No Apology, Sanction To Theocrats

Dear Susan,

I think you got carried away a bit didn't you...?

:-)

Susan,

Could I have some clarity why my innocuous comments to Onofrio rated ejection? I do not see how they did and feel that they were unfairly chosen to be erased.

I even put a smiley face in it!

onofrio,

I agree with you, as I was one of the ones whose post was ejected. The comment that I made broke none of the rules, and certainly not the new "housekeeping rules" that Susan Jacoby recently put up. If I had the ability to erase some of these posts I am sure that I would be tempted, but I am clear they would not be the posts that I put up. See, perhaps power does corrupt.

We do not smell the foul stink of judgment and favoritism, do we?

Susan J's editorial crackdown seems to be of wider scope than the *Blog housekeeping note* defines.

Within the last 24 hours, two thread-friends of mine offered brief, complimentary responses to a couple of my posts. I posted even briefer acknowledgements of their kind words. In all of this, there was neither obscenity, acrimony, nor identity speculation.

All of these posts have been excised from the thread.

I respect the need for thread-discipline, but is it really necessary to censor brief, friendly exchanges?

timscanlon,
like bureaucracies are great for bureaucrats, theocracies are GREAT for theocrats...

walter-in-fallschurch:

I just posted to you on the main thread regarding your question.

Farnaz

DITLD,

I agree with you in your sentiments about "minorities," but would go further. Do minorities exist--in any culture--or are they produced?

walter-in-fallschurch:

Walter, thank you so much for not posting in three parts. We are all able to click and read if we so desire.

Nothing is as tiresome than reading regurgitated articles posing as people's opinions.

It reminds my of people at my job who are asked for clarification on insurance documents in laymen's terms who are then just brushed off by reading the policy to them. How stupid is that?

Sorry, that was meant to say:

One catches more flies with honey.....

DINTLD:

"Minority peoples and people with minority beliefs, and with beliefs that are not compelled by the majority also have a right to exist, live, and be free in the world, do they not?"

I, for one, agree with your as long as the minority believers do not impose on others as they frequently do. What I am trying to say is that minorities in America have this "in-you-face" attitude at time, and although I understand where they are coming from it does not serve their purpose.

Ones catches more flied with honey than with vinegar!

Red Glasses

When complex fog makes it hard to see,
don spectacles tinted rufously!
To laser to the nub of troubles,
and vaporise distracting bubbles,
they will guide your gaze a-right,
though all the world is black as night.
So, as nations break in faith-fed fissions,
kiss them better with munitions!

Susan Jacoby,

My how much the fundamentalist you sound in your rant! You are filled with shoulds and should'nts and will nots, though decidedly lacking in how we wills. You moralize and philosophize about how the Taliban and any and every religion are evil and detrimental, but your judgmental approach is no more enlightened, it seems. I am sure that you disagree with this point!

You roundly criticize Depak Chopras suggestion on apologies, refusing the concept of apologizing for any reason here, but why? Your anger at Taliban and fundamental islamic attitudes toward women is extremely understandable, but that anger has you just seeing red. Red vision gets bombs to drop, (Bush was a compassionate conservative with red lenses on!), but is not the color that gets real positive change to occur.

It is no surprise, with those lenses on, that you have no real input to the Obama camp as to how to help that positive change to occur in the middle east. Hard to see through prejudice.

I am sure that you have read Mr. Chopra's current offering. I found it a good and balanced reminder for tolerance and understanding of those that are not where we are. It is akin to my more usual experience of reading your weekly entries.

"In a theocracy, there is no difference."

Really?!

rick22407,
thanks so much for the reply. and those ARE "good verses" from the koran. the problem is that some muslims do not think they apply anymore or to everybody. see my post here in response to another answer i got to my seemingly simple question:

Posted by: walter-in-fallschurch | April 28, 2009 12:54 PM http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/salman_ahmad/2009/04/taliban_are_enemies_of_pakistan_and_islam.html

i would post it here, but it had to be posted in three parts, i think because it was so long....

My purpose is not that complicated. It is simply to illuminate and combat hypocrisy and bigotry whenever I find it…be it directed at Muslims, or gays or atheists or anyone else.

My posts are of current news articles that are intended to be relevant to the question under discussion and hence shine some light on the issue of the day.

I see you don't understand my point. You are parked here on this site, copying and pasting, copying and pasting, copying, for some ulterior purpose, who knows why, and my simple points are interfering with whatever you are seeking to accomplish here, so I will, like EVERYONE else here, bow out for a little longer.

“…I don't think you understood my point. The point is theocracy is an insult to all who do not support the state religion…”
_______________

I still don’t get your point.

One could say the same of our democratic version of this Christian-majority “secular” nation.

Democracy is an insult to any non-Christian who would like to serve in public office or simply be accepted as an equal in any community.
______________________

More Atheists Shout It from the Rooftops

LAURIE GOODSTEIN writes in yesterday’s NY Times

“…More than ever, America’s atheists are linking up and speaking out…

They liken their strategy to that of the gay-rights movement, which lifted off when closeted members of a scorned minority decided to go public…

Despite changing attitudes, polls continue to show that atheists are ranked lower than any other minority or religious group when Americans are asked whether they would vote for or approve of their child marrying a member of that group…

Over lunch with some new atheist joiners at a downtown Charleston restaurant serving shrimp and grits, one young mother said that her husband was afraid to allow her to go public as an atheist because employers would refuse to hire him…

The theme of the article is that things are getting better…but we still have far to go.

Rick said:

"Actually, one could say the same of Christianity, God and Jesus Christ."

I don't think you understood my point.

The point is, theocracy is a an insuslt to all who do not support the state religion that rules over them. So what if it is only a very small number of people who are mistreated? Should it matter? I think it should matter.

DITLD:

“In Islamic societies, everyone is expected to believe in Islam, Allah, and Mohammed. And if they do not believe or cannot believe, then they are expected to pretend to believe.”
__________________________

Actually, one could say the same of Christianity, God and Jesus Christ.

Remember what a big deal it was when JFK became the first Catholic President?

I wonder when we will have our first Atheist President?

In Islamic societies, everyone is expected to believe in Islam, Allah, and Mohammed. And if they do not believe or cannot believe, then they are expected to pretend to believe.

I know from my own personal experiences that all "Islamic" people do not believe in Islam; in fact quite a few do not believe in Islam, and find it to be a constant and intrusive irritant on the normal progress of their lives.

Why shouold people be subservietnt to someone else's beliefs, while keeping their own true beliefs invisible, hidden, and disguised?

Sharia Law is a terrible, terrible thing because it is an unjust impostion of antiquated and primitive religous belifs on people who do not agree with these beliefs and cannot stomach them.

For a government to be just, it must acknowledge that rel;igion is a private affair, and that the many people over whom the government operates will believe in different things.

Minority peoples and people with minority beliefs, and with beliefs that are not compelled by the majority also have a right to exist, live, and be free in the world, do they not?

What is so wrong with this point of view?

Brad Hirschfield has an interesting On-Faith blog running…

Remembering Israel's Fallen, But Which Ones?

The evening of April 26, 2009 marks the beginning of Yom Hazikaron, Israel's Memorial Day. Traditionally observed to recall those men and women who paid the ultimate price for the creation and ongoing security of the State of Israel, the day has begun to change. For the second year in a row, Yom HaZikaron will mark the deaths of all those who have died, including civilian victims of terror. And despite having losses to remember from each group, this blurring of lines strikes me as a poor idea with potentially dangerous consequences…

Do we really want to lump civilians and members of the military into a single category? Isn't the inability to make that distinction what distinguishes enemies from terrorists? …

Hamas and Hezbollah argue that no such distinction between the two groups exists -- that in Israel, all citizens are "Zionist soldiers of the state", and therefore equally legitimate targets. If they are not correct, and they most certainly are not, why devote a day to mourning the losses as if they are?

I worry that in our entirely legitimate pain over both kinds of loss, we have created a situation that makes it increasingly difficult for those who may not support Israel to take a moral stand against the purposeful murder of civilians and the practice of terror to achieve political ends…

Let no one confuse the fight for the existence of the State of Israel, which is far from over, with the plague of terrorism against which all decent people must take a stand, regardless of their position on the former issue.

[An interesting article…where do others come down…I agree with Hamas and Hezbollah “…that in Israel, all citizens are "Zionist soldiers of the state", and therefore equally legitimate targets…” Just like the Japanese citizens of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Actually, the Japanese citizens were less guilty…they were just living innocently in their own homes, on their own land.]

The post by Feisal Abdul Rauf on this question is helpful…

How Islamic Law Can Work…

It is important that we understand what is meant by Shariah law. Islamic law is about God's law, and it is not that far from what we read in the Declaration of Independence…

The principles behind American secular law are similar to Shariah law - that we protect life, liberty and property…that we provide for the common welfare…

Where there is a conflict, it is not with Shariah law itself but more often with the way the penal code is sometimes applied…

The religious imperative is about justice and fairness. If you strive for justice and fairness in the penal code, then you are in keeping with moral imperative of the Shariah…

Just as the Constitution has gone through interpretations, so does Shariah law…

The two pieces of unfinished business in Muslim countries are to revise the penal code so that it is responsive to modern realities and to ensure that the balance between the three branches of government is not out of kilter…

Rather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam.

