are willing to suspend FGM practices until the woman is an adult, and allow her the choice to undergo the procedure at that point. They need to make is perfectly clear that they will go through proper secular legal channels for all disputes, and not establish underground/illegal Sharia courts.

Most importantly, moderate Muslims need to distance themselves from extremists - perhaps it is time for a separation, like how Protestants distanced themselves from Catholics.

[Joun_Lord]

The solution is simple: Moderate Muslim groups need to come out and clearly state that they do not wish for homosexuals, apostates, rape victims, or adulterers to be killed. They need to state that they are willing to suspend FGM practices until the woman is an adult, and allow her the choice to undergo the procedure at that point. They need to make is perfectly clear that they will go through proper secular legal channels for all disputes, and not establish underground/illegal Sharia courts.

Most importantly, moderate Muslims need to distance themselves from extremists - perhaps it is time for a separation, like how Protestants distanced themselves from Catholics.

Thats seems.....less then ideal. That seems like it might create more divide by implying all Muslims are responsible for these atrocities committed in Allahs name unless they speak against them and more importantly the default position of being Muslim is extremist.

Imagine if Christians had to all go and say they aren't all against abortion, murdering gays, and banning porn anytime some wackaloon attacks an abortion clinic, tries to criminalize gay behavior, or just say stupid shit. If Atheists had to make a collective statement anytime so dumbass says all religious people need their kids taken away. If the black community had to say they aren't all thugs and gangbangers anytime there is a driveby and the white community has to say they aren't all murderous cowboys anytime some white lawman or gun owner unlawfully or lawfully kills a minority.

Having Muslims have to say they are moderate, say they are the same as you or I or that guy, will only further illustrate and probably widen further the divide between "normal" people and Muslims.

I'm not saying they don't need to distance themselves from extremists (they do) but thats easier said then done when many of those extremists are friends, neighbors, uncles, cousins, brothers, father, and sons........plus women. Its hard to think bad about those people, hard to think you are connected. The best example of something similar I can think of is families in the South with connections to the KKK. During the Civil Rights era even good people who weren't at all racist might have family members doing the lower case t burning and cosplaying as ghosts but did not want to speak out about it if they even acknowledged it. They didn't want to think of their family as people people, think of themselves as bad by association, feel tainted knowing they shared blood with a monster.

Unfortunately I think there is no easy answer to create less divide between Muslims and non-Muslims but certainly trying to make them an other, an outsider probably would do no good.

[biostem]

First of all, no atheist can say they do something "in the name of atheism", as there is no atheist hierarchy, tenants, or dogma.

Second, if I were, for instance, a Catholic, and the Pope or other high member of the Catholic church started making damaging decrees or other heinous calls to action, then I would definitely be responsible, at least in part, for being complicit in my support of such an institution. If such a point were reached, then my choices would be to either continue my support of the church, or move away from Catholicism.

I also think it is important to distinguish between denouncing homosexuality, for instance, and outright calling for or being otherwise in favor of the death of homosexuals. Many Evangelical Christians decry homosexuality, but don't actually call for the death of homosexuals. If you are a part of a Christian church that *does* call for the death of gays, then you are just as responsible to distance yourself from that church as a Muslim would from theirs.

Any secular government that gives in to religious doctrine begins a perilous path towards becoming a theocracy.

[ray245]

First of all, no atheist can say they do something "in the name of atheism", as there is no atheist hierarchy, tenants, or dogma.

Second, if I were, for instance, a Catholic, and the Pope or other high member of the Catholic church started making damaging decrees or other heinous calls to action, then I would definitely be responsible, at least in part, for being complicit in my support of such an institution. If such a point were reached, then my choices would be to either continue my support of the church, or move away from Catholicism.

I also think it is important to distinguish between denouncing homosexuality, for instance, and outright calling for or being otherwise in favor of the death of homosexuals. Many Evangelical Christians decry homosexuality, but don't actually call for the death of homosexuals. If you are a part of a Christian church that *does* call for the death of gays, then you are just as responsible to distance yourself from that church as a Muslim would from theirs.

Any secular government that gives in to religious doctrine begins a perilous path towards becoming a theocracy.

