Were there any "facts" in your whining about having to spend money on security and wait in line? Reads like unalloyed invective toward a religion & culture to me.
There is wide disagreement in Islamic circles about which aspects of Sharia are fully supported in the Koran, many find fault with the "Sharia" being sold by fanatic Islamist groups. Even theocrats in Iran & Saudi Arabia publicly criticize the foundations of the crap ISIS and Al Queda are selling (though there is more support in Saudi Arabia than the rest of the Muslim world is really comfortable with.)
And in more temperate circles, even what is unequivocally in there isn't necessarily considered applicable to modern life, any more than the minutae of Leviticus is applicable to other Abrahamic faith populations living in modern societies that still have Leviticus in their scripture. I suppose some radicals of those other faiths would prefer it if it were followed to the letter and enforced by the state. Among state actors only Iran and Saudi Arabia have strong Sharia elements to the legal codes, though in tribal regions of weaker states local nut cases will sometimes go there. Afghanistan under Taliban rule was the extreme case, but so what? That's a case a radical theology taking advantage of a political vacuum, not Islam in general.
Fanatics come and go, but Islamic fanatics really haven't held much political power in the past millenium, and never had the influence on the broader stage that the fanatics behind the Inquisition had (ending barely a century ago), and it's silly to think that their influence is on the upswing, despite the rantings & ravings of the few. Yes, let's look at the history of Muslim countries, in particular the history of north African Muslim countries. Those were the enlightened, educated, and tolerant destination countries of refuge accepting religious minorities fleeing the wrath of the Inquisition, taking in the non-conforming Christians, Jews, and others. Did the political power of the radical intolerant Vatican at that time make Christianity incompatible with modern democracy?
The nut-job terrorists hate the tolerant Sufi Muslim populations of the world at least as much or more than non-Muslims, and pretty much all Muslims who disagree with them. That doesn't make Islam incompatible with democracy at it's core.
The country with the largest number of Muslim citizens is India, the world's biggest democracy. But are we to blame all of India's problems on their Muslim minority? The vast majority of India's Muslims are far from radical, but there are some. India's Muslims are more likely to become victims of fanatic Hindus in their midst than they are to become terrorists. (Many of the biggest Bollywood stars are Muslim, some of whom are married to Hindus or Sikhs.)
Behind India in close second place (or maybe first now, it changes with every census) in Muslim population is Indonesia. Unlike India, it is a country with a Muslim majority. Indonesia too has a history of political problems- not always democratic, but trending that way over time. But placing the blame for their economic & political problems on the radical minority or Muslim culture writ large would be preposterous. Yes, there are home grown Islamic terrorists there, but they are attacking other Muslims. As in India vast majority of the population strives toward modernity, not some nut-case theory of half-baked Sharia interpretation of how life should be.
By the Economist Intelligence Unit's
Democracy Index, those two countries which are home to about 20% of the world's Muslim population are nearly as democratic a the US, but not as democratic as Canada or Australia. India scores right next to Israel, Indonesia between Argentina and Poland. OK, not perfect, more democratic than those places like Mexico, or Brazil (or most of South America) , or some EU member states such as Hungary. How "evolved" do they need to be?
In third place comes Pakistan, also afflicted with a radicalized minority making life more difficult for the majority, and an arguably more flawed democracy, but a democracy nonetheless. Proximity of Pakistani tribal regions the Afghan tribal regions, and to the theocratic state of Iran has made it more difficult for them, but the vast majority are not sympathetic to the Taliban, or the notion of a theocratic ruling class. The political problems of these regions pre-dates their current nation state boundaries, pre-dates the British and Ottoman empires, and indeed even predates Islam. The political problems and failed states of those regions are a more credible cause for the rise of radical thinking in those area, Islamic or otherwise.
Communist Buddhist militant groups are in the terror mix in Kashmir, Krgystan, Nepal, and Myanmar, often making Muslims their targets. Shall explore the Buddhist underpinnings of the political philosophy of the Khmer Rouge Communists in Cambodia? That doesn't make Buddhism some sort of flawed religion/culture, incompatible with modernity or democracy.
Singapore is a thriving modern majority-Muslim country. Being a somewhat autocratic monarchy puts it quite a bit lower on the Democracy Index than Indonesia though, despite being a glittering star of modernity by most other measures. And it's the autocratic monarchy part, not the Muslim majority part that makes the difference.
Muslim bashing based on the ravings and practices of bad actors working out of failed state zones waving the Koran and a (distorted) Sharia law is cheap & intellectually lazy, despite it's current popularity. You can do better, and for the good of our democracy I hope you do.