Afghan constitution

[Stuart Mackey]

I hope you are not suggesting that Britian treats non Anglicans as second class citizens?

I'm suggesting that a state-established religion leaves the door open for legal persecution. Britain's government enforces its religion in public schools, which is perfectly legal if there is an official state church.

British law also allows the Queen to appoint the PM and cabinet ministers..sell Scotland, disband the navy, and go to war with Fiji.

If you want to seriously suggest that Britian would or could percecute people on religeius ground I would suggest you look up the events that removed all legal impediments to people of various faiths from a career of their choice{excepting the Monarchy}. Britians remaining religious laws are a historic hangover from the time of Henry V111 and the events of the Civil war/interregnum and the Glorious Revolution, and are no more than a hangover and one with little, if any, real effect on people. Such laws would probably be removed from the books if they appared to conflict with human rights.

The Afghan constitution goes one step beyond establishing an official state religion by saying that no law can contradict that religion. So now, every law is judged against the whatever interpretation of a religious text is most prevalent.

Of cource, it was designed that way.
Your British example has absolutly no relivance to this as British practice does not allow for what you claim.

*edited to fix italics