By Feisal Abdul Rauf | April 23, 2009; 8:16 AM ET

…are there verses you can quote from the koran (that were not later superseded by the ugly medina verses) and hadith that promote tolerance, fairness, equality, freedom of religion, self-determination etc...?

please, i would really like to know.

Posted by: walter-in-fallschurch | April 27, 2009 10:34 AM
______________________________
Continued below…

Continued from above…

http://www.rumiforum.org/server/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=35

Verses Related to Tolerance in Quran

Quran honors mankind as a vicegerent on earth 2:30 and all human are created in the best of moulds 95:4 and equal in creation without discriminating any race ethnicity, color or positions. The most righteous are in higher level than angels in the sight of God such as prophets, saints.

We have Honored ( karramna ) the Children of Adam [with karam , that is, 'noble nature'] and carried them on land and sea, and provided them with good things, and preferred them greatly over many of those We created. Quran 3:64

O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). Quran 49:13

Those who believe (in the Quran ), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians ,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. Quran 2:62

Let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. ( Quran 5:8)

Say: "We believe in God, and that which has been sent down to us, and sent down on Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob, and the Tribes, and in that which was given to Moses and Jesus, and the Prophets, of their Lord; we make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we surrender ( Muslimun ) Quran 3:83-84.

Good and evil are not alike Repel evil with what is better Then he, between whom and you there was hatred, will become as though he was a bosom friend"
Quran 41:34

Pakistani Offensive Puts Truce on Shakier Ground…

… According to CARLOTTA GALL and ISMAIL KHAN in today’s NY Times

The government is still trying to challenge the militants, though similar efforts in the past have been sporadic or short-lived, and the Taliban have expanded their reach from Swat into Buner, a district about 60 miles from Islamabad, the capital…

Some pockets of militant resistance remained in Lower Dir, but that most of the area was cleared…

Government officials said they would continue to try to hold the Swat peace agreement together, but demanded that militants cease their activities in several districts adjoining Swat and lay down their weapons…

Despite the inroads the Taliban have made, Afrasiab Khattak, a senior official from the Awami National Party who has led negotiations from the government’s side, said the authorities would not tolerate Taliban attempts to expand into districts beyond Swat.

“We assure the people of Pakistan that that it is not going to happen,” he told journalists.

“We are not going to allow the emergence of parallel states and of private armies.”

[Nice verse Onofrio!]

To tap the stone-vatted fossil sun,

The viscous draught on which its muscles run,

An eagle, with vans banded white and red,

Beat upon foreign earth until it bled,

And fanned alive a typhonic breed,

Craving ancient certainties for feed.

60 Miles From Islamabad

From today’s NY Times Editorial Page…

If the Indian Army advanced within 60 miles of Islamabad, you can bet Pakistan’s army would be fully mobilized and defending the country in pitched battles. Yet when the Taliban got that close to the capital on Friday, pushing into the key district of Buner, Pakistani authorities sent only several hundred poorly equipped and underpaid constabulary forces.

On Sunday, security forces were reported to be beginning a push back. The latest advance by the Taliban is one more frightening reminder that most Pakistanis — from top civilian and military leaders to ordinary citizens — still do not fully understand the mortal threat that the militants pose to their fragile democracy. And one more reminder to Washington that it can waste no time enabling such denial.

Pakistanis don’t have to look far to see what life would be like under Taliban rule. Since an army-backed peace deal ceded the Swat Valley to the militants, the Taliban have fomented class revolt and terrorized the region by punishing “un-Islamic” activities like dancing and girls’ attending school. The more territory Pakistan cedes to the extremists, the more room the Taliban and Al Qaeda will have to launch attacks on American and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

And — most frightening of all — if the army cannot or will not defend its own territory against the militants, how can anyone be sure it will protect Pakistan’s 60 or so nuclear weapons?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was right last week when she warned that Pakistan was “abdicating to the Taliban.” American military leaders in recent days have also begun to raise the alarm, but for too long they insisted that Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, chief of staff of the army, did recognize the seriousness of the threat. We certainly have not seen it.

[Continued on my next post…]

[Continued from my previous post…]

On Friday, even as Mr. Kayani insisted “victory against terror and militancy will be achieved at all costs,” he defended the Swat deal. On Sunday, government officials insisted again that the deal remained in force despite obvious Taliban violations. Mr. Kayani complains that his troops lack the right tools to take on the militants, including helicopters and night-vision goggles. The army should have used some of the $12 billion it received from Washington over the last seven years to do just that, instead of spending the money on equipment and training to go after India. The next round of aid should include these items but also require that they be used to fight the militants.

Pakistan’s weak civilian leaders, including President Asif Ali Zardari and the opposition leader Nawaz Sharif, are complicit in the dangerous farce, wasting energy on political rivalries. They must persuade General Kayani to shift at least part of his focus and far more resources away from the Indian border to the Afghan border.

Things are not going smoothly on the American side either. President Obama was right to recognize the need for an integrated strategy dealing with both Afghanistan and Pakistan. But his team has a lot more work to do, including figuring out ways to strengthen Pakistan’s government and its political will.

Congress is mulling two different bills increasing aid to Pakistan. Whichever prevails should set clear benchmarks, especially on military spending. Like Pakistan, Washington cannot afford to waste any more time figuring out the way forward — not with the Taliban 60 miles from Islamabad.

Hail and well met, Farnaz. Not sure I'm *back* - my litter-airy energeia's elsewhere deployed (thank god, muse the many). Have been contending with christmongers closer to home, though supposed to be focused on a minor thesis.

Your Saturday plans look nice. Hope you have a lovely time.

So Greater Syria continues to prevail over Lebanon....

The hue and cry? The moral outrage?

Clinton Visits Lebanon as Key Elections Loom

As reported by Mary Beth Sheridan in today’s WP…

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton traveled to Lebanon on Sunday in a show of support for its pro-Western government, weeks before critical elections that could increase the influence of Iran and Syria…

U.S. authorities are concerned that an alliance of parties led by the Shiite militant group Hezbollah could win the June 7 balloting…

Lebanon has received more than $1 billion in U.S. assistance since 2005, when Syria was forced under international pressure to end its 29-year military occupation after protests in Beirut. About half the aid has gone toward strengthening Lebanon's military to create a counterweight to militias such as the heavily armed Hezbollah…

Although the United States is concerned about the elections, it is not clear how the Obama administration would respond in the event of a victory by the Hezbollah-led alliance. Under Lebanon's complicated political system, which allots quotas for different religious communities, Hezbollah would almost certainly be part of a coalition government. State Department officials said the composition of the government and its policies would determine whether the United States reduces its aid after the election…

Ibrahim Moussawi, head of Hezbollah's information department, complained after Clinton's visit of "double standards," saying that the U.S. government wants Islamist groups to participate in elections but refuses to accept the results when they win. That happened in 2006, when the militant group Hamas won Palestinian legislative elections, only to be shunned by the United States and other Western nations… [Another instance of the hypocritical double standard Shark…]

Hezbollah controls a ministry and has veto power over the government's decisions. But the United States has defended its relations with the Lebanese government, noting that it is not run by the militant group…

i believe individuals who happen to be muslim share the innate desires for peace, love and harmony, but,

HELP!!!!

i've been asking this question over and over (apologies to those who've seen it) on various threads, but still no answer:

are there verses you can quote from the koran (that were not later superseded by the ugly medina verses) and hadith that promote tolerance, fairness, equality, freedom of religion, self-determination etc...?

please, i would really like to know.

Re: “…Try to think about the effects of US and NATO interference in that area… especially drone attacks which killed more than 900 innocent civilians. We humans have double standards…”

Absolutely…I agree with Shark, Jamil and Farnaz 100%. We are only shooting ourselves in the foot with our occupations of Iraq, Afghanistan and drone bombings of Pakistan.

What to do? As I said below on April 23…I say we get out of Afghanistan/Pakistan and the entire Middle East. Bring our troops home, kick the oil dependence, and learn to live within our means and our own resources. When the time comes that the rest of the world is alarmed enough to join us in the good fight, then and only then do we get back in…but only with our fair share of the load.

"drone attacks which killed more than 900 inocent civilians."

I posted on this earlier. It's my impression that the majority of the 170,000,000 Pakistanis desperately want the Taliban out of Pakistan. There is no great love for them among ordinary people in Afghanistan either.

When the US drone kills innocents, whatever grudging support Pakistan offers the US, gruding because with it has always come with devastating infringements on national soverignty, disappears into the wind.

These are Drones, empty planes killing innocent people by the hundreds, people who would have no Taliban among them had the US and Saudi Arabia not financed them, were the Saudis not continuing to do so, whilst we turn a blind eye to them.

How can we "win" this while the Saudis continue to fund the Taliban, channel money to terrorists elsewhere, and we kill innocents? While the Saudis continue to fund the Madrassahs in Pakistan?

Where is the outcry against Saudi Bank? Shouldn't it be rather loud and unmistakeable?

