Okay, so now that we are OFF of the "opinion-based question" rants... perhaps we can FINALLY get to what I wanted to talk about... the real possibility that the root of the problem in Palestine, and the main threat to peace in our time, is indeed the "Islamic State".
Jambo seems to agree with me that groups like Hamas (and its predecessor, the PLO) are doomed to fail because they base their entire system of rule and organization on direct and rigid interpretations of the Qur'an and very select portions of the hadith. Qur'anic law requires high progressive taxes, rigid segregation by both sex and creed, state-mandated religious authority resting in an ethnically-select group and very limited franchise rights.
I have never denied (no matter how much Ryan may protest) that Hamas' greatest evil is their advocation of violence against the innocent in their efforts (i.e. terrorism), but I think their second greatest evil is in insisting that, once Israel is no longer a viable political body (should they ever get their way)... that it be replaced by an "Islamic State of Palestine" which is a founding platform of their charter, and their very raison d'etre.
My question now is, are there modern examples of nations or states where the institution of traditional, fundamentalist Islamic law (sharia law, in other words) is compatible with anything resembling "democratic rule" AND a maintains a Western-like state or nation as a neighbor or partner? What I am talking about is an Islamic nation where supreme executive authority rests with a religious leader or group, and not with an elected President or Prime Minister... Iran would be the best example today, but it is not a freely-elected government, and has no real relations with the West anyway.
Jambo took this further, and asked me to post for him: How far back do we have to dial the "Way Back Machine" to find a fundamentalist Christian state that fits the same bill as Iran does today for Islam?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment