Difference between revisions of "Cultures Project Paper: The Essential Separation Between Church and State"

From ThePlaz.com

Jump to: navigation, search
m (→‎HHS Works Cited: add point)

Revision as of 02:19, 16 November 2006

English 10 Cultures Project Step 6 - Paper

Nuvola apps important.png Only a DRAFT!

May change/be updated - still in progress - may still contain inaccuracies

The Essential Separation Between Church and State

Around the world, the separation between church and state is not being maintained. In many nations nonbelievers are being forced against their wills and spiritual beliefs to submit to the state religion (Shea). Women are being executed in inhumane ways for violating their basic human rights (Human Rights Watch). Entire countries are enacting religiously motivated laws which segment and discriminate against sections of the popultation, leaving the entire country to starve (Womenaid International). Laws of sovereign nations ought not to be influenced by religion to protect and insure basic human rights. Such religiously-motivated laws must not be allowed to stand; the separation of church and state must be maintained. Although the majority of people in power support religiously-motivated laws, each nation contains an aggregate of people; a minority of these people will have different beliefs and values then ones the state mandates. Theses people must be insured fair and equal treatment according to internationally recognized human rights standards.

Religiously-motivated laws can easily be taken too far by groups which strictly interpret their religions. One example is the country of Afghanistan under the Taliban. The Taliban implemented their extreme form of Islamic law or sharia (شريعة). The Taliban used the Qur'ān (القرآن) to defend and back their laws (cite). Under this strict religious code, women were forced to wear a burqa (برقعة) in public at all times (Womenaid International). Women were not allowed to work or receive an education (Womenaid International). In addition, if a woman’s husband died, or if he divorced her, she had no way of caring for herself. She could not work or find any sort of employment. She was forced to beg on the streets for whatever she could get.

However, the Taliban didn’t just use religious law to marginalize women, they hurt everyone. Television was prohibited and religious freedom was not allowed (CBC).  ?add one more - alcohol? The country was kept squarely rooted in the past. Almost no western influence was allowed. This hurt everyone in Afghanistan because without a western style, free, economy, everyone’s standards of living fell. Not permitting women, who were willing and able to work, reduced the amount of output that could be produced in the country. This limited the amount of goods that could be sold or exported, producing profits for the country. This in turn imprisoned the people of Afghanistan in their mud huts. ?do I need to explain all this?

All of this made Afghanistan one of the world's least developed countries according to a UN study conducted in February 2005 (CBC). Only five sub-Saharan Africa nations manage to surpass it for dishonor of the lowest position in the development index (CBC). In Afghanistan, one hundred forty-two out of every one thousand babies die before age one and every thirty minutes another woman dies in pregnancy (CBC). All this contributes to the very low life-expectancy of forty-two and one half years (CBC). Afghanistan could definitely do better than this, if the Taliban did not so closely embrace religious law. By allowing all of the people who are willing to work, to get a job, it could greatly increase its productive capacity. Such an increase would greatly help all of its citizens. Case in point, since the Taliban was evicted after September 11, Afghanistan’s economy has grown at 25 percent a year (CBC). This helps everyone in Afghanistan lead a better life, except perhaps the displaced warlords who can no longer use their religious law as ruse for their own betterment. Mention karzi put hardliner in supreme court again and he is still do the same thing (Shea).

However, it should be noted that the Taliban took religious law to an extreme. Most Muslims condemn the actions of the Taliban, and claim that the Taliban misinterpreted the teachings of Islam (Nachef).

This, however, uncovers the problems with religiously-motivated laws in general. Religious teachings remain up to interpretation. Every major religion contains literally thousands of different sects which each have slightly different views on the topics and teachings (cite?). ?give examples In addition, there is no restraint on what a religion can teach or believe in. One can theoretically invent a religion which teaches anything and then enforce those rules as divinely mandated. In addition, not all the citizens of a certain nation share the same religion. Therefore, religiously-motivated are dangerous to implement in society in general. – move to after gays Religious law is harder to change then secular-based law. This leaves old statements and punishments to remain for centuries. A example from outside of the legal system is verse 2:283 which states, “if you are traveling, and no scribe is available, a bond shall be posted to guarantee repayment.” This statement is no longer relevant to today, where almost everyone is able to write. Although this statement most likely has no significance today, many other similar outdated statements remain in the Qur'ān. This brings up the problem because many who strictly interpret the Qur'ān continue to believe in such statements (?example and cite?).

