I haven’t read everything in this thread and it seems to have veered off topic. I want to ask the original question again worded slightly differently and please let me know if this was answered already.
As an example, I will use Chalav Yisroel. Some poskim say that you can drink non-Chalav Yisroel milk because of government health supervision while others say you can’t rely on that supervision. Those who paskin that you can only drink Chalav Yisroel think the other side is wrong, maybe even eating/drinking not kosher, but not apikorsus. It’s a machlokes in halacha.
Some poskim hold that the 3 shevuos are authoritative, some do not, some hold they were never actually violated with the founding of the State of Israel. Each side thinks the other side is wrong in this area of halacha… but why does it make the followers of that side apikorsim? Why is this different than any other of halacha?
Obviously, I’m not talking about the original secular Zionists who believed that having a State in Israel was a replacement for Torah and Halacha. I’m talking about religious Jews who either hold that one is allowed to have a State in Israel before Moshiach or even that it is a positive thing to have a State in Israel before Mashiach. Why is that apikorsus for those who hold of a strict interpretation and authoritative nature of the 3 Shevuos? Why is this not just a machlokes in halacha like all of the others?