The problem is non-muslims often don't distinguish muslims from the broad label of Islam. While many non-muslims and Muslim alike are familiar with the variety of different churches or sects in Christianity, Buddhism and etc, muslims are often lumped together as a cohesive body. Unfortunately, the guys with the biggest voice possible also happen to be terrorist blowing up skyscrappers and attacking the most prominent locations around the world.

Especially to a large segment of the world population that have very little actual interaction with a muslim, their only main exposure are the fanatics who hates every non-muslims in the world.

[biostem]

Well, you can't count on the extremists to distance themselves from the moderates by breaking away from the larger "Muslim" title, so the burden, unfortunately, falls to the moderates. The same holds for Muslim to Non-Muslim relations - it again falls to the moderates to extend an olive branch of "we don't want to destroy your society or way of life"...

[ray245]

Well, you can't count on the extremists to distance themselves from the moderates by breaking away from the larger "Muslim" title, so the burden, unfortunately, falls to the moderates. The same holds for Muslim to Non-Muslim relations - it again falls to the moderates to extend an olive branch of "we don't want to destroy your society or way of life"...

To what degree is someone a moderate muslims? When you think about moderate Christians, you're probably thinking of someone who attends church once in a blue moon while having no problem with gay marriages.

[biostem]

Well, you can't count on the extremists to distance themselves from the moderates by breaking away from the larger "Muslim" title, so the burden, unfortunately, falls to the moderates. The same holds for Muslim to Non-Muslim relations - it again falls to the moderates to extend an olive branch of "we don't want to destroy your society or way of life"...

To what degree is someone a moderate muslims? When you think about moderate Christians, you're probably thinking of someone who attends church once in a blue moon while having no problem with gay marriages.

Well, put simply, if you aren't in favor of the various things I discussed, and are willing to integrate into the country you moved to, then I'd say you are a moderate...

[madd0ct0r]

The solution is simple: Moderate Muslim groups need to come out and clearly state that they do not wish for homosexuals, apostates, rape victims, or adulterers to be killed. They need to state that they are willing to suspend FGM practices until the woman is an adult, and allow her the choice to undergo the procedure at that point. They need to make is perfectly clear that they will go through proper secular legal channels for all disputes, and not establish underground/illegal Sharia courts.

Most importantly, moderate Muslims need to distance themselves from extremists - perhaps it is time for a separation, like how Protestants distanced themselves from Catholics.

Cha-ching! this is just what we need! It's worked real well so far, and has produced definetate trends of inclusiveness and less attacks. We've even managed the historical parallel, with thirty years of civil wars and religious missionaries, hardline schools established world wide and the inquisition. Just like how Protestants distanced themselves from Catholics.



.
.
.

Sarcasm aside, this is precisely the wrong thing to do. Why? Because it defines the people you ask as Muslim first, not whatever else they feel like, say American, or even, shudder, Texan. It's still so common it's become a standard joke in the UK.
[youtube]http://youtu.be/X9P1_run7q8?t=166[/youtube]
It comes up as a joke AGAIN at the 25 minutes.

And it's not even fucking news.
2006: http://www.channel4.com/news/media/pdfs ... ege_LR.pdf
Subtitle: Alienating Deprived Communities
Long, and I'm not going to quote here, but its a pretty devastating review of fake news articles used by mainstream british papers to stoke up hatred for clicks.

2007: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... dical.html

Baroness Uddin, the Muslim peer, said: "Unlike their parents, our young people feel that this is their country and are saying why are we being told we do not belong here.
"There is also a problem of a lack of opportunities. Some people have been brutalised by their experiences with the police and this war on terror."

2010: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... ybody.html

As we are reminded on a daily basis, there is very little that government does well. Perhaps what it can do least well is theology.
Yet through its “Prevent” strategy, that is exactly what this Government has tried to do. In the past few years, it has spent millions of pounds trying to prevent Muslim radicalisation. But the effort was flawed from the outset and as the Communities and Local Government Select Committee warned yesterday, the efforts made could be backfiring.

2014: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 54062.html

But Dr Erin Marie Saltman, senior researcher at the counter-extremism think-tank Quilliam, counselled caution. “What you don’t want to see is policy that specifically targets a minority age-specific group. That becomes very dangerous,” she said. “You don’t want to go up to a 19-year-old second or third-generation British Muslim and say ‘you’re prone to radicalisation’.

