>I just quoted this website but here is another paragraph worth considering:
>
>Many of the arguments for permitting each religion or culture to determine its own laws are based on a misunderstanding of the nature of human rights. Human rights as defined in the UDHR are vested in the individual, not the group. As soon as rights are accorded to a group rather than to individuals, conflict becomes possible not only between one group and another, but between the group and its own members. Any group that denies the right of its members to leave is in contravention of one of the most fundamental principles of human rights. Yet clearly, one of the reasons for the growth of Islam over the past century has been that becoming a Muslim is a one-way street. Whether by birth or conversion (historically likely to have been a forced conversion) once you are a Muslim the only way out, under the Sharia, is death.
>
>Especially in light of a quote by Eric Meek, V.P. Council on American Islamic Relations, as reported here:
>
>Muslims affirm that all people are born Muslim, and they can either choose to embrace the teachings of their creator, Allah, or convert to a different religion, Meek said.
>
>Pair that with the built-in condemnation of apostasy in sharia, and I'd say there's a bit of a paradox.

Well, like I said, we went through that here (with a proper outcome, imho). There was never any indication that it should, could, or would apply to 'previous' muslims - only to current ones. ;)