A few days ago, I wrote a post examining why I believe Islam is not a religion like other religions, so that pluralist societies should view it with a distrust they do not extend to other religions. Daniel Pipes also tackles that issue. I’ll give you the first and last paragraphs of his article. You have to be sure to read the stuff in the middle:
Those of us who argue against Shari’a are sometimes asked why Islamic law poses a problem when modern Western societies long ago accommodated Halakha, or Jewish law.
The answer is easy: a fundamental difference separates the two. Islam is a missionizing religion, Judaism is not. Islamists aspire to apply Islamic law to everyone, while observant Jews seek only themselves to live by Jewish law.
Returning to pork: both Islam and Judaism abominate the flesh of pigs, so this prohibition offers a direct and revealing comparison of the two religions. Simply put, Jews accept that non-Jews eat pork but Muslims take offense and try to impede pork consumption. That, in brief, explains why Western accommodations to Halakha have no relevance for dealing with Shari’a. And why the Shari’a as public policy must be opposed.