(the study found: Young British Muslims whose families have lived in the UK for generations are more at risk of radicalisation than recent migrants to Britain, suffering from depression, being financially comfortable and being socially isolated were also common factors amongst those sympathising with terrorism, the University of London study found. - its not a million miles from the classic 'school shooter' profile.

another from 2014, but american focused: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/featur ... 56021.html
Lots more on the other side of the link, including the stupid criteria used to define 'radicals'.

The internalisation of collective Muslim guilt

While the media - and government - created a distinction between "good" and "bad" Muslims, and the topic has been written on extensively, there has been less discussion about how Muslim institutions play into that dichotomy. Although prominent Muslim institutions and community leaders are often criticised by leftists and right-wingers alike for supposedly not doing enough to condemn groups such as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group, they have consistently done so after every single major attack since 9/11. The actual problem, some suggest, is these institutions' overzealous support for governmental policies that have increased the threat of terrorism and created the perfect conditions for radical groups to recruit disenfranchised individuals.

Many Muslim-American institutions have gone to great lengths to distance themselves from the "bad Muslims", while presenting themselves as the "good Muslim" alternative and finding favour with Western governments. Critics say that this internal enforcement of Muslim "moderation" - as defined by Western governments - has isolated those members of the community who might otherwise have found a space to voice their political and social frustrations with governmental policies and societal marginalisation.

In the US, some organisations, such as the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), have even championed the government's CVE initiative. MPAC also founded the Safe Spaces Initiative, and has received much criticism for its attempt to "root out extremism in Muslim communities" through this programme, which accepts at face value many of the discredited arguments regarding the "signs of radicalisation". Indeed, Muslim-American institutions, in a panic to establish themselves as representatives of "good, moderate" Islam in a climate of Islamophobia, often adopt positions that are controversial in the very communities they are supposed to represent.

For example, many Americans objected to the US' extrajudicial killing of Osama bin Laden in May 2011 on the grounds that it violated the basic human right to due process and a fair trial. Yet, it was reflexively celebrated in press releases by Muslim-American organisations, with one group saying they "welcome the elimination of Osama bin Laden". Many who condemn Bin Laden, but also object to their government carrying out an extrajudicial killing, criticised these organisations for obfuscating the ethically grounded criticisms some Muslim-Americans have of their government. Furthermore, some of the largest Muslim-American organisations have been criticised for repeatedly releasing statements and holding press conferences that succumb to the pressure of being politically acquiescent and apologetic or which demonstrate an aloofness with regards to sociopolitical realities.

For example, in the midst of the massive #BlackLivesMatter protests in Baltimore following the police killing of Freddie Gray, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) was criticised for inserting itself into the debate by expressing its disapproval of "rioting" without having issued any condemnation of the shooting or a call for justice. Similarly, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), within mere hours of the San Bernardino shooting, before any confirmation from police that the criminals were Muslim, held a live press conference condemning the attack. The hastily organised event was criticised as "cringeworthy" for featuring a visibly shocked family member of the suspected perpetrators to express his condolences.

Many Muslims saw this as a desperate move to "frame the story as something it is not", effectively indicting the entire Muslim community by presuming to speak on behalf of Muslim-Americans. Such actions, critics contend, only serve to underline the idea that the community carries a unique responsibility to publicly denounce the acts of their co-religionists. Nihad Awad, CAIR's executive director, rejected the criticism and told Al Jazeera that "hosting a press conference, nationally covered live on all major news networks, got the family [of the suspected perpetrators of the San Bernardino attack] and community ahead of the story, rather than steamroll[ing] by it". But as Zareena Grewal, a professor of American Studies and Religious Studies at Yale University, wrote in her book Islam is a Foreign Country: "By accepting responsibility for 'bad Muslims' in the public sphere, Muslim-American spokespeople's defensive postures not only treat terrorism and fundamentalism as synonyms, they link the rehabilitative strategies necessary for salvaging Islam [their own reform projects] to the project of mainstreaming Muslims in the US."
Indeed, such positions unintentionally play into the idea that Muslims are a monochromatic entity.

So. Madd0ct0r's policy.
1) Grow a sense of perspective. Where do actual deaths occur?
2) Focus on economic regeneration efforts in deprived areas
3) Enforce press standards
4) Try to redirect the military industrial complex into the war on climate change.

