Given the reasons in my posts above it is hard to see organic change coming from within Islam. The immensity of the change required is defined by Robert Spencer’s definition of a ‘moderate Muslim:

"Is it [a moderate Muslim] one who will never engage in terrorist acts? That would make moderates an overwhelming majority of Muslims worldwide. Or is a moderate one who sincerely disapproves of those terrorist acts? That would reduce the number of moderates. Or is a moderate Muslim one who actively speaks out and works against the jihadists? That would lower the number yet again. Or finally, is a moderate Muslim one who actively engages the jihadists in a theological battle, trying to convince Muslims that jihad terrorism is wrong on Islamic grounds? That would leave us a tiny handful."

A tiny handful. One is reminded of Yeats:

"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
are full of passionate intensity."

Unfortunately that appears to sum up Islam.

I think people are confused and defend Islam for a variety of spurious reasons which all have their origin in the secular structure which gives people the right to defend such things as Islam.

The irony is by defending Islam such people are helping to destroy that secular structure.

Still dodging, cohenite.

They were simple questions, no prejudice implied. I have to say that your own user name does tend to imply a prejudicial viewpoint, however.

Are secularists happier than Muslims, on the whole? What about Jews, happier or less so than Muslims? Christians - happier or less so? Are the poor in Muslim countries more able to participate or less able to compared to those in countries which follow any of those other religious/ideological dogmas?

I'll give it one last go before I leave you to your polemic. Care to have a shot at those simple questions or are you simply going to continue to rant and rave?

cohanite: The Koran is full of invocations for Muslims to kill non-believers. The Koran says The unbelievers are your inveterate enemies [4:95-101].

You are right here. As I was told once by an Imam, "No Allah, Animal!, can kill, no problem."

cohanite: Arguments which point to similar texts in the Old Testament and which make historical comparisons are simply irrelevant.

There are some text in the old Bible but they have been negated by the coming of enlightenment in the West & the introduction of Secular Laws over some hundreds of years. Besides no-one but the nutcases in America take any notice of them. Something that the Middle Eastern countries have yet to come to grips with.

Unfortunately they never will because of their deep seated commitment to the Koran & other Koranic Texts. The coming of the Mahdi's & the consequences that followed their radical interpretation of the Koran have seen to that.

Jayb, I wasn't talking about wealth distribution, but about social participation, however wealth distribution is also an indicator. Given that in the West around 80% of the wealth is controlled by around 1% of the population and that the effort to maintain the fiction of relative wealth equality has sent several Western secular consumerist states to the wall, I'm not sure that it's a terribly favourable measure for the west. I'm not interested in trying to make Muslim women into Western ones, feminism is a failed dogma that creates more harm than good.

Here in Australia we redistribute more money to middle-class people with jobs (especially women) than we do to poor people without them (especially men). Is that a good or exemplary model? Does it accord with the Bible or the Quran?

We have people (mostly men) killing themselves at the rate of thousands a year. How does that compare with Islamic countries of similar wealth per capita? What about murder rate? Violent crime generally? Robbery and burglary? Interactions with neighbours?

You're focussing on scare-mongering, rather than trying to work out a way to come to a melding of views. I think that's destructive and I like to try to be constructive.

Antiseptic are you blind; I answered your 'question' when I said a secular society allows ALL religions to be free; if, as you appear to be suggesting, Muslims are only happy when everyone else has no choice but to be Muslim who cares if they are happy or not.

How about you answer these questions: would you be happy under sharia? Do you think everyone having to live under sharia is what the great mass of Muslims, both peaceful and violent, want?

Answer those questions and we'll proceed from there.

"who cares if they are happy or not"

Too funny. Sums you up in a nutshell.