NationStates Jolt Archive

People on this forum always seem to be disscussing with amazing fervour the little details of the notion that Church and State are becoming more and more linked in the United States. However in Saudi Arabia, Mosque and State have been linked for eaons, and in such a way that every other religion is sereiously persecuted against. I would ask again for people here to support the end of this tyranny by signing this pertition online. In response to those who believe that the pertition is a waste of time and it will have no power, it will have even less power if you dont sign it.

http://www.petitiononline.com/SARF/petition.html

Thing is - Saudi is openly a theocracy and a dictatorship.

Most non-muslims there are there by choice - work/US army base/diplomats and so on.

If you really want to get religious freedom there (along with other freedoms) then really you sould be aiming for political freedom which will bring other freedoms with it.

And will political freedom be the best thing for the region or is it just what we want because it is what we have and are used to?

Thing is - Saudi is openly a theocracy and a dictatorship.

Most non-muslims there are there by choice - work/US army base/diplomats and so on.

If you really want to get religious freedom there (along with other freedoms) then really you sould be aiming for political freedom which will bring other freedoms with it.

very true

And will political freedom be the best thing for the region or is it just what we want because it is what we have and are used to?
tough one - I think that political freedom has greater potential to bring other freedoms in it's wake - which would come slowly and when the populatio is ready. I think it would be a lot better than outsides trying to force one issue after another on them.

was it Saudi that had elections a few months ago?

I am aware it took 800 (or so) years for the UK (and US stemming frm the UK) political system to get where it is now (beginning with the first release of absolute power by the monarch), and only in the last 100 years ahve we seen anything approaching full political freedom (non landowners, women, black people getting the vote). So i am not expecting Saudi to go through that overnight - it took us time and it will take them time (like 100+ years type time).

Generally a democratic nation is more peaceful.

tough one - I think that political freedom has greater potential to bring other freedoms in it's wake - which would come slowly and when the populatio is ready. I think it would be a lot better than outsides trying to force one issue after another on them.

was it Saudi that had elections a few months ago?

I am aware it took 800 (or so) years for the UK (and US stemming frm the UK) political system to get where it is now (beginning with the first release of absolute power by the monarch), and only in the last 100 years ahve we seen anything approaching full political freedom (non landowners, women, black people getting the vote). So i am not expecting Saudi to go through that overnight - it took us time and it will take them time (like 100+ years type time).
Now that is where the problem lies. The US and other democracies want to push a thousand years of culture through a nation in a few years.

Generally a democratic nation is more peaceful.
Must disagree. Kuwait was pretty peacfull until invaded, the Vatican is pretty peacfull, Bruei is peace full. The problem is democracies have gone to war more often than other countires in recent history.

I would guess it would take Saudi Arabia much longer then two years, mostly because the religion doesn't permitt much in the way of religious freedom (Apostasy is a crime punishable by death, and so are many other seemingly minute crimes to westerners). In the Bible Jesus' words support seperation of church and state: "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's", but in Islam the state is Allah's arm on earth, and its entire job is to make sure that Islam spreads and that people follow the religious law (such as the compulsory giving to the poor, death for adultery, death for apostasy,ect.).

Its just a different culture one that democracy doesn't have much of a chance/

Now that is where the problem lies. The US and other democracies want to push a thousand years of culture through a nation in a few years.
And then they wonder why things bugger up...

I think it was Saudi that had local elections - but it was only for half the seats on the councils and only men could vote (i think they had to be a certain status too). I remember people bitching about it not being a true election and reflected dark-ages attitudes to women and so on. What the hell?! In a single step they got to a stage that too the UK several hundred years to reach - and still people bitch.

IF a country decided to make steps towards democracy (or another politically free system - who knows what a new perspective could come up with) it has to do it on its own terms and in its own time. If it is forced on people then there is a good chance it will cause resentment and backlash and lead in a direction that is good for nobody.

Look at the generally size and power (Militarily) of the nations you just pointed out.

Iran has gone to war,Iraq has gone to war,Egypt, Syria,Russia (The Russian Federation isn't really any different,except economically, from the Soviet Union, a rose by any other name still smells as sweet). China is preparing for war by 2008, North Korea is spending all its resources on a nuclear weapons program.

Over the last 20 years the democratic nations have generally been fighting to maintain the status qou of national boundaries against dictators Kosovo, Iraq. Or in retaliation to an attack, Afghanistan, or against an attack that could happen (even though faulty intelligence was the basis of the war),Iraq.

I would guess it would take Saudi Arabia much longer then two years, mostly because the religion doesn't permitt much in the way of religious freedom (Apostasy is a crime punishable by death, and so are many other seemingly minute crimes to westerners). In the Bible Jesus' words support seperation of church and state: "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's", but in Islam the state is Allah's arm on earth, and its entire job is to make sure that Islam spreads and that people follow the religious law (such as the compulsory giving to the poor, death for adultery, death for apostasy,ect.).

Its just a different culture one that democracy doesn't have much of a chance/
No I would say Jesus was pointing out that money and taxes were not part of the Church and that money is not what god expects you to give up.

Look at the generally size and power (Militarily) of the nations you just pointed out.

