I must rebut Pak Sheikh's 'Islamic state enhances democracy' (Dec 1) as it is an example of opportunistic politics. It is a common ploy of PAS and its supporters to tell non-Muslims that they do not understand Islam and that goals can be achieved via an Islamic state when it really is a manipulation of theories and logic to support their rhetoric.

Pak Sheik argues that because secular and pluralistic countries are imperfect, the Islamic state has the philosophy to make up for it. This is just pure nonsense. All states have a goal to achieve justice for all and just because they adopt secularism and pluralism, does not mean they do not have the same philosophy on good governance and justice. The Islamic state is no different or unique.

The incredulous thing that strikes me is Pak Sheikh's claim that an Islamic state would be more tolerant. There is no way that mixing religion and politics would be more tolerant no matter which religion. Islamic states too have a history of resorting to military and unilateral means.

The EPF investment issue is a good example. Though about half of the assets belong to non-Muslims, PAS wants to make it Islamic when the party's Youth chief Mahfuz Omar contented that the public money was being used in gambling, and thus, non-Islamic. If this is tolerance, then non-Muslims and Muslims would suffocate under it.

Pak Sheikh argues that all it takes for Islamic state to work is for everyone to accept it and Allah will show the way. How this logic is in line with the spirit of tolerance, multi-culturism and multi-ethnicity is beyond comprehension. A system that needs full and unquestioning faith is nothing short of an open invitation to abuse. In other words, it is just twisted logic.

In conclusion, the Islamic state argument is another example of opportunistic politics which is not that different than Umno's. It's just different players and tools but same methodology. Again, the means justify the end and that can only lead to disaster in the end.