Obviously its clear that your knowledge in this field is "POOR" and you base your opinion on mere assumptions.
You could have done at least wikipedia research before coming up with absurd posts that you are known for.
The Constitution of Medina (Arabic: صحیفة المدینه‎, Ṣaḥīfat al-Madīna), also known as the Charter of Medina, was drafted by the Islamic prophet Muhammad. It constituted a formal agreement between Muhammad and all of the significant tribes and families of Yathrib (later known as Medina), including Muslims, Jews, Christians[1] and pagans.[2][3] This constitution formed the basis of the future caliphate. The document was drawn up with the explicit concern of bringing to an end the bitter inter tribal fighting between the clans of the Aws (Aus) and Khazraj within Medina. To this effect it instituted a number of rights and responsibilities for the Muslim, Jewish, Christian and pagan communities of Medina bringing them within the fold of one communitythe Ummah.[4]
Thanks for the history lesson. What it has to do with modern geopolitical reality is another question.
Yes, I object to a Muslim-centric Government structure by whatever name it's called. Dhimmitude is not a desirable state of affairs for non-Muslims.
Let me turn it around again so that you will see how it is potentially viewed by non-Muslims. I don't know any other way to illustrate the problem. I've done this once before...
The U.S. is going to be renamed the
Christian States of America. Publicly rejecting the Godhood of Jesus is blasphemy and insult, punishable by death. Apostasy typically results in severe social stigma, death threats, beatings. If you are Muslim or Hindu, your ability to be elected to public office is nil.
Women must reveal their hair and faces. Church bells will be rung at regular intervals, as calls to prayer.
"But don't worry. You minority religions will be taken care of. We will allow you to practice your religion. Here's your religious-minority bill for the calendar year."
Would you be comfortable in such a system? Is it fair?
The only realistic solution in today's world is to allow people complete freedom to worship, and the government must not favor one religious group over another. By definition, a "Muslim Nation of XYZ" will favor Muslim citizens. Great for Muslims, not great for everyone else.