Skip to comments.
Iraq draft says laws must conform to Islam -text
Netscape News ^
Posted on 08/22/2005 11:13:09 AM PDT by Charlesj
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200, 201-220, 221-240 ... 301-305 next last
To: Warren_Piece
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof Heh. I referenced that one too.
201
posted on
08/22/2005 2:35:13 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: OXENinFLA
I'm confused. Islam DOES "contradict human rights and democratic principles" If it does, then that leaves a lot of area that laws are prohibbited in, yes?
202
posted on
08/22/2005 2:36:13 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: billbears
If the laws must conform to Islam, Even in the draft, it doesn't say that.
203
posted on
08/22/2005 2:38:27 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: bnelson44
Isn't representative democracy wonderful to watch :) Making sausage.
204
posted on
08/22/2005 2:40:11 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: Charlesj
Q: What happens when Islam conflicts with a democratic principle?
A: I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Islam wins that showdown.
Whether or not it's Theocracy Lite in 2005, we've allowed them to build a foundation at least partly made up of Sharia. Once the public can be convinced that Sharia is the primary law, it's only a matter of time for majority Shiite clerics to bulldoze their way into government and make the "necessary changes" using the democratic process.
The upshot is this, we went in there and kicked Saddam's ass. We overturned his regime, gave up 1800 lives so far, plus all the civilians who've died trying to make like better for the Iraqis and earn their living. And now this.
It doesn't make sense. We were the victors. But to the defeated have gone the spoils...
To: WiscBadger
NUTS!! The two are in conflict[...] Hardly. They are both proscriptions of laws. In other words, two additive areas where law cannot be made.
In mathematical and logical terms, it is the sum of [not A] plus [not B].
They may proscribe such a large area as to be excessively restrictive to function, but they do not conflict.
206
posted on
08/22/2005 2:44:38 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: texianyankee
Does the Iraqi constitution mention Christians & non-Muslims as 3/5 of a human being? Did any Constitution?
207
posted on
08/22/2005 2:46:54 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: Charlesj
Is this DU or bizarro world where:
CNN is on the top of the list for informative sources...
Wackos that repeatedly bash Republicans and President Bush are to be respected as possesing some measure of insight...
The glass is always half empty in regards to what might be Republican good but always half full in regards to what might be Republican 'bad'...
Sleeper trolls are conservatives...
208
posted on
08/22/2005 3:22:04 PM PDT
by
DBeers
(†)
To: Rutles4Ever
It doesn't make sense. We were the victors. But to the defeated have gone the spoils... The local talk show host said it best. It is like if after Germany surrendered in WWII, we let the new government be run by the same Nazi's we just fought.
209
posted on
08/22/2005 3:22:43 PM PDT
by
redgolum
("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
To: NavyCanDo
Did people think the Iraqi legislators would dawn powdered wigs and draft on constitution based on Christian ideology like our founding Fathers did? Apparently so! :-)
210
posted on
08/22/2005 3:35:16 PM PDT
by
Amelia
(Common sense isn't particularly common.)
To: lepton
Regarding Islam and the constitution: it was agreed upon that no laws that are against the widely agreed upon values of Islam can be issued and no laws that are against the values of democracy and human rights can be issued.I know, it's all spin from the 'evil' MSM isn't it?
http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/
211
posted on
08/22/2005 3:42:15 PM PDT
by
billbears
(Deo Vindice)
To: redgolum
The local talk show host said it best. It is like if after Germany surrendered in WWII, we let the new government be run by the same Nazi's we just fought. Read your history. For a lot of cities, it was.
212
posted on
08/22/2005 3:46:20 PM PDT
by
bnelson44
(Proud parent of a tanker!)
To: Amelia
I had hoped that the Iraqi Constitution would be crafted in the same way the Japanese Constitution was drafted...with a McArthur standing over the draftors with a big stick in his hand.
A secular government should be demanded of Iraq by the U.S. as a term of surrender. Islam will not be appeased.
213
posted on
08/22/2005 3:46:51 PM PDT
by
KDD
(http://www.gardenofsong.com/midi/popgoes.mid)
To: lepton
Our own US Constitution......check Article 1, section 2, clause 3......
To: redgolum
>>we let the new government be run by the same Nazi's we just fought.
Acutally, that'd be true if we allowed the secular Baathis, both Shia and Sunni back.
This is a new wrinkle, historically one of the most modern oriented Arab nations, a bulwark against the fundies is now going to be a Sharia state.
Yes, that "a" instead of "the" will be no protection against encroaching Islamism, not to mention the reality on the ground - a proto fundy state in the South.
To: KDD
I had hoped that the Iraqi Constitution would be crafted in the same way the Japanese Constitution was drafted...with a McArthur standing over the draftors with a big stick in his hand. So why don't we just draft it for them & tell them what they want -- save them all that trouble & agony?
A secular government should be demanded of Iraq by the U.S. as a term of surrender. Islam will not be appeased.
You know the president cannot do that. He's said many times we are not at war with Islam.
216
posted on
08/22/2005 3:53:54 PM PDT
by
Amelia
(Common sense isn't particularly common.)
To: billbears
Regarding Islam and the constitution: it was agreed upon that no laws that are against the widely agreed upon values of Islam can be issued and no laws that are against the values of democracy and human rights can be issued. I know, it's all spin from the 'evil' MSM isn't it?
Respectfully, it is a failure in Boolean logic.
What you cite is a bar against certain laws being made. You stated that it was a requirement that certain laws be made. These are opposites.
217
posted on
08/22/2005 3:54:09 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: texianyankee
Our own US Constitution......check Article 1, section 2, clause 3...... Not even close - though I figured that was where you were going.
Our Constitution said that slaves, being not able to express themselves freely would not be fully counted on behalf of their masters.
218
posted on
08/22/2005 3:58:35 PM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: lepton
we've come a long way from that wording..maybe the Iraqis didnt start with wording such as that?
To: bnelson44
On the local level, it was. This is on the national level
220
posted on
08/22/2005 4:05:05 PM PDT
by
redgolum
("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200, 201-220, 221-240 ... 301-305 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson