Not trying to debate either using religious law...but asking why support one and adamently oppose the other?
2006-12-20 04:43:11 · 17 answers · asked by kissmybum 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Democracy and theocracy are ideologically incompatible.
"Exposing Liberals": There was NO anti-semitic remark in the question. Screaming "anti-semite" at anyone who isn't goose-stepping behind Olmert's nuclear Israel with you doesn't make them anti-semitic, no matter how many times you say it. You and your ilk have so cheapened the impact of that accusation to the point it has no real meaning anymore. The millions of semites(Jews and Arabs are semites) murdered in the name of Fascism, Communism, or whatever, are all rolling in their graves every time some dipstick like you or some ADL/AIPAC slave baselessly throws around "anti-semite". Holocaust survivors would cane the everloving sh!t out of you, and you know it.
2006-12-20 04:54:57 · answer #1 · answered by eatmorec11h17no3 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Israel does have some Jewish costumes used in family law but not extreme.The Jew extremists want much more.With the Jewish parts of the law,Israel is still a democracy,women are equal,no one has to respect the Sabbath
In Iraq we don't want sharia law for several reasons.The objective is to make Iraq into a democracy,an example for the middle east.Sharia law is not compatible with many basic human rights,women,unreasonable punishment,separation of church and state and so on.
If we tolerated that Iraq would be more backward as it was before the invasion because again,Iraq was a cruel but secular dictatorship,women were equal,there was religious freedom,the secretary of foreign affairs was a Christian.
We don't want to leave Iraq worse as we found it.It has to become a free open democracy.Islamic law goes against that so it has no place there and it would be a back step for Iraq itself.
I was against the invasion but this is the rational for not wanting Islamic law in Iraq.
2006-12-20 05:12:22 · answer #2 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I believe that Islamic, or Sharia law, is felt by those who believe in Islam to be paramount to any form of secular, governmental law and probably is not open to other religions being tolerated (there is a large Christian population in Iraq). So, it's probably meant to prevent a legal theocracy from being formed.
As our Constitution is, quite frankly, based partly on biblical principles, it's easy to see why Israel, uses Jewish law in their laws (they don't have a formal Constitution).
Even the Bible states that people should follow the laws of their land. I don't know for sure whether the Koran makes such a statement. I guess that when Sharia law is in conflict with Constitutional law, many Muslims feel they must follow Sharia law first.
2006-12-20 05:01:28 · answer #3 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Since the Shiites dominate the Iraqi Government, it isn't surprising that they would want to enact a "Sharia" form of Government, as that is what they feel is appropriate for their populace. The reason the US doesn't like it is that Iran is mostly Shiites, and their Government is similar, also using "Sharia" law, and they usually hate the US and everything they stand for, so if this type of Government came into power in Iraq, the US would lose them as an ally.
2006-12-20 05:25:30 · answer #4 · answered by Crowfeather 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Isn't israel known as "THE jewish state"? The entire colony was founded as a religious state. Why would anyone, other than racists and bigots, have a problem with an Islamic state?
2006-12-20 04:58:23 · answer #5 · answered by normanbormann 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
American law is based on Judeo-Christian concepts, that's who settled here. It is a surprisingly non-painful code. To the Western eye, such things as beheadings and stonings and beatings and hand amputations are fairly dreadful. Even our death penalty is done as humanely as possible. And, although we need more work, we have done much to level the playing field between races and sexes. Not a chance of that under Islamic law, unless you take separate but equal to an extreme.
2006-12-20 04:55:17 · answer #6 · answered by justa 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I was unaware of this. Could you post some evidence.
We are well aware that Islam is the religion of Iraq. Based on this, I think you are being inflammatory.
Not wanting radical Islam to control Iraq is no different than not wanting one church to dominate the US government.
I also disagree with you that Israel uses "Jewish law" in their democracy. Please support these statements with evidence.
2006-12-20 04:49:16 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Actually, Jewish religious law is not used by the Israeli court system.
Israel is, in fact, a democracy and no need to put the word "in quotes".
2006-12-20 13:46:01 · answer #8 · answered by BMCR 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Don't assume all religions are equal or that the practice of them is equal.
The International stance on this issue is that religions that, in common practice, support hatred, terrorism and attackes on other sovereign nations should be discouraged.
The modern political appliction of Islam today seems to encourage those very types of behaviors and is thus discouraged as being the basis of any country's law structure today.
2006-12-20 04:51:11 · answer #9 · answered by JSpielfogel 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The "hypocrisy" androids are out in full force on this one. As usual, they have failed to think.
You're failing to distinguish that when Israel uses religious law, it doesn't involve openly violating human rights, murdering innocents, trapping women under a sheet or in their home, etc.
Islam does this and a lot worse.
2006-12-20 04:54:21 · answer #10 · answered by C = JD 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