[Napoleon the Clown]

The solution is simple: Moderate Christian groups need to come out and clearly state that they do not wish for homosexuals, apostates, rape victims, or adulterers to be killed. They need to state that they are willing to suspend reparative therapy practices until the person is an adult, and allow them the choice to undergo the procedure at that point. They need to make is perfectly clear that they will go through proper secular legal channels for all disputes, and not establish underground/illegal Biblical courts.

Most importantly, moderate Christiains need to distance themselves from extremists - perhaps it is time for a separation, like how Shia distanced themselves from Sunni.

Protestants did not break away from Catholicism because they disagreed with the Catholic church on questions such as what qualifies as humane treatment. They broke off because they did not recognize Papal authority. "The Inquisition was bad!" was not a motive. Hell, the Anglican church came about because Henry VIII wanted to get a divorce, the Pope told him no, so good ol' Henry the Eighth made himself a brand new flavor of Christianity.

Christians aren't expected to distance themselves from the crazy fucks that do bad things under the banner of Christianity. Why should practitioners of Islam be held to a different standard?

(FYI: Every barbaric thing you listed is something found in the Bible, too!)

[Iroscato]

The solution is simple:

I've learned to be wary of people who think that complex issues merit simple solutions.

[biostem]

Christians aren't expected to distance themselves from the crazy fucks that do bad things under the banner of Christianity. Why should practitioners of Islam be held to a different standard?

A good many Protestants don't want anything to do with Catholics, and some don't even consider Catholics to be Christian. So, yes, there is a good bit of distancing being done. Similarly, if you were to ask many Protestants what they think of any given Papal decree, most would disagree with or denounce it.

As for the general notion of distancing oneself from a group which has dangerous or damaging beliefs - would you give someone the benefit of the doubt if they went around saying they were a member of the KKK or Nazi party, but when questioned on their membership, they stated "well, I don't believe in those aspects of this group...". You shouldn't make snap judgments based upon what groups a person is a member of, right? You shouldn't require them to clarify or denounce the more dangerous or distasteful components of the groups they belong to, right?

[Grumman]

Christians aren't expected to distance themselves from the crazy fucks that do bad things under the banner of Christianity. Why should practitioners of Islam be held to a different standard?

Because there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who are openly in favour of executing ex-Muslims for being ex-Muslims, for starters. Ask an Egyptian, a Palestinian or an Afghan and there's a better than even chance (60%, 58% and 80%) that they will tell you they support the death penalty for apostasy. Muslims who will murder people over depictions of Mohammad are common enough that even their defenders take it for granted. But because making a career out of killing unborn children can provoke a similarly violent response from some Christians, we're supposed to act like they're as bad as each other?

[Napoleon the Clown]

Christians aren't expected to distance themselves from the crazy fucks that do bad things under the banner of Christianity. Why should practitioners of Islam be held to a different standard?

A good many Protestants don't want anything to do with Catholics, and some don't even consider Catholics to be Christian. So, yes, there is a good bit of distancing being done. Similarly, if you were to ask many Protestants what they think of any given Papal decree, most would disagree with or denounce it.

As for the general notion of distancing oneself from a group which has dangerous or damaging beliefs - would you give someone the benefit of the doubt if they went around saying they were a member of the KKK or Nazi party, but when questioned on their membership, they stated "well, I don't believe in those aspects of this group...". You shouldn't make snap judgments based upon what groups a person is a member of, right? You shouldn't require them to clarify or denounce the more dangerous or distasteful components of the groups they belong to, right?

The shitty stuff is central to the KKK and Nazis, stop being disingenuous.

The Troubles were one of those times that Protestant vs Catholic really flared up. Political matters played a role as well, but religion was a meaningful factor. Similar to what we see between Shia and Sunni Muslims in the Middle East these days. Catholic vs Protestant is largely the same thing as Shia vs Sunni. Who has The Truth? And from that difference in belief comes a plethora of other differences in belief.

I'm curious, are you saying that Catholics are doubleplusungood? Catholicism itself? It seems as though it goes without saying that your run-of-the-mill Catholic doesn't support sexually assaulting little kids, even though the Catholic church itself is damn near synonymous with that shit these days.

