I don’t know how to express this more clearly.
You obviously assume it is axiomatic that religions are non-political. That is a valid belief system, but that’s all it is.
Islam is only one of many “religions” that incorporate aspects of what we would today consider politics. Another example is the Caesaropapism of the Byzantine Empire, under which the Emperor was head of both the Church and State. In medieval western Europe, church and state were separate in some ways, but intimately entangled in others. Similarly, under the Roman Republic and Empire the state religion was a department of the state.
That religion and politics are or should be separate is not a fact, it’s an opinion. One I agree with, BTW. But that doesn’t change the FACT that it’s an opinion and preference only.
No i don't.
All I'm saying is once the religion becomes a theocracy it becomes more political then it is a religion. That is why our founders set up the separation of church and state to avoid creating a political system based on a religion.