You're being vague. I'm not saying that the Islamic State's interpretation of Sharia is the only one; merely that their interpretation is what what they believe to be true and this is what drives them. After all, al-Baghdadi has a PhD in Islamic Law.

As far as other interpretations of Sharia are concerned, those are the great questions of our times. Are there interpretations that can completely undercut groups like the Islamic State? If so, how can Muslims spread these alternative interpretations? How can non-Muslims help (if at all)? Must Islam go through a "reformation" of its own before any progress can be made?

But to begin to discuss these questions we must first acknowledge the importance of Sharia to the events of today, including Islamic terrorism in Europe and elsewhere, the war in Syria, the resulting refugee crisis, etc., and have some knowledge about what Sharia is, what its different interpretations are, and if there is space for modernization.

The issues surrounding Sharia are a bit more relevant than those involved with Manitoba's common law vs. Quebec's civil law.