According to the survey, majorities in Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan and Nigeria would favor changing current laws to allow stoning as a punishment for adultery, hand amputation for theft and death for those who convert from Islam to another religion. About 85% of Pakistani Muslims said they would support a law segregating men and women in the workplace.Infidels beware.
Muslims in Indonesia, Egypt, Nigeria and Jordan were among the most enthusiastic, with more than three-quarters of poll respondents in those countries reporting positive views of Islam's influence in politics: either that Islam had a large role in politics, and that was a good thing, or that it played a small role, and that was bad.
Friday, February 04, 2011
Elections Were Held In The Confederacy, Too
As we rush to embrace democracy in Egypt, it's worth noting that the results of democracy are only as good as the society practicing it. If, for example, your society believes that Sharia Law should play a key role in politics, you might end up with something quite different than the liberal, enlightened democracy we all crave here in the West.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Yes. As far as I can see, the innovation of the US was not "Democracy"; it was the idea that the law applied to the government (and to government officials) the same as to everyone else.
Unless there are things that the government is forbidden by law to do, and unless those restrictions are enforced, then the conversion of democracy into tyranny is inevitable.
Didn't the Magna Carta do that? (At least in theory.)
I thought the big deal with America is that we were built around an ideal, not a culture, a leader or an area. The law applying to everyone was a well established tradition of English common law, even if it wasn't always honored.
Even making Egypt a Republic wouldn't work, since any rules about all humans being equal would just be constitutional conventioned out.
Booger. Countries are more like bonsai trees than rock gardens.
The Magna Carta was a start, but it was kind of weak on the "enforcement" part. Which is what the whole "Division of Powers" concept was intended to address in our Constitution.
I think that that is the key problem that Egypt has been having: Mubarak has been running in a "State of Emergency" for ages, specifically so that a lot of the limitations existing in the Egyptian constitution would not be enforced on his government. And the people there are sick of it. The question is whether the new government will be set up with enforced restrictions on its powers, or whether they will be allowed to run roughshod over the populace in turn.
Somehow the phase, "Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it!" comes to mind in this situation.
Post a Comment