Just wondering....

rick22407

You have discussed Talibans and Condition of Governence by the Pakistani.
Try to think about the effects of US and NATO interference in that area, specially drone attacks which killed more than 900 inocent civilians.
We humans have double standards - A person dead in lockerby incident is worth million and a poor man died in Afghanistnan is worth 200 dollars compensation to the family. Can we win this war like this?

Perhaps the patient is not dead quite yet after all...

But he is in intensive care on life support.

Pakistani paramilitary troops assisted by helicopter gunships attacked Taliban militants in the Malakand Agency on Sunday as reported by Ismail Khan in today’s NY Times.

30 militants and one paramilitary soldier were killed.

The fighting appeared to signal a stronger resolve by Pakistan’s government to challenge moves by Taliban factions to expand the areas they control outside of Swat.

“The [Swat] peace accord was linked to peace. When there is no peace, there is no use for that accord” according to Rehman Malik, of the Interior Ministry.

It remains unclear whether the country’s powerful military has decided to engage militants more forcefully in other areas.

The army has strongly resisted being drawn into a battle against Taliban insurgents and prefers to keep its focus on India, its archrival.

Among the militants the paramilitary troops engaged around the town of Lal Qila in Lower Dir was a senior commander, Qari Shahid, of the Taliban in Lower Dir.

The operation served as a prelude to a larger one against the Taliban in Buner in the coming days.

But the scale of the pending attack by Pakistani forces in Buner remained unclear. It was not spelled out whether the Pakistani Army would conduct the operation or whether it would involve the paramilitary Frontier Corps.

In response to the paramilitary action, a radical cleric affiliated with the Taliban in Swat, Maulana Shah Doran, told his followers to “prepare for jihad.”

The Pakistani government agreed this month to the Taliban demand that Shariah courts be established throughout the Malakand region.

Since that agreement, Taliban militants have advanced steadily through
Malakand, with their leaders asserting that they were introducing Islamic law.

[Perhaps the patient is not dead quite yet after all.]

The new Americans

US on the pretext of homeland security went to fight the Talibans along with armies from 35 countries.
Still the mission is not accomplished. Therefore a need arise now to Americanise the talibans in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Billions of dollars are announced to change the old habbits and culture + the religion of these people.
We have to see when the war is won and the mission is declared accomplished.But how long it will take to tame and educate the New Americans, at what cost and within what time frame, does anyone got the idea?

The passage posted by Rick, below, may be found at the DailyException web site (www.dailyexception.com)

Although there have been rumors of Taliban in Kasmir, no reputable source in either India or Pakistan has given them credence, as far as I know. Kasmir, is the site of gun-running and worse. Why mess things up with the Taliban?

Army sympathies with the Taliban come from unpaid low-ranking soldiers, drawn from among the poor, living in a collapsing feudal economy that can no longer keep all its bonded labor down on the farm.

The Daily Exception, the online version of the American Exception, posts the following goals:

The American Exception defines US interests as (1) preserving America’s standard of living and way of life; (2) maintaing American leadership in the world; and (3) spreading American liberal democratic values. In that order!

-----------------------------------------
Buzz words--all.

It is much, much too late in the day to rid Pakistan of the Taliban. They are over-running the country.

When I post on US shenanigans in that region, and in others, it is not because I wish to "slam" the US. It is for the same reasons that ethical people tried to bring to the public eye the truth about what was occurring in Vietnam.

A few facts:

The US, along with Saudi Arabia, originally financed the Taliban. The US trained the Taliban.

The US, "infidels," promised Osama that post-Afghanistan, the US would leave SA. The US did not. Hence 9/11.

On Pakistan
The US, through its "support" of Zia (use google), allowed an "Islamic" state to form in Pakistan, turned a blind eye to the Madrassahs that Saudi Arabia was funding with Zia's approval in Pakistan.

These Maddrassahs were used and are being used to indoctrinate young Pakistanis in Wahabi ideology.

Young, poor people in Pakistan, those like the children who attended and attend the Red Mosq come to these schools, with their parents blessings, seeking an education.

The opportunities for a decent education in Pakistan are extremely limited for poor people. Mullahs seek out the parents of the poor, make them false promises, and send their children to the Madrassahs, which our ally Saudi Arabia continues to fund.

Pakistan is a corrupt, third-world country. Except for high-ranking military officers, the army is not paid in any sense we would recognize. Ditto, the police. The regular army, low-ranking police, are also drawn from the ranks of the poor.

These people have watched for generations as this country has played with India and Pakistan, has funded roothless regimes. The Pakistani version of "Islamism" is a nativist, nationalist, reaction, a desire for sovereignty.
In the past, reactions against imperialism have taken different forms.

In the meantime, the country is over-run with Pashtoon, some, but by no means all, either Taliban or Taliban sympathizers.

Zardari, in some misguided effort to maintain them, has placed many in the Universities, among which one also finds Taliban-sympathizing academics.

The majority of Pakistanis want the Taliban out. How to do this?

For one, we cannot continue to prostitute ourselves for oil. Saudi Bank which funds Middle Eastern and Asian terror must be stopped immediately. The Taliban must be contained in Afghanistan.

In Pakistan, nothing short of nation-wide reform, could ever truly bring it stability. In the meantime, cutting off funding to the Taliban would help. Training and paying soldiers would help. Closing the Madrassahs and opening decent schools would help, etc.

I had a wild time trying to sign in under my regular moniker, so here now, am I, formerly Farnaz2, posting under my middle and maiden names plus the number 1. (Farnaz1Mansour1)

I'd like to recommend a book by Noah Feldman. It provides a solid history of America's church-state problems, and offers the fairly useful terms "values evangelicals" and "legal secularists," the former designating those, who, regardless of religous practice or lack, thereof, think religious values should inform government.

In parts, particularly when it comes to suggesting solutions, the book is somewhat simplistic. However, it is worth the read.

Divided by God: America's Church-State Problem - and What We Should Do About It
Author: Noah Feldman

Jamil:

“You have given the information but not concluded the result. What is happening is part of a campaign to ask Pakistan "to do more". It’s a propaganda and pressure game if you see from another angle.”
__________________________
I also agree with your analysis Jamil. The US is pressuring the Pakistani government to commit suicide by siding with the US against the Taliban, and that cannot happen. It is too late…game over. Here is another take on the issue by The American Exception …
___________________________
“…To the Pakistani Generals, the Taliban and other terrorist groups are the vanguard of the nation’s defense. They are the Army’s “strategic assets”. The Pakistani Taliban fights India in Kashmir. The Afghani Taliban, which is also located in Pakistan, fights the Americans and will form a new government in Kabul when the US “inevitably” leaves. The Generals are loathed to give up these assets...

It is highly unlikely that the Army could get the Taliban to give up their cause or their land. The jihadis are too emboldened, armed and full of righteous zeal. For their part, morale among Pakistani rank and file soldiers has plunged. They do not want to fight their own countrymen and allies…

The Pakistani military is therefore unwilling to fight – both its Generals and its troops. In fact Pakistani society as a whole… resents being pushed into confronting the Taliban by the United States in its War on Terror and the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan…The same people who were trained to fight in India and Afghanistan in the name of jihad have now turned their guns on Pakistan itself for being insufficiently Islamic…

In delaying the confrontation with the jihadis, the Generals are risking the very viability of the modern state, and ultimately the unity of the country. In their excessive focus on India, they have overlooked the threat to Pakistan itself…

We believe that it is probably too late for Pakistan. The Taliban are too entrenched and the military too unwilling to confront them for things to meaningfully change. Even though society in Pakistan’s core provinces seem a million miles from the Taliban’s harsh rule, they are not. By appeasing militancy, and not jettisoning the Taliban and other jihadi groups, Pakistan’s Generals are dooming their country to isolation, fragmentation and possibly civil war.”

rick22407

You have given the information but not concluded the result.
What is happening is part of a campaign to ask Pakistan "to do more".
Its a propaganda and pressure game if you see from another angle.

rick22407

Your analisis is good about the situation.
All is a game of diplomacy and lies.

All Muslims to include the Taliban and the citizens of the Iranian theocracy suffer from the Three B syndrome, i.e. they were Bred, Born and Brainwashed in the Islam, a religion based on the hallucinations of one, mad Arab named Mohammed.

Cut these ties to these hallucinations and the world will be a much better place!!!!

One question I have though for people who believe like Spidey....

Would you like to have a Taliban-like Christian government right here in the U.S.

If so, what do you think the outcome would be?

Totalitarian regimes, whether based on religion or secular believes are abominations to freedom of any kind.

Hitler is being brought up frequently in this regard, but there were and are many others. How would you like to live under Stalin, the Khmer Rouge, Idi Amin, etc.???

How would a "Christian" US be governed? By whom? And what type of "Christian" will be in control? A fundamentalist evangelical, a Catholic, a Mormon, an Episcopalian, a progressive UCC, which one???

Just as the Taliban does not speak for Islam, the Jerry Falwell types did/do not speak for Christianity.

Nor do the orthodix Jews speak for Judaism, or the Wiccans speak for all Pagans.

Come out, come out whereever you are!

Spidey:

"As I say always, stupidity is self destructive. They will destroy themselves by their own making.
God created this world and only those who follow him will inherit."

