Posted on 11/12/2015 4:43:50 PM PST by marshmallow
The Iraqi parliament has approved a new law that will require children in non-Muslim families to convert to Islam if one of their parents converts.
Chaldean Catholic Patriarch Louis Raphael I Sako led protests against the new law, which he termed "unacceptable" and a flagrant violation of the Iraqi constitution. The Chaldean prelate led a protest meeting in Baghdad, attended by Christians and representatives of other minority faiths.
"Leaving aside the fact that a parent betrays his bond with his children, it is unacceptable that this implies the second party is deprived of the opportunity to fulfill the promise made and keep their religious faith," the Patriarch said.
The new law is a threat to national unity, because is demonstrates a "total disregard for the values of the civilization of Iraq" and is an affront to some of the nation's oldest communities, the Patriarch continued.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicculture.org ...
What a sht hole.
So many Christians have been killed or driven from the country, that they will never have the votes to assert their rights there again.
Genocide and sectarian cleansing are the hallmarks of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy. Lasting change.
“What if the child refuses to convert to Islam?
a. Beheading
b. Immolation in cage
c. Hanging
d. Stoning”
I am sure that all Islamic scholars can agree on this.
...But buggery first.
Before Bush II's invasion of Iraq, nothing. But now that poor child will face violence, and probably violence of the worst kind. There is an important lesson to be learned here. But I doubt if the Bushies or the neocons will see it.
I will now retreat to my underground bunker, as I'm sure I will draw incoming fire.
Suckahs!!
Crazy as it seems, I heard that Saddam Hussein protected Assyrian Christians.
Meanwhile, the 101st is ramping up to deploy back to Iraq in 2016 to support this wonderful world of islamic representative democracy (puke).
What you say is true, but the Arab states have been sht holes for their entire history.
Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Yep. Saddam was a secular dictator. He didn't care what your religion was, as long as you were no threat to him personally. Same went for the Shah of Iran.
Carter stupidly decided to topple the Shah. End result: A hard line islamic dictatorship. Bush II had that lesson before him. But Bush ignored it. Now Iraq is drifting towards an islamic dictatorship.
Folks call Carter an idiot in regards to foreign relations. True enough. But Bush II was a bigger idiot, and has done more damage than Carter (but it's close, IMHO). Bush II, a decent and honorable man, but a terrible, terrible president.
Will the U.S. learn from Bush's mistakes? One can only hope.
In anticipation of the incoming fire, back to the bunker I go.
The so-called "War on Terror" officially became a disgraceful farce the moment the Bush administration allowed Iraq to adopt a new constitution in which Islam was enshrined as the official state religion.
It's amazing how many Americans allowed themselves to be conned by that bunch of @ssholes.
“What if the child refuses to convert to Islam?
Before Bush II’s invasion of Iraq, nothing.”
And after Bush left office - nothing.
But then Obama allowed Nouri al Maliki (Iran’s boy) to keep power, after he lost the election to Iyad Allawi (Pro-American). Maliki set about re-igniting sectarian conflict, abusing Sunnis.
And also, in 2009, Obama decided to empty the prison camps, releasing what became the leadership and cadre of the Islamic State, as well as Pro-Iranian Shi’ite Militias - to wreak havoc on Iraqi society.
And Obama announced that America would withdraw, leaving one of the world’s largest fortunes of oil to whoever could take it.
And then he withdrew, and threw to the dogs all those who allied with us, or supported any form of modern or moral thought. They have been executed in droves.
And now children face forcible conversion to Islam. Once legally classified as muslim, the penalty for trying to change is death.
It is Obama and Hillary’s policy that let, or caused, this occur, not Bush’s. Obama is responsible for the dissolution of Iraq - not just because it was on his watch, but because it is the direct result of what he did. Iraq was stable and improving when Obama came into office.
In some respects I will agree with you. Obama and Hillary made a bad situation worse.
But here's where I'll respectfully disagree: Bush wanted to fundamentally transform the Middle East. But his "nation-building" plan was just wrong, terribly wrong. You simply cannot take tribal members with centuries-old grudges and magically turn them into Yankee Doodle democrats.
Sooner or later, that plan was bound to fail. Obama in the White House just means failure sooner rather than later.
“Bush wanted to fundamentally transform the Middle East. But his “nation-building” plan was just wrong”
I’ll give you that execution was flawed. Alberta’s Child’s point about including Islam in the constitution was a fundamental mistake is pretty key, in my opinion.
But I don’t think that it was wrong to overthrow Saddam (an anti-American monster), and I don’t think that nation building is inherently flawed - it worked very well in Japan and Germany.
Your point that tribal societies won’t easily convert is true, and is widely true with trying to change ingrained culture.
I believe that a more forceful approach was needed in weeding out enemies, and in setting up the Government.
Bottom line: We needed a pro-American strongman to knock heads for us. That is how it is traditionally done. Iyad Allawi would have been ideal.
I look at it this way: If a Democratic president had pissed away thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars to establish a radical Islamic government and destabilize an entire region of the world, I would consider him a war criminal and a flaming @sshole.
Well ... now you know how I feel about men like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, etc.
I agree totally. I was a Bush voter, however I feel like I was duped. Bush II never vetoed a single spending bill his first 5 years in office. He destabilized the middle east and did not cut any federal departments, but rather made the federal government into an omniscient beast. Not to mention the debt under his watch. Judging by his visceral hatred to Ted Cruz, I do not think he is a True Christian. He is one of those “Laodicea Christians”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.