[Captain Kirk]

Well...then we disagree. No Islamic country has ever allowed freedom of Christians to evangelize (even Turkey) that I know of. The most tolerant among them follow the Koranic rule that Christians should be allowed to freely practice but as second class citizens who are not allowed to evangelize.

I simply do not think that it is possible that an Iraqi government will be an exception, nor do I think the U.S. would insist on it. Please note that Saddam (by Islamic standards) was a secularist and he primarily oppressed the more pro-Islam people, like the Shi'ites. The more likely scenario is that a more pro-Islamic regime will arise in a "democratic Iraq" as a backlash to the Saddam's secularism.

If there is a chance that any country would allow evangelism by Christians it would probably be a post-revolutionary Iran. By many indications, a significant part of the Iranian population is sick and tired of Islamic fundamentalism. Even in such a new goverment, freedom to evangelism would probably be viewed as too radical. Let me note again that even Israel does not allow this for Christians. Perhaps pro-evangelists should start by putting more pressure on Israel (allegedly a democratic paradise) to allow evangelism.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

even Israel does not allow this for Christians.

I have many Christian friends in Israel who would disagree with you.

[Illbay]

Israel does not allow prosletyzing by any religion, either.

[AppyPappy]

Here's hint. They aren't going in there to evangelize. They are going in there to provide relief. Graham has already been in Afghanistan and no one complained a bit.

[GirlShortstop]

Well...then we disagree.

Cap'n, the disagreement that existed was on two separate points, I think.   "The No Iraqi government will ever allow..." statement you made didn't make sense to me since the missionary's plans are at hand.  The article as I read it, meant now, i.e., before an Iraqi government was officially established.

Moving along to what you've outlined in your most recent post, there isn't much on which I *don't* agree with you, except the expectation, or maybe pessimism, that the post-Saddam Iraq will be Islamic:  I simply do not think that it is possible that an Iraqi government will be an exception, nor do I think the U.S. would insist on it.  I am hopeful, and even prayerful about Iraq not becoming an Islamic state.  Truth be told, I will be extraordinarily peeved if that happens given the pledge America has made as Secretary Rumsfeld pointed out on Meet the Press:

The basic principles that President Bush has properly put forward are that

• the Saddam Hussein regime has to go,
• that the new Iraqi government, whatever it is, be selected by the Iraqi people,
• that it not have weapons of mass destruction,
• that it not threaten its neighbors,
• that it be a single country and that
• the people of that country be free to put themselves on some kind of a path towards a representative system that protects the rights of the minorities and the ethnic groups in that country.

Sharia [Islamic] law has not, will not, and can not adhere to the final requirement.   The Status of Non-Muslim Minorities Under Islamic Rule
FReegards.