You cannot " make a simple outline " of Religion or of matter of Religious Scholarly debate or Religious Scholarly discussion.
You would, should one so wish, have to go through the entire exigetical discernment of What God Had to Say on the issue and not just very quickly concisely conjecture.
The so-called "united states" on the other hand , actually DOES have a very very indepth tediously nuanced and enormous, in terms of volumes of written, compiled, matter of legal issue, stores from which to draw of debate and legal discussion in making audible, publically announced its own " outline," to use the same English language 'word' but in the fuller sense of it,
Sharia cannot be 'reduced' to the basic so-called " must haves " or essentials. God did not leave an earth with 'carbon-copy' 'cookie-cutter' standard forms to be judged and legally discerned. Ther exist no 'essentials' or 'must haves' to which a legal authoritative body can reduce jurisprudence and safeguarding man's greater society. Legal debate involves the entire Quran and debate of all that comes to mind in the general and in the detail of the particular in each of the seperate individual cases. It CANNOT be nonsensically ' REDUCED ' to your so-called " must haves " of matter of interpretation of law. You, may I remind the reader, are not the 'determiner' of judgement of such matter yourself. There are 'professionals' so to speak who do that !
You would want to listen to God Himself first on the seperate and individual matter, issue at hand, in the particular case to be debated, judged, argued. To do otherwise, would, should I dare say, be as good as behaving yourself a so-called 'good Christian believer.' (Which is relatively invalid in God's Eyes.)
Believers are 'at war' with the people of the disbelievers, unbelievers. Believers are 'in an effort' to [we shall
] OVER COME the efforts made by the unbelievers those which go against God and which go against God's Better Judgement. There is truly a LOT to be debated and you cannot, Can Not, " make [the matter of legal interpretation] a simple outline. " This is a 'foolish' reply of yours, I dare say it. You could use the thoughts gleaned from it as fodder for some more "interesting things to do between Fard salah" if you like. [My God! Cincinnatti's online cafe and lounge culture; Are you familiar there in Cincinnatti with 'Kemal' who keeps the
discussion and blog site?]
Now take this in the best way: "From your [sic] rhetoric [read; 'rhetorical'] 'contrivances'," as you yourself attempt to articulate in your own words of thoughts on the issue, i.e. "We can set up any form of social administration, gov't, we want to." Again, this is another 'poorly thought out idea.' To put it in words to which I surmise you might be a little more accustomed in the circles in which you may see "you can go in the men's room and do in there whatever you want.' But this as you may more plainly see, by the eloboration in my having put it that way, can go against God. And arguably it should'nt.
Quran is revealed as 'guidance' to [m]an not by utopian mastermind. Quran is revealed as 'guidance' to [m]an by Himself.
" Please re-read my boldfaced grading above. " Nonsense, nonsense; no one has to make study of your opinion and your previously proferred choice words.
Quran exists I would say in my own opinion for the sake of preserving order among the Muslims and replacing their disunity with unity. But there are many many of us reading it and knowing God through its message brought down sent down upon each one's heart. And each and every hearer, each and every reader, is another mind and another life experience and so we talk. Is it U or is it me. Certainly God Knows best, as the moslemically 'oft heard phrase goes.
( * . . ( * . . ( * . . ( *