Talk:Islam and Australian values: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: == Apostasy == Thanks for the clarification. Did the ruling of 1839 become law in the caliphate, or did it stop with the university? Isn't treason inevitable if someone rejects the theo...) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Did the ruling of 1839 become law in the caliphate, or did it stop with the university? | Did the ruling of 1839 become law in the caliphate, or did it stop with the university? | ||
Is it intended to be a revision of Islamic doctrine, or a revision of it's application under the current circumstances? That is, is the decision intended to apply forever, or to be revised as circumstances change? To what extent did 'foreign' interference influence the decision? That is, did they change the rule because it made Islam look so bad? | |||
Isn't treason inevitable if someone rejects the theological foundation of the state? A non-Muslim is almost automatically opposed to theocratic Muslim rule. | Isn't treason inevitable if someone rejects the theological foundation of the state? A non-Muslim is almost automatically opposed to theocratic Muslim rule. | ||
Revision as of 04:08, 19 November 2008
Apostasy
Thanks for the clarification.
Did the ruling of 1839 become law in the caliphate, or did it stop with the university?
Is it intended to be a revision of Islamic doctrine, or a revision of it's application under the current circumstances? That is, is the decision intended to apply forever, or to be revised as circumstances change? To what extent did 'foreign' interference influence the decision? That is, did they change the rule because it made Islam look so bad?
Isn't treason inevitable if someone rejects the theological foundation of the state? A non-Muslim is almost automatically opposed to theocratic Muslim rule.