You know, I would suggest you grow a long beard, put on a turban and move to Pakistan. You and the rest of the "stupid" Taliban would get along just famously!

And now for the bad news…

Taliban Advance, Pakistan's Wavering Worry Obama Team…by Karen DeYoung in today’s WP…

The Obama administration reacted with increasing alarm yesterday to ongoing Taliban advances in Pakistan…

"The news over the past several days is very disturbing," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, adding that the administration "is extremely concerned" and that the issue was taking "a lot" of President Obama's time…

[Secretary of State Hilary] Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates publicly expressed frustration with reports that Taliban forces had moved eastward into two new districts of the country this week with no apparent resistance from government forces, bringing them within 60 miles of the Pakistani capital…

For the past several months, Zardari's government has been enmeshed in other domestic political turmoil; his popularity has dropped to the low double digits while ratings for his principal political opponent, former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, rose to 83 percent in recent polls…

The administration is recalibrating the schedule drawn up for a May 6 and 7 meeting here among Obama and the presidents of Pakistan and Afghanistan. The trilateral summit, Holbrooke said yesterday, "was conceived in an atmosphere that has now changed significantly, and the focus is increasingly on Pakistan."

Another administration official acknowledged some concern over Zardari's planned week-long absence from home for his visit here, given Pakistan's history of military coups and government overthrows while the head of state was outside the country…

Finally some good news…

In Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim nation, Islamic parties are suffering a steep drop in popular support.

In parliamentary elections this month, voters punished Islamic parties that focused narrowly on religious issues.

Altogether, the major Islamic parties suffered a drop in support from 38 percent in 2004 to less than 26 percent this year.

Indonesians overwhelmingly backed the country’s major secular parties, even though more of them are continuing to turn to Islam in their private lives.

“People in general do not feel that there should be an integration of faith and politics,” said Azyumardi Azra, director of the graduate school at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University. “Even though more and more Muslims, in particular women, have become more Islamic and have a growing attachment to Islam, that does not translate into voting behavior.”

"OK, back to the original subject.

The clerics (what a joke, just look at the old ill-fated men) in Pakistan are nothing but a bunch of evil little trolls.

When you think about it, they contort their own holy text into a cook book to murder their own and be above the law."

It is ironic how God's will and the narrow minded desires of fundamentalist clergy always seem to be the same . . .

Shawn Cromett

Only for those eyes that have not seen!!

The Jewish theocracy described in the OT was nothing more than myth or embellishments if you believe the latest conclusions by most of the 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis.
(Rabbi Wolpe, an On Faith panelist, is among these Conservative Jewish rabbis)

To wit:

New Torah For Modern Minds
By MICHAEL MASSING (NYT)

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.

Such startling propositions -- the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years -- have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity -- until now. "

The foundations of Islamic theocracies are biult on analogous myths and embellishments. Ditto for the Vatican.

Theocracy...or something less, which the Bush admin pushed on our country including government involvement in religion & attempting to base law on sectarian religious ideals is always bad for religious freedom & democracy.
Hopefully the republican party will abadon their love of theocracy

"And as it was in the days of Noah (and destroyed them all), so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man... Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; "

Christians are NOT inventing stories. These are events that will happen as foretold by God himself. The instruments of destruction or the "props" are already here with us and what is lacking are the the words "lights, camera, ACTION".

Prophecies are written in codes. Contrary to what CCNL or many believers think, the "Son of man" is not coming but destruction will come.

And just like in the days of Noah and Lot, he would just be in the background.

The only scam I see CCNL is the copy and paste garbage you post.

anyone that falls for it is a fool.

Paul prophesied/"profitized" that the simple preacher man aka Jesus would return in Paul's lifetime. Well he never showed up but fortune tellers like the evangelicals and the RCC theocracy/Vatican still run the "he will return" scam.

Ambruce:

Blah, blah, blah. Same old regurgitation of right-wing anti-Muslim baloney. Sure, the fundamentalist Muslims are bad and, at this point in history, quite violent. But looking at the last 1500-2000 years, no one religion looks any better or worse than the other and all have commanded things that were unreasonable, immoral and just plain insane. And occasionally some religious people have done some good things too.

All your supposed analysis (i.e. cherry-picking and distortion) does is show that, as religions go, you are bigoted against Islam. Way to go, champ. What a credit to America you are.

Islam is a unique case. As the controversy over the Pope's remarks in Regensburg a couple years ago showed, it appears to be constituent to an Islamic understanding of Allah that he is not restricted to what is good and true, what is reasonable, that he can command what to human wisdom is gravely immoral.

This makes Islam a difficult dialogue partner. While the majority of mankind would agree to the principles of the natural law, whether contained in the Judeo-Christian commandments, the principles of other religions, or as understood by a good-willed agnostic or atheist, for Moslems is there not always going to be a certain withholding of assent to such a common human morality, since Allah is free to command what he wills, even if it seems abominable to the world?

Spidermean wrote:
Those who believe on the Bible as the written word of God will rule the world. That is the prophecy and nobody can disannul it. It's like stopping a storm. It's impossible.

Funny, though, because we're told to have "faith" in God. Faith, to me at least, is having a supposition that something good will come about, or a hopefulness that an event may occur, but that we have no ability to predict or guarantee it.

This quotation from the Bible isn't faith, it's a threat. Believe and do what we tell you...or ELSE! So how exactly are we to respond to this?

Again, are to we to say it should be law to stone a disobedient child? Or has our society evolved (there's that word again) to where such behaviour is absurd?

President Bush expressed to voters that God wanted him to be President. He spoke of using his Religion in every decision he made as President for 8 years. He lied for 8 years about Torture and Iraq. We now know Bush had children kidnapped and tortured. Bush had the Church have an office in the White House as Pastors preached the word and prayed for all those that sinned. Well Pastors were found to be having sex with men, raping boys, paying child support and stealing taxpayers money. We saw our Law Makers hire prositutes as their fellow Law Makers cheered, we saw a Law Maker select child to molest and one Law Maker who was a campion for Religious Values was in a men's room looking for sex. I've seen 8 years of how Christian Religious Values is shown by White House leaders and in no way does that represent God's teaching. Before anyone speaks of any other Religion better look in the mirror first or at lease read the bible this time.

It's a gift.

As I say always, stupidity is self destructive. They will destroy themselves by their own making.

God created this world and only those who follow him will inherit it. As simple as that. I's a gift.

Spidermean2,

Thanks for proving my point so effectively.

Whether you like it or not , this is the prophecy as foretold by Apostle Paul :

"You know that the saints (or true Christians [not Catholic]) will rule the world, don't you? And if the world is going to be ruled by you, can't you handle insignificant cases? " (1 Cor. 6:2)

Those who believe on the Bible as the written word of God will rule the world. That is the prophecy and nobody can disannul it. It's like stopping a storm. It's impossible.

Liberal evolutionist gay marrying states in America may not exist anymore by the time the prophecy happens. Also a big portion of the rest of the world would cease to exist.

Sad but that's the prophecy.

There's no point in opining on what other countries should or shouldn't do with religion and government. It's not my business.

But as a US citizen I have this to say:

The 1st Amendment of the Constitution guarantees that government shall neither establish nor prevent the exercise of religion. This means that neither will have control of the other. Period.

The "christian" Dominionists, their supporters and any other US theocrats have as their goal the overthrow of the US Constitution. So it's time to treat them as the domestic terrorists they actually are.

For all the issues that face democratic nations, it is still a more preferable society than theocracy. All three Abrahamic religions have shown their violent, intolerant, misogynistic sides over and over again.

Do we want to instill laws that make it legal to stone disobedient children to death? Or shopkeepers who operate on the sabbath? Do we want to begin engaging in collective punishment, as it is written in the Bible? Or make it legal to murder children, women and the elderly because some lunatic thinks God instructed him to?

A democracy may not be perfect, but it's far more civilized.

This is why religions should not rule over a nation: because what if it is not my religion?

Under most religions, I am sure that I would end up in jail, or worse, if any of them were to excercise the rule of law over me. That would be unjust.

Instead, why not allow me to live under a secular government? It's called "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." What is so wrong with that, as a rather simple philosophy?

And under such a secular system, why couldn't an individual person be just as happy to celebrate their own religion, free and unfettered?

Is it really necessary to impose belief on people who are not interested, don't care, or beleive otherwise?

Until God says so, himself, why should I be under the thumb of theologicans who say they speak for God, but who really speak for themselves?

That is how I see it.

Once a religion rules a state the religion becomes more important than the individual. This is why religions must never be given power over individuals. Freely joining a religion allows one to freely leave the religion. But when a state runs a nation, no one is free to do anything. Religion and government should never be allowed to mix unless one believes in the tribal way of living.

Farnaz2
You wrote:
A moral argument on behalf of theocracy is very difficult to make. Ultimately, empirical evidence will be brought to bear on the topic since theocracies exist.

