Precisely..With the vague and sometimes contradictory laws, what we have is an immense scope for (mis)using the same to settle scores based on personal vendettas/bias. So if we have a better law which gives a more fool proof method to solve the same crime is not better to move towards that rather than persisting with the old one which might not be suitable for modern day ?
But my point was not that, the previous part of the post was slightly on tangent - my main point was to those who are ridiculing Zarvan that secularism is completely compatible with Islam. No it is not. Islam tells people how to run a govt. If you dont follow that then that is un-Islamic. If you follow it, then it is not secular.
That is agreed. But many of those principles that supposedly make these secular "society" a hallmark for equal justice already exist in Islam. What secularism allows in the name of personal liberty even if it is damaging to others in society Islam has made that void.