That stipulated, if one believes that all Muslims are interested in the imposition of Sharia, there is no hope for democracy in the Muslim world, and I simply don't believe that. I don't think Sharia is human nature. I think freedom is.
I do think that it is going to take some serious reformation of Islam to moderate it and bring it in line with Western culture and values, which I think we'd all agree are responsible for most of the progress in the world since about 1400AD. What Bin Laden, et.al., preach is not a bastardization of Islam, it's pretty much what the Koran and the Hadith say, and he's got many, and the most vocal, clerics to back him up. The guys' on pretty solid theological ground for what he's doing.
Show us the moderate clerics who are helping the generally peaceable Muslim make the choice to embrace Western values and reject Sharia by re-interpreting Islamic teachings. Please do, because those leaders need to drown out the voices of the Muslim Brotherhood and their ilk, because the Muslim street sure seems pretty aligned with that crowd. I'm not suggesting such a change is impossible, I am just saying it's a big uphill climb.
As for Cain's proposition, the real question is - can a devout Muslim retain his devoutness and not desire the imposition of Sharia? Can he separate the political ideology that exists within Islam from the pure worship of a single deity that is a fixture of Islam? Does that make him less Muslim? I just posit that you will find most Muslims, and Islamic leaders, find that separation problematic.
So, we're looking for Muslims who practice a "kinder, gentler" form of Islam. If that's so, is it still Islam?
Until that's mainstream, American political leaders should be very wary of what their Muslim advisors and appointees believe. Sharia? Just say no.