Wrotes Dr.Muhammad Iqbal:
Religion on its doctrinal side, as defined by Professor Whitehead, is ‘a system of general truths which have the effect of transforming character when they are sincerely held and vividly apprehended’.2 Now, since the transformation and guidance of man’s inner and outer life is the essential aim of religion, it is obvious that the general truths which it embodies must not remain unsettled. No one would hazard action on the basis of a doubtful principle of conduct. Indeed, in view of its function, religion stands in greater need of a rational foundation of its ultimate principles than even the dogmas of science. Science may ignore a rational metaphysics; indeed, it has ignored it so far. Religion can hardly afford to ignore the search for a reconciliation of the oppositions of experience and a justification of the environment in which humanity finds itself. That is why Professor Whitehead has acutely remarked that ‘the ages of faith are the ages of rationalism’.

I myself say nothing, I am a person with very little knowledge.

Good essay Jacoby. I too wondered what the heck Mr. Chopra was up to. Maybe his brain got confused reading all the Farnaz, CCNL nonsense hogging up space. The two should get married. They deserve each other. Sorry Farnaz, I was on your side once but not anymore....And CCNL, you were never this bad before....

Susan Jacoby is absolutely correct.

Rick, I think you confused me with Daniel in the Lion's Den when you responded to the post I wrote on the main page. I am a Daniel but not so much stuck in a den anymore. I guess my prayers have been answered. I seem to be doing better in life these days.

Dear Ms. Jacoby,

CCNL posted:
"From Wikipedia's review of theocracies: (might want to review before commenting on the topic-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracy"

All the examples of theocracies listed have one thing in common - they are "cults" with founders. This applies to Bhuddism to Sikhism to Islam to Christianity.

The only unique spiritual system("religion") is Hinduism, which is based on Vedanta. It has no founder and is designed to help the INDIVIDUAL develop spiritually, philosophically and morally. There is no need to be intolerant, proselytize, and fight with other groups.

The great tragedy of humanity is the tendency to follow cult-like groups and leaders. This causes attachment and ego to grow, and it diminishes spiritual development.

Think clearly about this and learn about the philosophy of Vedanta. There is hope for a secular and scientific future for humanity which is not bereft of spirituality. It is a delicate balance to create a culture which is tolerant, progressive, scientific, and spiritual.

Good essay DITLD. You pose two worlds: (1) Religion (Islam) subdues the nation states to rise above them…and rules the entire world sans nation states; and (2) the nation states emerge from religions and develop further in a secular manner sans religion.

I am pulling for a third world, in which nation states dissolve into a single world community sans religion which continues to evolve in a secular manner influenced only by science and reason.

I wrote a present for all secular humanists here on this question on the on faith main page where readers are invited to comment on this question. Enjoy!

Susan:

“…What I don't know is how Obama can manage to do what needs to be done--reaching out to those in the Muslim world who do want democracy and who do not hate modernism--without condoning radical Islamism…”

How right you are. Look what happened in Gaza when the people were allowed to vote. They chose Hamas. The same will now also happen in the West Bank when/if they hold the next election. Abbas is so unpopular because he is correctly seen as the collaborator with the US/Israeli alliance that he will lose in a land slide. His term in office has long expired but he refuses to hold elections, and gets no pressure to do so from US/Israel.

The same dilemma is encountered with the Taliban. We want to overthrow them in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but how to proceed. They broadcast on AM/FM radio each evening the list of suspected collaborators with the US/Pakistan forces, and whose head will roll the following day. Then they make good on their promise.

It reminds one of the Mexican border town, where the drug cartel tells the Police Chief to resign or they will execute a deputy a day until he does so. He lasts about 3 days losing 3 deputies before he resigns.

What to do? I say we get out of Afghanistan/Pakistan and the entire Middle East. Bring our troops home, kick the oil dependence, and learn to live within our means and our own resources. When the time comes that the rest of the world is alarmed enough to join us in the good fight, then and only then do we get back in…but only with our fair share of the load.

Rick Jones, Fredericksburg, VA

The idiocy and significant stupidity of violent theocracies like Iran and Afghanistan are that they are based on the hallucinations the founders of said religions had about "pretty, wingie, flying, talking, thingies!!!

How do we communicate this to the millions of brainwashed Iranians????

CLIP SOME WINGS AND SAVE THE WORLD!! should be the new motto of the United Nations!!!

"The most completely anti-modern religions keep themselves going through high birth rates. Feminism does not appear to be evolutionarily favorable. (Which is not an argument against feminism; evolution is not a moral process.) " WMARKW

Wise words indeed, then this should also extend to Gays, modern civilizations that practice population control, Western democracies etc? History suggests among animals and humans most successful populations are those that procreate profusely. We see spilling of people from bad overcrowded governments/theocracies into sparsely populated western societies. Muslim populations procreate and will no doubt outnumber their counterparts in a matter of generations. They remain primitive and continue with their barbaric theocratic thinking - Spark is a good example. Muslims don't shed their beliefs, a good Muslims is one who prays 5 times, fasts, pays zakat, eats hillal meat, refrains from alcohol, does not eat western food (harram) and all believe that women must stay home and breed. The only good Muslim then is a bad one.
The Taliban are true Muslims, they read the same Koran, pray 5-times the same prayers, fast, eat hillal, keep their women in purdah (covered in tents) and control their streets with terror. It is a matter of time before Islamabad will be run over by the Taliban. They know how to terrorize. In a few years you'll read about the government brokering a deal to allow the Taliban to reign in Sharia as the rule of law for Islamabad. It just takes one city at a time folks. In the end only barbarians win as history dictates, Islam sacked Iran, Egypt the Middle East etc., which were way civilized before the invasion than what they are now.
Apologize? You have bigger fish to fry than a simple apology.

Arif

More News from the Iranian Theocracy"

"Baha'i leaders to be put on trial in Iran for religious affiliation

Seven followers of the Baha'i religion are in jail because of their beliefs
By: Michael Allen
Issue date: 3/10/09 Section: News

Seven leaders of the Baha'i faith are being detained in an Iranian prison. They will be on trial in the coming weeks; most people who are even allowed a trial are executed.

The Baha'i Seven have been charged with espionage for Israel, insulting other religions and using propaganda against the Islamic government. No evidence has proven formidable against them."

http://media.www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2009/03/10/News/Bahai.Leaders.To.Be.Put.On.Trial.In.Iran.For.Religious.Affiliation-3666910.shtml

Farnaz although "Jewish?" is lucky to have left/escaped from Iran many years ago.

" I am one of three million Middle Eastern Jews living in exile. The few remaining are desperate.

Posted by: Farnaz | June 21, 2008 12:08 PM

Give to Caesar that which is Caesar’s. Give to God that which is God’s.

Nations are expected to do many things. Some of these expectations are covered by scripture and religious belief, but many are not. Does it serve God’s will for religion to take a stand on an issue in which God has not taken a clear stand? I think not.

A theocracy risks confusing and diluting the faithful when it takes up a cause that is not God’s cause, but is necessary to the governance of a nation. Coercion does not bring man closer to God. And what nation has not coerced to get what it wants? (i.e. the draft, the IRS, ect.)

If theocracies best served God’s will, Rome would have lost Palestine two thousand years ago and Jesus would have taken up the Throne of David instead of the sins of the world.

And modern Israel is a democracy, not a theocracy. There are more secular Jews in Israel (as a percentage of the population) than there are secular Americans in the United States.

Give to Caesar that which is Caesar’s. Give to God that which is God’s.

Persiflage wrote:
"Pakistan is likely the most volitile and potentially unstable government on the current international horizon"

And a path by which radical islam may acquire nuclear devices.

inveighing against the symptom and not the disease.

Those free thinkers who run this forum select their topic cleaverly. The reader is quickly tempted to go for or against the topic.
In real life the lines are not so stictly drawn.
Religion do not necessarily mean rule by the clergy.
The presently politicians themselves are attached to the religion and make decisions on the basis of their faith, sometimes keeping their agenda hidden.
What the Neo-con + Blair + Spainish and Italian were doing in the recent past is a good example.
Discarding the religion from the daily life means freedom to have abortion, freedom of gay marriages, freedom to use drugs and all the vices carried in the name of freedom and progressive enlightentment.
The clerics in Swat are not going to march on Islamabad anyway. These news are being spread to achieve something else.
While forces of 35 countries, Pakistan and Afghan governments supporting them are there how it is possible for a group of clerks to capture Islamabad.

Gaby1,

On the generations, do the math. A twenty-six-year-old moves to a settlement in the 1970s, has a child. By now, the twenty-six-year-old is in his mid fifties or thereabouts. His child is in his mid-thirties. His grandchild? Could be a young teen. Orthodox Jews, by the way, tend to have large families. This isn't always the case, however. Moreover, there are degrees of Orthodoxy among the settlers.

Some wouldn't qualify, technically, as Orthodox.

Btw., in a democracy, people should be allowed to demonstrate, protest peacefully. Demonstrating against the US is illegal in Israel. Protesters are arrested, not gently.

Gaby1,

People grew up and reached adulthood on the settlements. Their parents came to middle age, and above in the settlements.

If you saw the dismantling of the one I reference, the image of the woman setting herself on fire (it remains with me), you, no doubt, saw.

Uprooting these people will be no small task, especially given the sympathy that has grown for them from people who formerly couldn't stand the thought of them.

