Again in reply to Arbibi Ashoy's Religious laws outdated, I begin with a most obvious consequence of his argument.

If - as he asserts - the commonalities between religions are so profound and great to the extent that non-Muslims can enter paradise, then why the fuss about those who leave Islam? After all, if one can enter paradise without being a Muslim - then why bother to ask for reasons to leave Islam? It makes no sense.

I do not create my own rules; the issue of the fate of non-Muslims in the after-world according to the Islamic faith is dealt with in the standard Islamic literature including both the Qur'an and the Hadith.

On another point, the discovery of the coelacanth does not invalidate the evolutionary theory. After all, we have never found the archeopteryx alive. There are many transitional forms between land animals and their aquatic counterparts.

And the fossil record along with some DNA evidence, testifies to this. Science at least allows for self-corrections.

Finally, I do not at all believe that religion has all the answers to all the questions facing humanity, for all time. It has only been 250 years since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Humans are still learning to cope with the advent of consumerism and machines. Human society is evolving rapidly.

Given that we have had a 100,000 years of homo sapien evolution, this is nothing new. Human society will change. Besides - what has religion got to do with ' ... Sars, mad cow disease, the growing gap between the rich and poor, drug addiction, alcoholism, gambling addiction, mental disorders, teenage pregnancy etc?'

With all due respect, religion, as we know it today, was developed even before the Agricultural Period of human evolution. To what extent can the sociology of agricultural societies or nomadic hunters be generalised to encompass the social conditions and norms of the post-industrial, post-modern society of the 21st century?

I think there is a huge gap that needs to be filled by theologians.