The Sock Thief notes Ahmed Zaoui's comments in his essay about Islam being an all-encompassing system of law, and tries to use it to tar Zaoui's supporters:
If liberals here in NZ want to support some one who does not believe in the separation of Church and State then that's their choice but perhaps they should moderate their criticism of the influence of certain Christian church groups in NZ. Or maybe its OK if you're a Muslim fundamentalist. I'd be very interested to see Destiny Church or the Maxim Institute appear on the Public Address web site.
Unfortunately, he's deliberately conflating support for someone's human rights with an endorsement of their views. I do not support Zaoui's position on Islam or the separation of church and state, any more than I support the position of David Irving or Destiny Church - but that does not mean that I think they should be silenced, imprisoned without charge or denied a fair trial.
Liberals do not have any sort of double standard over Zaoui. They are consistent in standing up for human rights, regardless of the views of the person in question. Sadly, it seems the same cannot be said of Sock Thief.