They've had to reconsider the fact that the settlers were given every kind of incentive to live there, that every attempt at peace has failed, that by now, there would have been a Palestinian state for several years, had not Arafat destroyed all hopes for it.

Israelis who overwhelmingly supported Barak and the "Peace" Plan felt betrayed, lied too. They lived through the entire period of the Clinton Plan with terror every week, a bombing every week.

When Arafat began the intifada, they knew Labor had lied to them. The Palestinian school curriculum became known to them. Other texts, documents. They still have very little idea how much antisemitism there is in the US, but they have some, some idea of the antisemitism in Europe, but, again, access to the internet is limited.

Did they know of how bad things were, in England, for example, they wouldn't have allowed their star soccer player to go over there and win for the Brits. Pity.

How are the Turks doing in Germany, by the way, speaking of religion, toleration of differnce?

I, for one, would also like to know about the Baptist/Baha'i (BB?) views on anti-psychotic medication. Seems relevant to the new confessor. Is Baha'i a creedal religion, btw.? If not, the merger would seem to be very complex. Interesting, even for atheists.

Farnaz you wrote:

"For most of the people living in the settlements, they are the only world they have known. We are speaking of generations"

Excuse me, how many generations are we talking about? Isreal didn't come into existance until 48, the next generation would be 78, and the next one 2008. The settlements were not captured until 1967. Please, you can not have generations from in a little more than 40 years.

Haloczel1:

"Human Rights,Contemporary Values/Rationality and Democracy.
These should be the Components of Civilization,not palavers,myth and sophistry."
____________________
Sounds very good to me, excellent, in fact.
Suggest we begin right here in the good old U.S. of A.

Farnaz

"Baptists would fit well considering the Baha'i cult's ban on dancing, drinking and homosexuality!"

Finally, the Crossanized Catholic has found a true religious house, split-level, part Baha'i and part Baptist. I, for one, would be interested in Baptist-Baha'i theology since the two religions seem so different. How were they brought together? Was it the QRST Gospell?

And whatever will CCNL do when he finds gay Baptists and gay Baha'is.

Perhaps, he can describe the BB marriage ceremony for us.

And tell us whence this sudden notion in the two faiths, now, apparently one?

Ah well, it will be all right, for soon they like all other gays living in the US will get married.

May that day come very, very soon.

Of course, he'll have a problem with the ban on drinking....A big problem.

Hmmm, this hypothetical Baha'i theocracy in Austin would appear to be a lot more peaceful than an Islamic one. That 19 day, 19 month calendar would however be really, really weird. Baptists would fit well considering the Baha'i cult's ban on dancing, drinking and homosexuality!

Hurray!!!

A new subject and new criteria for responding.

Thank you, Susan!

"No Apology, Sanction To Theocrats
How would you respond to radical Muslim clerics in northwest....."

Theocracies, whether Islamist, Christian, Jewish, or otherwise should never, ever be allowed. Neither should countries be allowed to force atheism on anyone.

As long as people are private about their beliefs and do not force others into their (non)deism, no one will be hurt.

Any government who espouses religious beliefs will inherently become evil. Not because religion in itself is evil, but because people who interpret religion for their own selfish gain are. The old MEN (have yet to see a woman) who try to force their religious opinions (remember they are like a*holes, everbody has one) should be held accountable for each and every abomination they sanction. Ideally, by castrating them.

Let me go sharpen my butcher knife!!!

Pseudo pseudonymous
Her names they were Legion
Her screen names so numerous from infernal regions
She screened a screen alias so to baffle the vicious
Then some fool declared that that was seditious

"We are already in deep trouble here, since previous administrations have long accepted the Saudi theocracy as an ally."

Ah? We stopped? Is that a joke? I mean, seriously, what are you talking about? And what about other thug regimes? Puhleez.
----------------------------------

"The moral answer is clear: we cannot continue to play footsie, as we always have, with states governed by religious laws that sanction every kind of human rights abuses in the name of their deity"

Have you informed the oil companies of this?
________________________________
On Iraq

Now that we have brought the Taliban into Iraq, how, pray tell, will we leave?

On apologies
Good grief, I forgot the apology we owe to the people of Afghanistan for visiting the Taliban upon them.

Apology-wise, I'm only dealing with predominantly Muslim nations, not all of which are technically theocracies.

Once we get to non-Islamic nations....

Apologies are long, long overdue to many, many nations.

But they are not enough. Apologies are not enough.

------------
At some point, we ought to move on to the Brits, the French, et al, I would think.

Susan,

I generally love to hate everything you write, but, unfortunately, I find myself in agreement with you on this issue...the horror. I've always considered Jesus' comment about giving unto Ceasar et al his most important contribution to secular society. God knows we don't need to reduce God to a politician.

"Does the Islamic world, as the source of so much trouble and turmoil, not to mention so much backwardness in women's rights and democratic freedoms, deserve anyone's apology?" He answers, "In their own eyes, they do, and America should be strong enough to offer it."

What we owe is an apology for the interference in national sovereignty that brought Iran the "Shah," without whom the Islamic Revolution might not have taken the form it did, causing suffering to so many millions of people, among the the B'hai, in whom CCNL is so suddenly interested.

The danger they face has been noticed in the UN, condemned, etc., blah, blah, blah.

We owe an apology to Pakistan for Zia of the Madrassah Zias, whom we supported knowing he was accepting funding for the the Madrassahs from Saudi Arabia.

We owe an apology to Egypt for supporting the thug Mubarak, who lives very well while Egyptians starve.

The Brits and the Americans owe an apology to Saudi Arabia for the "House of Saud."

We owe Iraq an apology for our support of Saddam.

The French owe everyone an apology, especially, the Algerians, beginning with those in their own country.

Its a long list, Susan. But, one more country, Bangladesh. The US sided with Pakistan, while India, which was then alligned with Russia instigated the war.

There's a long list, Susan. Very long.

What price oil.

"As for the question of whether union between religion and government has ever done any good, anywhere, in any era, the answer is no. I also think that religious influence on secular government, even if it stops short of theocracy, is invariably detrimental."

So do I. When will it end in the United States? The Congress? The Judiciary? The Executive Office? When will so many Christians/Catholics shift their gaze away from my womb?

Why did the stem cell research insanity go on for as long as it did?

Why can't gays marry?

Why do I have to read about Obama and Easter eggs? His "church"? I didn't vote for a Christian. I voted for an American.

Banks in a Baha'i theocracy:

Really weird religion:

Banks are taken over by The International Baha'i Fund, administered by the Universal House of Baha'i Justice which supports the growth and development of the Baha'i "faith" throughout the world. The Fund also helps maintain the Faith’s sacred shrines and other endowments at the Baha'i World Center in Haifa, Israel.
http://www.uhj.net/- a bit of weirdness???

"Singled out as Authentic – as the only Institution in the world that has the living descendant of King David as its president, the great grandson of 'Abdu'l-Baha seated upon the throne of King David which is to last forever (Psalm 89) –

this House alone, the true UHJ, has the Divine Power and God given Knowledge through the “KEY of DAVID” to heal the world of all its ills and guide a
wayward and forlorn humanity back out of the gloom of the darkness of war into the light of real fellowship, truth, felicity and brotherly love in the shade of the divine and holy Tree of Life –man reunited with God in the garden of God as this earth was meant to be – in fulfillment of this sacred verse."

Susan:

For most of the people living in the settlements, they are the only world they have known. We are speaking of generations.
Most are Orthodox, not all. The majority are not wedded to the sites because they view them as part of Eretz Israel.

Eretz Israel is inconsistent, of course, with contemporary Israel. Extremists, of whom we had none, started to form in the 1970s after more than twenty years of terror. For the first time in the thousands of years of Jewish identity we have something akin to but not identical with "fundamentalism," impossible in Judaism since it is, paradoxically, "foundationally interpretive."

With every new terrorist attack, a new extremist was born. An overwhelmingly liberal country became much more conservative after the failed Clinton initiative, the violence directed against then General Sharon at the Temple Mount. "Gee, thought, the libs, they lied to us, and Likud told us the truth."

Actually, Likud had told them the truth about Palistinian Muslim indoctrination concerning Jews. But the Clinton administration supported the election of a Labor Party candidate, and Labor did everything possible to discredit Likud. The Clinton interference in the Israeli election was not a good idea. Labor would have won on its own. Later, the US interference (comme d'habitude) in Israeli sovereignty became known.

Since the wall, the number of suicide bombings, car bombings, etc., has decreased from more than 160 annually to four. That wall is a constant reminder.

It took more than twenty years of terror for extremism to begin. It took thirty years of terror for the wall.

How long did it take the US to kill 630,000 Iraqis? More than that number of Afghan people?

With whom will Israel negotiate this time? When will the corruption in Fata stop? When will words on paper saying that Israel has the right to exist be backed up with action?

Just a passing thought or two: Why didn't the Palestinians form a state pre-1967?

No peace will ever be possible until Jews have access to the Second Temple. Quiet as its kept. Israel is the Middle East, not midtown.

Moi, I'm not even observant, not Askenazic. But I know the Middle East. And I know the power of religious symbols. As I mentioned, Jews have died protecting a medieval Christian church for Christians.

