To: Neocon who wrote (5984 ) 3/14/2003 1:32:41 PM From: one_less Read Replies (3) | Respond to Thank you for posting that. As you can see there is some disagreement among the scholars regarding how much consideration should be given for people who participate in the government, while not being defined as members of the group. Personally, I don't think they have ever gotten it right. If they had, or even if I could, we would be defining a utopian society. I don't want to live under the rule of any of these attempts, I like it right here, even as imperfect as right here is. So, I would not be a good spokesperson for or against the Shari'a definitions of "Islamic State." In general, I do not even make a good member of the religion in the sense of the "Organization." The closest western analogy I can come up with would be an Amish community, or to a lesser extent, a covenant community. In either of these, you afford resident people (like the adult son of a member/property owner) as much rights as any covenant member, with some restrictions on their ability to do things (vote, build a wall, etc.)
