proposed Iraqi constitution threatens bill of rights.

Huh. Wasn't the subject of this thread that the Iraqi interim constitution will have a clause stating "no law shall contradict the universally agreed tenets of Islam?"

Here are the only instances of the word "Islam" in the text of the interim constitution for Iraq:




I'm impressed by the fact that they managed to limit the wording to Islam being A source of law, and not THE source. Those complaining about "separation of church and state" might want to do a reality check. I see little likelihood that any Iraqi Constitution will be mute on the issue of religion and Islam specifically.

I, too, think, this is really okay, if the majority of Iraqian citizens wants it.
(Constitution = the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it.)

You quote this:



Then write this:



It is funny because one quote completely contradicts the substance and spirit of the next.

Those "complaining about the separation of church and state" are absolutely correct, since, according to your own quote, Islam is the national religion of Iraq. Therefore, it is not secular.

Further, it is considered a source of legislation.

Most disturbing of all, it says no law may contradict the universally agreed upon tenets of Islam - without stating what those tenets are - thus the subjecting the entire constitution to the whim of religious intrepretation.

As I said earlier, there are no "universally agreed upon tenets of Islam." The religion is a mosaic, not a monolith. It is perhaps more fractured and varied in intrepretation than any other religion on Earth. As I said:

Only one nation actually abides by the Sharia's economic tenets (ie - the elimination of interest rates.) Most Islamic nations, for example Pakistan, use only selected areas of the Sharia, and then only in domestic cases. No nation - not even Saudi Arabia or Nigeria - follows all the codes of the Sharia in all cases. Afghanistan under the Taliban is the only nation in modern history to actually put all the tenets of the Sharia into practice.

To clarify, I think that the Iraqi's should be allowed a non-secular state if that is what they want. I just think they are making a mistake.

Scrat
And you think that will hold? As soon as it was signed the agitation began. IMO as long as religion and it's leaders hold sway there can be no democracy. Or shall we call it democracy at the pleasure of the Ayatollah.

Since (see my response above) the head of state of the UK is head of the English state church as well, the UK isn't a democracy in your opinion?

The UK constitution does not provide him with an avenue to impose those beliefs on others, prevent him from enacting laws that contradict his intrepretation of religion, or enshrine his religion as the official state religion. There is no basis for comparison here.

What you are asking is: can a religious person run a secular nation?

The answer is, demonstrably, yes.

Walter
Are you trying to eqate the UK with a Muslem theocracy? The UK is a secular secular nation and laws are not dictated by the religious community. I do not know but I would venture to guess that it is an honorary title and something left over from times long past. Does the royal family still rule the UK?

IZ

Wouldn't that, after all bloodshed and treasury expended in Iraq, be tantamount to allowing a second Iran to come into being?

Sorry, I guess you missed my meaning. I wasn't suggesting that they had no reason to complain given the text of the interim constitution, I was just suggesting that it was silly to project the notions of some American citizens regarding separation of church and state onto Iraq, it's "apples and figs". Just because we value a nation where all religions are supposed to be treated equally (except for Christianity of course :wink: ) doesn't mean we should expect Iraqis to value the same ideals. That was my point. Sorry if I was less than clear in expressing it.

Did I write anything about thinking it "will hold"? :wink: I think there's a decent chance that the interim constitution will work for the period for which it was intended. I expect that its replacement will likewise be a document divided against itself; naming Islam as the official religion while guaranteeing some version of equal rights and representation for women... stuff like that for us to all go nuts over! (What fun!)

Well, the QUEEN is head of state.


And she is head of the Anglican Church, whaich is the state church in the UK.


That's all.

Can a constitution be written and adhered to in the face of a holy war? In addition has Bush with his liberation of Iraq placed us directly in the middle of this holy war. Another part of the Bush well thought out plan?



Anti-Shiism in Iraq and beyond
MONTEREY, California The first celebration of the Muslim holiday Ashura since the fall of Baghdad has been particularly bloody for Shiites - and ominous for American foreign policy. About 140 Iranian and Iraqi Shiite pilgrims died in suicide bombings in Baghdad and Karbala last week, and 43 Pakistani Shiites were killed in Quetta, Pakistan..
The attacks bring to light a grave problem facing America: The Shiite revival in Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated a Sunni militancy that in turn threatens peace and stability in a broad swath of Asia from Pakistan to Lebanon..
American authorities may well be correct that the bombings were the work of the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Al Qaeda operatives who see sectarian violence as the means to subvert American plans for the country. However, it would be a mistake to view the anti-Shiite violence in Iraq as the work of a small group of terrorists and limited to Iraqi politics..
Anti-Shiism is embedded in the ideology of Sunni militancy that has risen to prominence across the region in the last decade. Wahhabi Sunnis, who dominate Saudi Arabia's religious affairs and export their philosophy to its neighbors, have led the charge, declaring Shiites "infidels" and hence justifying their murder..
These anti-Shiite beliefs have spread to South Asia and Afghanistan, where the Taliban government used them to justify massacres of Shiite civilians. Even with the fall of the Taliban, widespread killings of Shiites and bombings of Shiite mosques and community centers in both Afghanistan and Pakistan have continued..
Many of the Sunni militants responsible for the attacks were trained in the same camps in Afghanistan as the Qaeda fighters and the Taliban soldiers. They fought side by side when the Taliban secured its grip on Afghanistan, notably the captures of Mazar-i-Sharif and Bamiyan in 1998, during which at least 2,000 Shiite civilians were murdered. And Ramzi Yousef, who was convicted of planning the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, is also a prime suspect in the bombing of the Shiite shrine of Mashad in Iran in 1994..
The point here is that the forces that are today killing Shiites in Iraq have their roots all over the region. It is a network of Arabs and non-Arabs, South Asians and Middle Easterners, Wahhabis and non-Wahhabis. And if these men succeed in starting a sectarian civil war, it will quickly spread beyond Iraq's borders..
While Shiites make up only 10 percent to 15 percent of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims, 120 million of them live in the Middle East. They are the majority populations in Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Iran and Iraq, the largest community in Lebanon, and sizable minorities in various Gulf emirates, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia..
The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq has produced a Shiite cultural revival there that is shifting the balance of power between Shiites and Sunnis. Political events have further angered Sunnis outside Iraq - especially the creation of the Shiite-dominated Iraqi Governing Council and the virtual veto power over it exercised by the Shiites' religious leader, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani..
It is virtually unthinkable to many Sunnis that one of the most important Arab countries - the seat of the Abbasid Empire from the 8th to 13th centuries, which established Sunni supremacy and brutally suppressed Shiites - would pass from Sunni to Shiite domination. In militant Sunni circles, it is taken as proof of an American conspiracy against them and against Islam as a whole. Thus Sunni militancy is not only inherently anti-Shiite, but anti-American as well..
What America is facing in Iraq is not just a Qaeda operation against U.S. control, but the vanguard of a broad movement. It is based on the premise that violence against Shiites will not only derail Iraq's transition to democracy, but will also incite Shiite-Sunni violence throughout the Muslim world..
To contend with Sunni militancy in Iraq, America must contain it throughout the Middle East and South Asia. This means putting pressure on countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to stem the tide of anti-Shiite rhetoric. It also means ensuring that Iraqi Sunnis do not feel left out of the emerging democratic Iraq, and working with Sistani to quell Shiite rage over the attacks. What happened in Karbala must not become a sign of things to come for the whole region..
Vali Nasr is a professor of national security affairs at the Naval Postgraduate School.