What price oil.

"I also think that religious influence on secular government, even if it stops short of theocracy, is invariably detrimental. Israeli foreign policy--in a nation founded by secular Jews--has now been held hostage for decades by ultra-Orthodox settlers who believe that their god gave them the right to occupy every smidgeon of biblical land. And extreme religious convictions pose an equally grave obstacle to any peace settlement on the Palestinian side. The Dome of the Rock. The Wailing Wall. The Via Dolorosa"

Not exactly. Not on any accounts. No, Israel is not being held hostage. It encourage settlement with every means it had available. The people who live there, those who lived in the ones dismantled became very closely bonded, necessary in order for them to protect themslves.

The largest dismantling of a settlement involved a woman setting herself aflame. Setting herself on fire.

Israelis recall the Clinton Peace initiative to which they wholeheartedly subscribed, which Arafat renounced via an intifada.

The Second Temple pre-dates the Dome of the Rock by centuries. In the mind of the Mufti, but not in that of any Muslims I know (though many feel differentl, perhaps most) the Temple does not exist. It is physically present, but doesn't exist.

Mufti propaganda has had it that "the Jews" want to destroy the Dome of the Rock.
Religio-politically, the Dome is significant since historically scant attention was paid to it. The Grand Mufti of years past, a great friend of Adolf Hitler, worked tirelessly, to get it mentioned.

While the word Yerushalaem (Greek: Jerusalem) appears thousands of times in the Tanakh, it appear not at all in the Arabic version of the Quoran. In translations, it does!

The Second Temple is the most sacred place in Judaism. For two thousand years, Jews, whenver outside of Yerushalaem, pray facing it. (Muslims praying facing Mecca derives from Jewish practice.) In 1967, Moshe Dyan stood at the Temple Mount and people all over the world rejoiced. Finally, Jews would be able to go to their own Temple. However, Meir said the "time was not yet right." (Question: When will it be right?)

There never was discussion about ceasing the Dome of the Rock. Although building your Dome on top of another people's Temple could be seen as imperialist, the idea has always been to permit freedom of worship to both Jews and Muslimes.

In the interims, Jews have died protecting a medieval Christian Church. What price oil.

Susan Jacoby:

"This applies not only to the original offenders but to those who reply to the original offenders. . . ."

I would think that if the "original offenders" stop offending there will be no replies.

Hopefully, no harm has been done to the identifiable person for whom I advocated. There is, as is evidenced in your essays, such a thing as journalistic responsibility, obtaining even for blogs.

I'm happy to see this nonsense come to an end, at long last, having made numerous requests that it be stopped.

"we do owe support to those democratically minded Muslims whom we have let down by our desire to placate oil-rich theocracies and strategically placed lands, like Pakistan, that are threatened by evil, woman-hating, liberty-hating, pluralism-hating fanatics who want to rule everyone under their medieval version of faith. "

US self-prostitution for oil has caused an enormous amount of suffering for Muslims, Jews, Hindus, et al.

It good to hear Pakistan's plight accurately stated, in part, for once. Pakistan is not the culprit. The fanatics are, the Taliban, whom we, at first, supported and financed, and then allowed to regroup and over-run Pakistan, as I posted previously.

Pakistan always had and still has its own problems: bonded labor, the Christian sweepers, domination by a few wealthy families, corruption far worse than that of India (which has 95 separate mafias) not to mention Daud Ibrahim, currently in Dubai, from which he still "governs."

Like many other nations, Egypt, our good friend, it is virulently antisemitic, as politicians seek to divert the people's attention from injustice and starvation.

This tactic has been wearing thin for a long time in Iran, where there are daily protests for the jobs promised by the "elected" leader. One can only arrest, beat, etc., hungry people for so long.

A Hypothetical Theocracy and What It Might Mean:

Place: Austin, Texas controlled by the Baha'i "faith"-

Churches, mosques and temples are converted Baha'i houses of worship with statues, songs and salutes to the last great prophet, Baha' Ullah, the "Glory of Allah".

Austin citizens are required to
follow the Baha'i calendar calendar of 19 months of 19 days (with four additional days). Adherents are expected to pray daily, fast 19 days a year, and keep to a strict ethical code to include the banning of alcoholic beverages. Homosexuality and gambling are prohibited.

The Christmas, Easter and Ramadan periods/celebrations are replaced with Ridvan (April 21-May ). On the first, the ninth and the twelfth day's of Ridvan, Bahai's do not work. People observe
prayers, meetings and the celebrations include feasting, dining, giving gifts to friends and alms to the needy.

All non-believers are deported to Houston.

Schools to include the University of Texas, Austin are converted to Baha'i learning centers.

Banks are taken over by The International Baha'i Fund, administered by the Universal House of Baha'i Justice which supports the growth and development of the Baha'i "faith" throughout the world. The Fund also helps maintain the Faith’s sacred shrines and other endowments at the Baha'i World Center in Haifa, Israel.

http://www.uhj.net/- a bit of weirdness???

"Singled out as Authentic – as the only Institution in the world that has the living descendant of King David as its president, the great grandson of 'Abdu'l-Baha seated upon the throne of King David which is to last forever (Psalm 89) –

this House alone, the true UHJ, has the Divine Power and God given Knowledge through the “KEY of DAVID” to heal the world of all its ills and guide a
wayward and forlorn humanity back out of the gloom of the darkness of war into the light of real fellowship, truth, felicity and brotherly love in the shade of the divine and holy Tree of Life –man reunited with God in the garden of God as this earth was meant to be – in fulfillment of this sacred verse."

Spark1,

'When militant groups such as Hamas try to resort to democratic means their victory was denied by the west.
BJP is a Hindu religious party with extreme views but they seek power and no one cries."

Actually, a lot of people cry out against BJP, including yours truly, an Iranian Jewish refugee. More on Iran, later.

Many people cry out against the oppression of the Dalit, especially the Banghli, including yours truly, who has posted on it tirelessly.

Many people. Fewer people cry out against the Indian maneuvering in Bangladesh, but I have.

Do you mean to say that political/economic interests and positions on religion are somehow related? Are you implying that in India, Muslims are treated as second-class citizens and no one gives a damn? Are you asking where the outcry was over Gujurat?

Where, indeed, are your outcries? Where are they, Spark1? And not only for Indian Muslims, some of whom are doing remarkably well, but for the Dalit. It's not only about you and your idenitity, you know.

The tolerance of the US for atrocities in and by India is due to US economic interests in that country. The newspapers follow suit. What else is new?

But, where have you been on these issues, Spark1?

gladerunner

What I wrote is true, politics without religion is something without base and therefore do not serve the humanity as it should.
It is a very popular belief in the west that governance and religion should be seperate because their experiment in the past with the interference of church is mot pleasant. The church rubber stamped such things which then proved wrong.
On the other hand when two or multi-party system found root in the societies then they too could not free the human being from their own created vices.
The most developed societies these days are most disturbed at the sametime. The main unit - the family is shattered - the human is disillusioned - now only remain a dog a sincere friend an alternative to a child. The economic system created by the politician without taking guidance by the divine has taken away the peace of mind.
The common man has no alternative, Rep or Dems, Lib or Con - no change - no light at the end of the tunnel,no happiness.
And still we boost this is the best system of all of us - everywhere - because now we are looking for a new world order - one government.
Politics without religion is savagery.

From Wikipedia's review of theocracies: (might want to review before commenting on the topic-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracy

Contents
1 History of the concept
2 Current states with theocratic aspects
2.1 Andorra
2.2 Central Tibetan Administration (Tibetan Government in Exile)
2.3 Islamic Republic of Iran
2.4 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
2.5 Holy See (Vatican City)
2.6 Israel
3 Historical theocracies
3.1 Antiquity
3.2 Historical Christian theocracies
3.2.1 Protestant theocracies
3.2.2 Florence
3.2.3 Deseret
3.2.4 Montenegro
3.3 Historical Sikh theocracies
3.3.1 Sikh Confederacy
3.4 Historical Islamic theocracies
3.5 Historical Buddhist theocracies
3.6 Other
4 See also
5 References
6 Further reading
7 External links

Spark1

You said:

"Pagans and non-believers cannot be given free hand to impose their wishes upon others."

Well, I guess that makes you an intolerant bigot. You are so marinated in your culture of religious intolerance that you cannot even imagine what it is to be a tolerant human being, able to accept the plain and awful truth that everyone does not think or believe as you do. You are deluded in the imaginings of your own superiority.

You are not a superior person, not superior to any other religious person, nor superior to any atheist, agnostic, nor any "non-believer" of any kind, and you do not know what God thinks, wishes, or wants, any better than anyone else.

You are just a plain old garden-variety bigot.

"Mark
Always seek the truth.
Posted by: volkmare"

I always seek what truth has been verified by evidence. In that sense, faith cannot be truth, except in the Goedelesque sense that there will always be unverifiable propositions.

But I will never accept as truth what has been refuted (such as Creationism), that which is merely fanciful (Jesus died for our sins) or obvious cases of faith for self-interest (the non-Muslim world is a House of War).

