On May 11, the Kuwaiti Constitutional Court rejected an appeal by MP Nabil al-Fadl to adjust citizenship laws in order to allow Christians to become citizens.
The current law, according to Article 4.5 of the Citizenship Act of Kuwait, holds
that he [a potential citizen] be an original Muslim by birth, or that he has converted to Islam according to the prescribed rules and procedures and that a period of at least 5 years has passed since he embraced Islam before the grant of naturalization.
Nationality thus acquired is ipso facto lost and the Decree of naturalization rendered void ab initio if the naturalized person expressly renounces Islam or if he behaves in such a manner as clearly indicates his intention to abandon Islam. In any such case, the nationality of any dependant of the apostate who had acquired it upon the naturalization of the apostate is also rendered void.
Such is the idea of “nationality” in Muslim countries—one that is antithetical to Western notions of citizenship, where freedom of religion (and conscience) are paramount.
This also sheds light on why Muslim “apostates,” especially those who convert to Christianity, are regularly seen as traitors: abandoning Islam is synonymous with treason.
Finally, it is a reminder why the modern day rise of Islam is reminiscent of the 20th century rise of European nationalism in nations like Germany and Italy – and resulting in the same fascism.

Billy Corr says
The irony is that Westerners shed their blood to ‘liberate’ Kuwait from the clutches of the supposedly-wicked Iraqis.
It will be recalled that Christians were treated no worse than other Iraqis under the tyrant Saddam. Now over a third of the Iraqis Christians are refugees, either within Iraq or in other countries.
Angemon says
Exactly, Billy – lying to get Westerners to fight their battles for them? Halal. Rewarding those Westerners who risked their lives for them? Haram.
Rob says
No different to Bangladesh currently.
In the 70s thousands of Bangladesh Muslims crossed into nominally Hindu India to escape the barbarity of their co-religionist army.
Eventually India said enough and intervened.
The followers of which religion are constantly vilified and attacked in Bangladesh today?
Hinduism of course.
Don’t know how many 000s I’ve spent on supporting children in Bangladesh via World Vision over the years.
No doubt if there were no Hindus in Bangladesh they would turn on the Christian population.
umbra says
western countries were paid by the wealthy gulf states to kick saddam out of kuwait and depose him a decade later. At the state level, real and initial benefactors of the destruction of saddam’s iraq were wealthy gulf states. Their borders were secured when saddam fell, at least when US forces were still maintaining security in iraq. Now however, an iran aligned iraq has become a threat once again. Unfortunately, this time with obama “I’ve stopped worrying and love iranian mullahs” on the helm, these gulf states could not get the US to do anything about realigning iraq away from iran. Consequently, some of these gulf states created obama’s JV team to try and fix their problem of an unfriendly (and potentially hostile) shia iraq by starting a proxy civil war to wear down iraq (and now iran).
This present proxy war in iraq and syria shall continue until international intervention(s) takes place or when one side or the other is exhausted (militarily/economically). Since those wealthy gulf states have plenty of cash, it stands to reason that it is the iranian side that is being pushed to exhaustion at this moment. However, if obama manages to return $150Billion to iran and more importantly dismantle economic sanctions against iran, then iranian war stamina may persist for sometime. Needless to say, at this stage large quantities of arms would be flooding into the middle east to feed the conflict. If and when the conflict does eventually end (if it does not lead to a larger regional war or indeed a world war), then a large part of iraq and syria would be turned into complete rubble. Western countries are then expected to contribute substantially to the reconstruction of these two countries that were ravaged and destroyed by islam.
p/s Christians in saddam’s iraq were not treated equally by their fellow ROP citizens. While a Christian like Tariq Aziz did become a high ranking government official, the general Christian population were still expected to tow the line. The pecking orders were ROP types (specifically sunni) then non-ROP/rebel types (like Christians, some kurds, some shias). saddam distrusted the shia (also kurds) leadership and to a lesser extent the shia/kurd population. He however trust the Christian leadership far more then the shia one simply because he knew that the subjugated Christian population had no realistic capability or desire of rebelling against him. Furthermore, Christians were quite dependent on him to provide protection for their communities. So, while Christians in saddam’s iraq were dhimmified, they enjoyed the protection of dhimmitude as offered by saddam. That of course changed when saddam was deposed. Christians could no longer depend on successive governments/authorities (from the coalition provisional authority to the transitional government to the interim government to al-maliki’s and now al-Khozaei’s) to protect them. It appears that post saddam governments see any political arrangement/pact with iraqi Christians as redundant. They simply do not see the need to have Christians in carrying out their agendas … whatever they may be.
pennant8 says
Exactly right, that was the first thing I thought of when I read the article. We have to stay off the ground in these Muslim countries. All we do when we go on the ground is protect Muslims from other Muslims with virtually no gratitude whatsoever. Then we insult ourselves by clinging to the narrative that our troops are defending “our freedom.”
Huck Folder says
‘Modest’ Malaysia is the same. To be a citizen, you have to be a moslem. I don’t know where that leaves all the CIVILIZED minorities. Can they get passports? Can they travel? Can they get government jobs?
Can you say APARTHEID?
But the butt-licking SINISLAM leftards NEVER breath a word about moslem apartheid.
phil hurley says
its about time we stood up to these religious fanatics as they all lie to us infidels to further islam and that is actually written in the quran
duh_swami says
Well, that’s too many requirements for me. I guess I will have to give up my dreams of Kuwait citizenship.
R Cole says
I wonder how many of these Islamic ‘refugees’ they are taking ??
Clearly through it is that – the responsibility doesn’t have to be theirs – and we are buying it.
::
Count the countries where it is not possible to be a non-Muslim citizen in the Islamic world.
There is Saudi Arabia – the whipping boy for all Islam’s ills – no Christians no churches – simple. There is the moderate Maldives – no non-Muslim citizens allowed there – there had been reports of disappeared apostates and confiscation of Bible ‘contraband’ from tourists at its airports [all deserving of the highest ‘respect’]. And there’s Christian-Free Kuwait.
And where non-Muslims are allowed – as if their very being an inconvenience to DNA identical Muslim countrymen – they are granted reduced citizenship – or second class status [That’s called ‘peaceable’].
All while complaining loudly of the problem of so-called ‘Islamophobia’ in the west.
So what’s the deal – no churches there – and huge melee when their Arab funded mega mosque construction face opposition here. And further to this arrangement – to point out the gaping disparity – is akin to hate speech.