Quote:
Originally Posted by myrrh
One of the rulers would have to decide to enact a Sharia form of government. By doing so, then would have the backing of all the Scholars, and if the Scholars would say to back it, then the people then would agree.
|
So then wouldn't the short answer be "by force"? I have a hard time believing that everyone would just be on board because the scholars said they should be, and they'd have no opportunity to voice any opposition. So when you say that under Sharia law, people are still allowed to vote on things, the complete thought is actually that they're only allowed to vote on things the rulers decide to allow them to vote on. That kind of nullifies the true value of voting.
And earlier in the thread, you said this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by myrrh
Sharia Law does not have plain racism and discrimination written into it. In fact, such ideas run completely contrary to Islaam itself, so to say that a system of government that is Islaam calls for would contain ideas that are against Islaam's core teachings is illogical.
|
But now you say this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by myrrh
Like a prime case for example of this would be Gay Mariage, in a Democracy, this can be allowed if just enough people were with it, while in Sharia, this would never be allowed.
|
That would be a discriminatory policy against gays.