Spark1: “Whatever man is now, whatever little consciousness he has, the whole credit goes to religion”

“Politics with out religion has been a curse, a calamity; and whatever is ugly in humanity, politics is responsible for.”

Serious disconnect here.

I know these are not your words, you have just copied them from other places, but you apparently have not read them either. (Frankly I find plagiarism distasteful, disingenuous and deceitful.)

What you are saying is that whatever man is or does the whole credit goes to religion. Then you say that whatever is ugly in the world is derived from politics.

Yet man created politics.
Man who derived his every fiber of being and conciousness from religion conjured up politics, we must therefore give religion all the credit for all the worlds' evil as well.

BTW; Must you post this in EVERY thread? If people are not responding to you in one I can assure you that they are unlikely to respond to you just because you multi-pasted.

dream on, CCNL

Mark
Always seek the truth.

spark1,

Human Rights,Contemporary Values/Rationality and Democracy.
These should be the Components of Civilization,not palavers,myth and sophistry.

Islam imposes to people circumcision and FMG.
Submission imposes what to eat and drink(Wine is sin on this world,but there are Wine Rivers in islam paradise)
Cult of Violence imposes how to kill infidels/non-muslims.Cutting off hands and feet opposite side 5.33
Stone Age Mentality imposes how to dress.
Comedia(Tragy-Comedy indeed) of Divinity imposes people to believe wrong knowledge(Azar,father of Abraham,sperm comes from male's rib,Trinity means Father,Son,Mary,Alexandra The Great was a muslim and many others....)

Isnt there *Impose*(not impose,oppression) in Islamic Republic Iran and Homeland of submission Saudi Arabia and others....?

Civilization shall,of course,impose Woman-Man Equality vs Two women equals One Man mentality.
Civilization shall absolutely impose Rationality against Desert Rules.
Civilization shall,of course,yes,thousand times of course,impose Democracy vs Oppression,Subjugation.

"How any believer, Islam , Christianity or Judaism can agree to the perspective of a non-believer.?
Pagans and non-believers cannot be given free hand to impose their wishes upon others."

Spark1,

May this Pagan remind you that any beliver cannot be given free hand to impose their wishes upon others? Sauce, meet goose and gander.

DanielintheLionsDen

How any believer, Islam , Christianity or Judaism can agree to the perspective of a non-believer.?
Pagans and non-believers cannot be given free hand to impose their wishes upon others.

Well-written and well-argued! There is a difference between tolerance for other religions, or none at all, and simply giving a group a license to do despicable things. Theocracy of any kind is historically a treacherous road to take because it leads to unchecked power on the part of a few to dominate the many.

DANIEL wrote "This kind of "old-man" prudish, anti-sex, anti-body, anti-youth, anti-fun, anti-female perspective is totally and complety incompatible with modern society. Islam will reform and change; in my mind, there is not doubt on this point, or it will dissappear."

Not necessarily. The most completely anti-modern religions keep themselves going through high birth rates. Feminism does not appear to be evolutionarily favorable. (Which is not an argument against feminism; evolution is not a moral process.)

Spark1, you know what?

Your Medeival supersitious blame-everthing-on-the-West defense of Islam is tiresome. There is not a thing you have said, not a single thing, that was not pulled capriousoucly from your own imagination.

There is no freedom of religion in Islamic society, only compulsion to appear "Islamic" enough. That is what you base you entire life on?

Iran is an Islamic "Republic" where very, very old men regard the youth of their nation with simultaneious lust, and reactionary prudishness and punishment.

This kind of "old-man" prudish, anti-sex, anti-body, anti-youth, anti-fun, anti-female perspective is totally and complety incompatible with modern society.

Islam will reform and change; in my mind, there is not doubt on this point, or it will dissappear.

part2

The politicians without overtly confessing their religious affiliations, strongly reflect their ideas in govt policies. Look at the Bush and his neo-con team plus Blair and other world leaders who fought the latest wars to clear the way for second coming of Jesus.

Lastly, The Iranian revolution is a clear example that religion in politics is not a danger to other countries, its another matter that Iraq was encouraged and supplied with lethal arms to fight Iran for several years.
The victory of FIF in elections was never accepted by the west and they were denied right to form govt which lead to bloody civil war in Algeria.
When militant groups such as Hamas try to resort to democratic means their victory was denied by the west.
BJP is a Hindu religious party with extreme views but they seek power and no one cries. There are religious parties in Europe who are in power politics - then why we should deny such a right to the people in Muslim countries.

Religion has been raising human consciousness for centuries. Whatever man is now, whatever little consciousness he has, the whole credit goes to religion. Politics with out religion has been a curse, a calamity; and whatever is ugly in humanity, politics is responsible for.
The fact is that Politics interfere with the religion and for material gains vilify religion.
Writes John Esposito:
"For more than four decades governments formulated policy in the midst of a superpower rivalry that defined the globe and the future in terms of the visible ideological and military threat posed by the Soviet Union. In the aftermath of the cold war, the fall of the Soviet Union and the discrediting of communism have created a "threat vacuum" that has given rise to a search for new enemies. For some Americans the enemy is the economic challenge the Japanese or the European Community represent. For others it is an Islamic world whose 1 billion Muslims form a majority in more than 48 countries and a rapidly growing minority in Europe and America. Some view Islam as the only ideological alternative to the West that can cut across national boundaries, and perceiving it as politically and culturally at odds with Western society, fear it; others consider it more a basic demographic threat...........
The causes of the resurgence are many and differ from country to country, but common catalysts and concerns are identifiable. Secular nationalism (whether in the form of liberal nationalism, Arab nationalism, or socialism) has not provided a sense of national identity or produced strong and prosperous societies. The governments in Muslim countries-- mostly nonelected, authoritarian, and dependent on security forces--have been unable to establish their political legitimacy. They have been blamed for the failure to achieve economic self-sufficiency, to stem the widening gap between rich and poor, to halt widespread corruption, to liberate Palestine, to resist Western political and cultural hegemony. Both the political and the religious establishments have come under criticism, the former as a westernized, secular elite overly concerned with power and privilege, and the latter (in Sunni Muslim nations) as leaders of the faithful who have been co-opted by governments that often control mosques and religious universities and other institutions".

An amplification of my warning:

What will be removed from the blog are any comments, from whatever source, addressing the use of multiple aliases. It is the content, not particular screennames themselves, which will be removed from this thread. No judgments are being made about whether multiple screennames are being used, and by whom. The topic itself is off limits.

First, we trust Susan's warning about the use of aliases will be enforced. One wonders though how she will be able to determine who the offenders are with the current loose registration requirements.

With respect to the topic, today's religions are weighed down with so many flaws and errors in their history, theology and claims to be the one and only way to salvation, they have no capacity to rule countries let alone villages. We predict religions will be extinct or on their way to extinction in ten years.

Societies and cultures remain archaic and dangerous where religion rules - we don't have to look far to see examples throughout the Near East....totalitarian governments are the inevitable outcome.

Pakistan is likely the most volitile and potentially unstable government on the current international horizon - and are well equipped with nuclear weaponry. We see in the news a growing trend there toward Taliban style and Wahabi inspired fundamentalist rule - very dangerous indeed!

Unfortunately many first and even second generation Muslims resist assimilation in Western societies that have provided a certain level of hospitality and freedom not readily found in societies dominated by Islamic rule (e.g. Sharia Law).

That this will remain a source of contention in the more heterogenous and secular West goes without saying.

Solutions in the near term remain elusive. What we don't need is more religion in government, and that much is certain.

For the first, and probably only, time in my life, I have to agree with Susan's comments. We cannot allow such tyranny in the name of religion.

Of course, it doesn't seem that a solution is coming forward anytime soon. We tried the "ignore it and it might go away" theory under President Clinton and the Taliban ran roughshod over Afghanistan. We tried the "shock & awe" theory under President Bush and the Taliban shifted operations to Pakistan.

Theocracy is the desire of all religion, and is the inevitable result if religion itself is not resisted.

In the Christian west most believers are able to get their fix with a sunday deluge and a holiday or two. Yet we still see the insistent pressure of their theocratic leaders to take over the government.

In Islam the believers are never free of it. Five times a day, in their government, throughout their entire culture.
Their institutionalized misogyny has completely oppressed half of the population by trading power to the other half.

There have been times in history when Islam did not do this, why is it doing this now? Christianity has been guilty of this too in the past, but not as much today as before. It seems the two religions are just out-of-phase right now, can we trust Christianity not to revert to the same?

I don't.

If Islam was simply a matter of private devotion and spirituality, of course our country would never go to war against such a thing. But we have gone to war with ideologies of government -- monarchy, colonialism, slavery and totalitarianism, for instance -- and to the extent Islam is one, it might be our enemy.

Have you seen Chris Hitchens' article in Slate about Turkey's conduct at the NATO summit in Strasbourg? They opposed the appointment of the Danish secretary-general (normally a formality) because the Danish government did not stop the publication of the Muhammed cartoons or
shut down a radio transmitter broadcasting to Turkish Kurds. In other words, they objected to Denmark not doing what an Islamic government would.
http://www.slate.com/id/2216518/
Pity, I thought they were the world's hope.