By saying "moderate" Muslims must denounce the shitbags that do horrid things in the name of Islam implies that horrid things are central to Islam. Muslims in war-torn regions don't need to "do anything" to show they're good people. They're largely trying to live their lives or get the hell out of a place where people are dying because a group of assholes want to force their beliefs on others.

Your average asshole needs to learn that Islam is not much different from Christianity, when it comes down to it. Vicious, cruel, backwards punishments exist in the holy books for Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. All three of the Abrahamic religions have historically done some truly brutal things. All three have had practitioners do truly twisted things in the name of their religion of choice. People need to figure that out and realize that Muslims aren't inherently hostile and vicious.

Grumman: There are plenty of Christian groups that treat women as subhuman slaves. When will moderate Christians distance themselves from that? When will Christians distance themselves from those who wish to outlaw sodomy? Anything else bad Christians have done? Christian nations of old did the same exact shit you're decrying in theocracies of the Middle East. Our love of proxy wars against the Soviet Union, as well as the Soviet Union's expansionism, threw social progress back centuries in the Middle East. It's not indicative of the religion itself. Buddhism and Hinduism have had similar shit happen. Theocracy is the problem. When a country's entire infrastructure is destroyed over the span of decades it alters how society functions. These acts are not unique to Islam, they've happened among damn near every country throughout history. There are over a billion Muslims in the world.

[biostem]

They're largely trying to live their lives or get the hell out of a place where people are dying because a group of assholes want to force their beliefs on others.

According to Pew polls, a vast majority of Muslims consider killing apostates, homosexuals, adulterers, and so on, to be key stances associated with their religion. Stop pretending that your average Muslim is content to simply live and let live - perhaps that is the case when Muslims are a minority and don't have the political clout or sheer numbers to enforce their preferred form of law, but one need look no further than Germany to see what happens when you get Muslims in significant numbers, and just how much respect they have for Western values...

[madd0ct0r]

oh wow. Dude. you went full retard.

How long has Germany had a large Turkish population?

edit: on reflection, retard ain't the word. Trump I think.

[biostem]

oh wow. Dude. you went full retard.

How long has Germany had a large Turkish population?

edit: on reflection, retard ain't the word. Trump I think.

Ah, the first resort of someone who can't refute an argument - personal attacks. And, no, I'm not a Trump supporter, but points for effort.

[madd0ct0r]

How long has Germany had a turkish popualtion? I'm interested in if you are going to show that this caused a surge in terrorism in Germany, or if you were referring to the recent refugee crisis as 'the significant muslim popualtion'. If the latter, could you explain why that counts as significant but the turks didn't?

[biostem]

How long has Germany had a turkish popualtion? I'm interested in if you are going to show that this caused a surge in terrorism in Germany, or if you were referring to the recent refugee crisis as 'the significant muslim popualtion'. If the latter, could you explain why that counts as significant but the turks didn't?

So are you saying that everything is just fine and dandy in Germany now? I am unconcerned with who was there before, because the fact of the matter is that when a large number of Muslims enter a country, bad things happen. Perhaps the Turkish immigrants arrived slowly enough and in smaller numbers, that they had to integrate into German society, which falls in line with my previous comments about them not being an issue when they were the minority and small in number.

[AniThyng]

oh wow. Dude. you went full retard.

How long has Germany had a large Turkish population?

edit: on reflection, retard ain't the word. Trump I think.

Nevermind Germany. The issue of the day in Malaysia is something about removing constitutional safeguards against sharia overriding the secular legal system. As I've said many times before, it's an exaggeration to blame all Malaysia problems on Islam, but to deny the central role Islam has in these problems is to deny reality, and ET haven't even touched on how it affects issues like homophobia, reproduce rights and apostacy

[madd0ct0r]

How long has Germany had a turkish popualtion? I'm interested in if you are going to show that this caused a surge in terrorism in Germany, or if you were referring to the recent refugee crisis as 'the significant muslim popualtion'. If the latter, could you explain why that counts as significant but the turks didn't?

So are you saying that everything is just fine and dandy in Germany now? I am unconcerned with who was there before, because the fact of the matter is that when a large number of Muslims enter a country, bad things happen. Perhaps the Turkish immigrants arrived slowly enough and in smaller numbers, that they had to integrate into German society, which falls in line with my previous comments about them not being an issue when they were the minority and small in number.

