Some people argue that the very fact that the law in an Islamic state is coming from Islam rather than some other kind of lawmaking processes is a form of unjust discrimination in favour of Muslims by implementing "their laws".

Such thinking is based on an assumption that any discrimination on the grounds of a persons beliefs in unjust. To shift this paradigm we need to understand its roots:

Christian Europe has suffered greatly over history due to the battles between different churches and sectarianism, and as a result of this experience Europeans have an almost natural tendency to regard religion and politics as a dangerous mix. When differences of religious creed are used as justifications for one religious group attacking another there seems little way out. Why is that? Largely it is because, when pressed for a reason that their creed differs from the alternative, the answer is not expected to be reasonable: the core belief of the now secularised Western world is that acts of faith are by definition without reason. Consequently, getting two warring religious groups together to agree on their creed is basically unachievable. They can agree pragmatic matters such as not to fight for a while but not matters of creed.

If beliefs are formed purely outside of reasoned argument and evidence, then discrimination in favour of any beliefs, or belief system, is discrimination on arbitrary grounds. Such discrimination would inevitably be unjust. This is at the heart of the 'secular consensus' defining much of Western thought on the issue. If its basic premises are accepted then it follows that God would similarly be acting unjustly to discriminate on the basis of beliefs which were formed regardless of reasonable argument or evidence. Needless to say, once you start down this road it soon leads to the invalidation of all religions which claim any kind of exclusive salvation doctrine based on their beliefs.

Islam, however, rejects the basic premises of this argument and asserts that beliefs are the result of sincere evaluation of reason and evidence. Beliefs founded on speculation and without evidence are challenged such as in the following verses that set out the Islamic inclusive "doctrine of salvation":

And they say: "None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian." Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful."

Nay,-whoever submits His whole self to God and is a doer of good,- He will get his reward with his Lord; on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

(Qur'an 2:111-112)

The Qur'an makes it abundantly clear that people can be on the right course religiously speaking but have yet to fully accept Muhammad's message since the knowledge had not come to them.

The Religion before God is Islam (submission to His Will): Nor did the People of the Book dissent therefrom except through envy of each other, after knowledge had come to them. But if any deny the Signs of God, God is swift in calling to account.

So if they dispute with thee, say: "I have submitted My whole self to God and so have those who follow me." And say to the People of the Book and to those who are unlearned: "Do ye (also) submit yourselves?" If they do, they are in right guidance, but if they turn back, thy duty is to convey the Message; and in God's sight are (all) His servants.

(Qur'an 3:19-20)

So, if a Muslim encounters a non-Muslim he can ask this question. If the Christian or Jew or whoever replies that they do submit themselves to the will of God, then the Muslim can not judge them as wrong and the duty is on the Muslim to deliver the message of Islam.

There are many more verses in the Qur'an on this theme making it clear that Jews, Christians and others can be believers without yet fully acknowledging Muhammad as a prophet. In such cases, this would be due to Muhammad's message not having been delivered adequately to them.

So then, it is wrong to understand implementing Islamic law as any kind of unjust religious discrimination. Rather it is a technocratic system with the sovereignty held by the one with the most knowledge – God. This is not to say that the will of the people is ignored. On the contrary, it is part of good management to consult widely in order to understand and to do what is best for the people. Indeed, we know it is - because God has commanded it. This is much like the founding fathers of the United States and the formation of a constitution which sets out God-given rights of people which the simple will of the majority has no right to overturn.