Erroneous islamic positions in debate ?

Muslims have a tendency to debate with almost UTOPIAN litter when debating or talking secularists .... We have a cycle of rehasing utopian visions in our stances !

Since many of the principles and rituals of islam Cannot or is hard to be understood by the libralists ... "Why do we fast? Why do we have to pray 5 times a day? Why do we do wear hijab etc. etc.

Sharia law is now a sticking point for the "new world order" ... We should not allow ourselves to fall into the dialogue the communistics or any of the other isms fell into ....

We also bring apologetics into the equation heavily ...

We should bring more of a realistic aim to the debate ....i advocate the following few points ...

1. Pointing out some benefits of sharia ...

i.e. abandonment of the Usury model and moving to another

2) Seperate segregated gender education increases understanding

3) etc...

5) Pointing out that many of the principles and rituals are linked to the orders of God and are for the believers, for example, a woman wearing hijab which is an order for the "believing women" i.e. a sign of Piousness for the individual person and since the state Caliphate is a state for the believers, muslims in general i..e comprising of majority of muslims, this law can be followed quite easily as is linked to God-Fearing-ness of the individual ....

6) Many of the non-believers believe that Sharia law will be applied when 95% of the population are non-muslims, this is an erroneous understanding and should be made clear from the beginning....

7) That they will have to all convert to islam ... which is an erroneous misconception although if the Sharia is implemented it will probably comprise of a majority of Muslims ...

8) Many principles of islam are easily understood and obeyed when a person is muslim since the foundations and roots of the nature of the person has been changed. And since Sharia law is a complete way they all compliment one another and are easily followed as part of the culture as a whole ... Therefore It is folly to go into sharia specifics ...

In concluding, Nit-Picking from Sharia which is the norm can be a dangerous way of dialogue, since no context is given and the individual is left out of the equation .. and importantly they will see Sharia through the secular glasses .... Give the context, give the Culture and norm of the society, be generalistic and not specific since being specific leads to confusion in understanding for the non-muslim.