In other words, you don't actually know anything at all about germany, except that there was lots of articles about the new year stuff. There was trouble with the turks, they didn't really assimilate and I softballed that one to you and you still didn't even bother a cursory check. And you still feel like your opinion on the topic is worth something?
Go away and do some fucking research.

Nevermind Germany. The issue of the day in Malaysia is something about removing constitutional safeguards against sharia overriding the secular legal system. As I've said many times before, it's an exaggeration to blame all Malaysia problems on Islam, but to deny the central role Islam has in these problems is to deny reality, and ET haven't even touched on how it affects issues like homophobia, reproduce rights and apostacy

Well, I'm arguing with Biostem about his inital response to Ray254's OP - how to make islam less of a boogeyman in the west. I think malaysia is interesting but I think its a different catergory of situation, unless you are drawing parallels between countries showing that even in malaysia, where there is no alienation effect, islamic groups seem to be growing more hardline?

[biostem]

In other words, you don't actually know anything at all about germany, except that there was lots of articles about the new year stuff. There was trouble with the turks, they didn't really assimilate and I softballed that one to you and you still didn't even bother a cursory check. And you still feel like your opinion on the topic is worth something?
Go away and do some fucking research.

Blah blah blah... Islam is fine, it's you Westerners that are the real problem. Name me one Islam-run country or majority-run area whose human rights violations, civil rights, equal rights, and other freedoms are as good as in the West. Name one Islam-majority area or country whose human rights, etc were improved when it changed from non-majority Islam to chiefly Islam. Name one Islam-run country where you would be fine having your mother/sister/wife/daughter traveling around in normal US Summer clothes, alone. If you can't, then shut the fuck up.

[madd0ct0r]

Blsh blah blah. I have muh sterotypes, and i refuse to bring any evidence to the table, so ill ask a load of questions irrelevant to the op and hide behind them when people call me out on my own bullshit.

Grow up.

I might be inclined to answer a question for a question. If only because in answeribg them you might actually do somer esearch and learn something about a topic that clearly interests you.

[AniThyng]

How long has Germany had a turkish popualtion? I'm interested in if you are going to show that this caused a surge in terrorism in Germany, or if you were referring to the recent refugee crisis as 'the significant muslim popualtion'. If the latter, could you explain why that counts as significant but the turks didn't?

So are you saying that everything is just fine and dandy in Germany now? I am unconcerned with who was there before, because the fact of the matter is that when a large number of Muslims enter a country, bad things happen. Perhaps the Turkish immigrants arrived slowly enough and in smaller numbers, that they had to integrate into German society, which falls in line with my previous comments about them not being an issue when they were the minority and small in number.

In other words, you don't actually know anything at all about germany, except that there was lots of articles about the new year stuff. There was trouble with the turks, they didn't really assimilate and I softballed that one to you and you still didn't even bother a cursory check. And you still feel like your opinion on the topic is worth something?
Go away and do some fucking research.

Nevermind Germany. The issue of the day in Malaysia is something about removing constitutional safeguards against sharia overriding the secular legal system. As I've said many times before, it's an exaggeration to blame all Malaysia problems on Islam, but to deny the central role Islam has in these problems is to deny reality, and ET haven't even touched on how it affects issues like homophobia, reproduce rights and apostacy

Well, I'm arguing with Biostem about his inital response to Ray254's OP - how to make islam less of a boogeyman in the west. I think malaysia is interesting but I think its a different catergory of situation, unless you are drawing parallels between countries showing that even in malaysia, where there is no alienation effect, islamic groups seem to be growing more hardline?

Yes. Hell even Turkey itself is backsliding. Malaysia is/was the foremost of the moderate Muslim nations, certainly one of the most diverse, and we've never managed to really fix the religious harmony problem. Sure, people get along individually ( " I'm not racist, I have Muslim/non-muslim friends! " ) but as an aggregate? I mean, I can completely believe that westerners feel threatened by public perceptions of the more regressive aspects of Muslim culture when I've been living in one my entire life.

That being said, you probably could get away with dressing in us summer clothes in KL. But that's because of white/ non Muslim privilege. A local Muslim can and have been shammed on social media.