An international community is needed to revise and look at such laws (Nachef). However, such a committee must receive broad international support from every sect of Islam. This will be very difficult to achieve.

Firm believers believe that the Qur'ān and in some cases, sharia court’s laws and rulings, are the divine word of god (Shea). This makes such rulings very difficulty to change or even criticize. This makes religiously-motivated laws even more dangerous, as it is hard to alter.  ?move 3 sections down Plus, in addition to using religious law as a deception for gaining political power, religion also permits human rights atrocities to occur. ?change transition depending on what proceeds For example, take Safiya Husaini. Recently she was accused of adultery under Islamic “sharia” law in the country of Nigeria (“Loophole Saves Woman From Death By Stoning”). She had supposedly confessed under police interrogation that she had been raped and impregnated by her cousin (“Loophole Saves Woman From Death By Stoning”). She was to be buried to her waist and stoned to death as soon as her daughter was weaned (“Loophole Saves Woman From Death By Stoning”). However, she was acquitted only because of one obscure passage in the Qur'ān (القرآن) which stated that a pregnancy can remain in the womb for seven years, possibly making the girl her former husband’s daughter (“Loophole Saves Woman From Death By Stoning”). Had this loophole not existed, Safiya Husaini would have been executed by illegal corporal-based punishment methods for exercising her basic human rights (Human Rights Watch). LaShawn R. Jefferson, the executive director of the Women's Rights Division of Human Rights Watch said, "When a woman is punished so severely for having pre-marital sex, her right to make free decisions regarding her body is violated. Women have a basic right to control their sexual autonomy" (qtd. in Human Rights Watch).

However, some Muslims retort that these laws apply equally to men as well as women. Indeed the Qur'ān supports this idea in verse 4:16,“the couple who commits adultery shall be punished.” However, in this case, Safiya Husaini’s cousin was not punished because of the verse before (4:15), “those who commit adultery among your women, you must have four witnesses against them, from among you. If they do bear witness, then you shall keep such women in their homes until they die” (“Loophole Saves Woman From Death By Stoning”). The statement is worded to imply men accusing women. There is no reference to imprisoning men as well as women. In fact, the Qur'ān repeatedly discounts the worth of women. “Two men shall serve as witnesses; if not two men, then a man and two women” (2:282). In addition when dividing up an inheritance, “if the siblings are men and women, the male gets twice the share of the female" (4:176). Thus, is it impossible to say that Sharia treats men and women equally.

?move this all to conclusion? Religiously motivated laws are taking away people’s freedoms. Modern human rights groups believe that it is a basic right of all people to control their sexual autonomy (Human Rights Watch). However, when religiously-motivated laws which are enforced by the state revoke these rights, it is a flagrant violation of people’s freedom to live their life how they want. This includes the right of exercising their sexuality in ways both them and their partners wish. However, it is not clear if these laws are being forced upon non-believers. If they are, the state is arbitrarily taking away the basic human rights of the entire population.  ?mention sepefic rights? However, in any case, it is not the state’s job to make these decisions for their constituents. Citizens should be free to follow what ever religious principles they want. ?should I advocate letting them do this in private- I don’t think so -

?should I mention the easy divorce by cell phone (doesn’t build constructive marriages…) ? Religiously-motivated laws oppress sections of the population which does not believe in the religion the state is trying to enforce upon them. In Indonesia, conservative Muslims are trying to get the world’s largest Muslim country to ban all homosexuality activity and media (Ireland). They are forcing the “Law Against Pornography and Porno-Action" to be passed (Ireland). This law would prohibit any writing or audio-visual presentation which "exploit the notion of persons engaging in sexual relations" or "engaging in activities leading to sexual relations with persons of the same sex" (qtd. in Ireland). Under this law, portrayals of "kissing on the lips" of any gender combinations would be forbidden (Ireland). It is proposed that violations of this law would be punishable by prison terms of up to seven years (Ireland). Clearly, this law is trying to force the religious principles of one group onto the entire population. However, only about eighty percent of the entire population is Muslim. Homosexuality is clearly prohibited in their religion (Qur'ān 7:80). However, this leaves about twenty percent of the people, of which some percentage, are open to homosexuality. Conservative groups should not be trying to pass laws which take away the basic human rights of people. Explain the right again? ?say: in there religion that is the place, mention not all believe and freedom of religion should be offered

