Michael is just amazingly reactionary and sees criminal association with one religion whilst ignoring the failings if others.
.,,.,
No, I don't. They are all bollocks to me & replete with 'failings'. But the 'one' you accuse me of concentrating on happens to be the 'one' that this thread is about, doesn't it? So it wouldn't be particularly germane to go off at them all. Cast eyes ½" upwards and read the thread title, sillipooze.

But this 'one' happens nevertheless to have a lot more 'failings' than the others, at that, doesn't it? Or can you after all name a sovereign state run by any other system where, in this current Year Of Grace, young women are publicly caned 100 strokes on their bare buttocks [N Nigeria 2001], or buried up to their necks & stoned to death for sleeping with husbands they have legally married but the sharia court won't recognise, or hanged for maintaining the religion into which they were brought up? But objedction to such practices is "reactionary", is it? How so, pray?

I'm surprised BTW at you falling back on such a pathetic lefty boo-word as "reactionary". Why, I shall be an "imperialist running-dog" of something-or-other in a minute, I daresay.

"reactionary": let me roll it round the mouth. "reactionary"; "reactionary"...

Reminds me of my bro-in-law's Communist-party-member brother back in the 1940s. "Reactionary" --

Ah, sweet!