Replies

I think we're picking nits here. You seem to be drawing a distinction between a democracy and a republic (one which I agree with by the way)...and I am using the word "democracy" in a simple definition (as it has been used in referring to the government to be constituted in Iraq...a government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives).

Mullahs aren't elected and, though they may adhere in varying degrees to the dictates of the Quran and the life of the Prophet, the rules and punishments of Sharia are potentially medieval and more intrusive than not.

My bottom line is, frankly, I would rather see a republic in Iraq and a highly secular one at that rather than any form of sharia.

Also, Hirsi Ali is in Toronto this week protesting against the possible use of sharia in settling and mediating family disputes. You are probably familiar with her. I think she would say that the human rights under sharia, to the extent any exist, greatly depend on one's gender.

[ You seem to be drawing a distinction between a democracy and a republic (one which I agree with by the way).. ]

I know.. I used your post as a canard to make the connection of Mob rule to sharia law..

On FR democracy is referred to as mob rule because it IS..
The fact that Sharia law is also Mob Rule.. is not as frequently made.. Tribal rule is also mob rule.. All mob rule is the same "type" of government.. The democracys of URP are also mob rule..

This Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). THIS Republic recognizes the inalienable rights(given by god and not the gov't) of individuals while democracies(ALL democracys) are only concerned with group(mobs) wants or needs (the public good).