Violence often accompanies religious conflicts. When people are oppressed they revolt because they are unhappy with their current situation. They want their views to be accepted and the injustices to end. On the other hand, conservative groups may use violence to protect their interests and positions. In the above example, conservative Muslims are doing whatever it takes to roughen up Arus Pelangi, the group protecting the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender in Indonesia (Ireland). Arus Pelangi reports that conservative groups such as the Front of Supporters of Islam and the Betawi Council Forum often attack the offices, workplaces, and homes of people they consider to be a threat to the morals and values of Islam (Ireland).

Another example of a religious conflict is the continuing trouble between the Arabs and Israelis. This conflict is almost entirely religiously motivated. Extremists on both sides aren’t taking compromise for an answer as both sides try to find homes for their people and religions. Hamas, a militant Islamic group, and now the elected leaders of Palestine, wants to implement Sharia law (The Middle East Now). Mr. Abu Tevir, a Hamas leader said that, “the No. 1 thing we will do is take sharia as a source for legislation. Shakria has a soul in it and is good for all occasions” (The Middle East Now). The residents of other religions in the area are afraid that the new laws will take away some of their rights (The Middle East Now).  ?cut violence thing

According to the US and others, Hamas is a terrorist group involved in operating missions against Israel (The Middle East Now). Groups like Hamas are often the same calling for a jihad (جهاد) or holy war (cite?). “The Religion of Peace,” a non-partisan website aiming to point out the un-peaceful tendencies of followers of Islam, reports that there have been six thousand three hundred twenty-eight terrorist attacks by Islamic fundamentalists since the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Centers. These attacks are undoubtedly carried out by the same groups trying to impose religiously motivate laws. The Qur'ān advocates such fights, “O you who believe, you shall fight the disbelievers who attack you - let them find you stern - and know that GOD is with the righteous” among many others (9:123). It would be fair to say that followers who strictly interpret the Qur’ān are more likely to try and implement religious law. Conversely, therefore, it may be said that those who wish to implement religious law also want to wage a holy jihad and kill innocent people. They also have no intentions of looking out for non-believer’s rights: "as for those who disbelieve and reject our revelations, they will be dwellers of Hell, wherein they abide forever" (2:39). People around such extremist points of view will start to adopt those views (find and cite?). If a person, Muslims included, is exposed for long periods of time to these extremist views, their opinion of the world will change. This is especially true if these extremist views are the only opinions they hear. ). ?mention boys on video They may start to feel that Muslims are supreme to everybody else, and that sharia punishments are just and fair. They may start to grow up hating all non Muslims. They may feel that they must kill the non-believers. They certainly will if they read, “Surely, those who are too arrogant to worship [Allah] will enter [hell], forcibly” (40:60).  ?include this para – if cutting violence?

However, not all Muslims support sharia or jihad. Elaborate ?and mention discussion – cut out usa??? One out of every ten Muslims in Indonesia supports jihad and justifies the bombing attacks on Indonesia's tourist island of Bali, where two hundred people were killed in blasts three years ago attributed to the militant Jemaah Islamiah network (Norton).

Go on to say not all Muslims support this jihad and ways to resolve this - ?are the laws causing the jihads- need to try and convince this brings tyranny and mob rule Islam is the only country actively trying to destroy others (religion of peace??) 1. Closing: Muslim nations are changing laws 1. But not doing enough 2.  ?? campaign for elimination of all religiously inspired laws 3. Wrap Up

So – should I cut out the whole violence th ing??? (offer as supplement)

???Add dash between “religiously motivated” Woman/women Then/than

Works Cited

HHS Works Cited

See HHS Works Cited Info
Retrieved from "https://wiki.theplaz.com/w/index.php?title=Cultures_Project_Paper:_The_Essential_Separation_Between_Church_and_State&oldid=5125"