wouldn't it be called "separation of mosque and state".people in the middle east still want their children to get some type of Islamic education.because Islamic values keep corruption(like pre-matrial sex,drugs teen pregnancies and so on).also in middle eastern countries there aren't hundred different religions.and no middle Eastern country forces its citizens to become Muslims.so what's the problem?
and no it wouldn't be the solution.most of the middle east problems is tribalism it has very little to do with religion.
2006-09-19 11:24:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
You are exactly right. If a nation can't take the necessary, fundamental step of separating church and state you will not have a democracy, you will have a theocracy. This is why the neoconservative delusion that Iraq was ready for democracy by force is a colossal blunder of historic proportions.
2006-09-19 10:51:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by ideogenetic 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Assuming such a thing would ever occur, it would have to come from the people themselves. Not by pushing it down their throats, or Ha, bombing them into a democracy. There are abuses of power in many countries and we have certainly committed our share of brutalities there..and it was for oil, power, and greed. Our Government and the Christian Coalition would like nothing better than to make fundamental Christianity the religion of this country. We had best be concerned with what our own government is doing.
2006-09-19 11:02:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
in the middle east?
iran is the only theocracy, isn't it? all other countries separate state and religion.
though islam doesn't recognise this separation, the political classes in every other middle eastern state does. egypt: republic, jordan: monarchy, syria: republic, lebanon: democracy, israel:democracy etc...
2006-09-19 10:45:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Boring 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm not sure the majority of Muslims are ready for Western style democracy. I don't mean this in the sense that they are incapable of doing it, but I think they don't have the need for it yet. The more basic things in life have to be addressed first.
2006-09-19 11:31:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by notme 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
If America can't do it, Middle East can't.
2006-09-19 10:47:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by Egroeg_Rorepme 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its sort of perplexing to charm to the line. by permitting it are you condoning it? by isolating church and state are you raising state above the church? To a lot of human beings permitting is comparable to condoning. yet another component to contemplate is what's marriage. maximum Christians take the term marriage very heavily. They sense it extremely is a union between a guy and woman sanctioned and blessed by God. They sense that permitting homosexuals to call themselves married could erode the fee of marriage itself, and supply it much less meaning. individually i could desire to care much less. i believe that homosexuals are no longer likely everywhere, and mutually as i do no longer condone it, i believe that they are human and deserve a similar rights as others. I strongly believe in separation of church and state. Many have been watching for a political Messiah in Jesus, yet he replaced into far from it. So in case you will profess religious freedom, your rules could desire to be freed from faith...Bringing back states' rights could bypass a protracted way in fixing those varieties of issues in my view....yet i'm no longer likely to get right into a critique of the federal government impressive now.
2016-10-17 07:13:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
In Islam, there is no concept of the "separation of church and state."
2006-09-19 10:42:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by chrstnwrtr 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
yes if you don't go to their church they separate your head from your body
2006-09-19 10:42:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Why do you assume middle eastern countries arent as developed as the US and the UK?
2006-09-19 10:46:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by stephaniemariewalksonwater 5
·
1⤊
0⤋