Iran has gone to war,Iraq has gone to war,Egypt, Syria,Russia (The Russian Federation isn't really any different,except economically, from the Soviet Union, a rose by any other name still smells as sweet). China is preparing for war by 2008, North Korea is spending all its resources on a nuclear weapons program.

Over the last 20 years the democratic nations have generally been fighting to maintain the status qou of national boundaries against dictators Kosovo, Iraq. Or in retaliation to an attack, Afghanistan, or against an attack that could happen (even though faulty intelligence was the basis of the war),Iraq.
I accept that, all I point out is that democracy as a political system is not any more inherently peacfull than any other system.

Ahh but in another part of the bible he does say give 10% of what you get back to God, so the Caesar part is about seperation of church and state.



(Another intresting side note that I've been thinking about for a while now. THe Arabic (Muslim) calander is about 600 years behind the Gregorian. It is about 600 years behind the Gregorian because Islam was founded 600 years after Christianity and the Muslims started at year 1 after Islam was founded. So if you look at the date they would be at (1400's), it would be the time that they would (if following western patterns) begin to experience religious freedom, and getting more powerful.)

Over the last 20 years the democratic nations have generally been fighting to maintain the status qou of national boundaries against dictators Kosovo, Iraq. Or in retaliation to an attack, Afghanistan, or against an attack that could happen (even though faulty intelligence was the basis of the war),Iraq.
20 years is a very convienent cut-off, and a single generation may be considered by some not to be the most reliable measure.

The US (for better or worse) has been involved in (and was the invader) in more wars than any other country in recent years - including your 20year timeframe. THIS IS NOT AN ANTI-US COMMENT PLEASE DO NOT TAKE IT THAT WAY _ I AM JUST POINTING OUT THAT DEMOCRACIES CAN AND DO GET INTO WARS.

If you go the last 2 or 3 generations you will see that some of the most bloody wars in history were between democracies (or dictatorships that were origionally elected).

Ahh but in another part of the bible he does say give 10% of what you get back to God, so the Caesar part is about seperation of church and state.



(Another intresting side note that I've been thinking about for a while now. THe Arabic (Muslim) calander is about 600 years behind the Gregorian. It is about 600 years behind the Gregorian because Islam was founded 600 years after Christianity and the Muslims started at year 1 after Islam was founded. So if you look at the date they would be at (1400's), it would be the time that they would (if following western patterns) begin to experience religious freedom, and getting more powerful.)
No that would outline two types of tax, state and federal for example. Which could point to a reasoned joining of the two for economic reasons :-).

And if you follow the Jewish calander they are some years ahead of the Gregorian. And if we want to be biblical to paraphrase JC he said there is but one kingdom, the kingdom of god pointing the way to theoracies:-).

Depends on what you count an invasion.I would classify an invasion as a nation taken over another nation without the intention of giving it back its sovereignty. And if you look all throughout history (goin broader then that 20 year time frime) democratic nations are generally more peaceful.

(But when a nation democraticaly elects a man and he becomes a dictator and then starts a war, does it count as a democracy?)

Ahh but JC also says his kingdom is not of this earth. And I don't think he came from a UFO :). And at his time there was no consideration of Federal and State level taxes so why would he be talkin about those? (Also on a more humerous note, I don't think Jesus would want higher taxes people have to work harder and can't worship as much)

Ahh but JC also says his kingdom is not of this earth. And I don't think he came from a UFO :)
I just find it amusing that 'a portion' of the worlds population appear to be obsessed with the separation of church and state. And if we are talking about US citizens, there is (and I won't get into it) a debate as to how the words of the 'founding fathers' should be read.

Ahh but JC also says his kingdom is not of this earth. And I don't think he came from a UFO :). And at his time there was no consideration of Federal and State level taxes so why would he be talkin about those? (Also on a more humerous note, I don't think Jesus would want higher taxes people have to work harder and can't worship as much)
Ah but there was, there were taxes to Rome and taxes to local Gov in many of the provinces.
But yes I think he would be all for lower taxes.

Well they can "interpret" them all they want but we know what they were supposed to mean. Madison kept a journal of the constitutional convention and we can read their other works. (Also of all the men that attended the convention I think only 2 did not belong to a church at all I think it was Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson and they were both deists)

We shouldn't be doing business with repressive governments period. When we buy oil from Saudi Arabia or products from China , we bare equal responsibility for the treatment of the people there.

I'm all for punchin China in the gut with a tariff or two, bring back some jobs.

I'm all for punchin China in the gut with a tariff or two, bring back some jobs.
We agree on that point.
Only party in the U.S. that supported that idea was the Green party though.

And I wouldn't vote for the green party if you held a gun up to my head, to many bad things and not enough good.

And I wouldn't vote for the green party if you held a gun up to my head, to many bad things and not enough good.
Same with me and Republicans.
Well, maybe with the exception of McCain, Spectre and a couple of others. MAYBE .

Thing is - Saudi is openly a theocracy and a dictatorship.
Strictly speaking, SA is an Absolute Monarchy, which is technically the same thing but without the military uniforms.

There's nothing wrong with theocracies IF they're done correctly - unfortunately, this hasn't happened for hundreds of years. This doesn't mean the religion itself is at fault, its just the way the state administers it.

There's nothing wrong with theocracies IF they're done correctly - .
How would it be done correctly?
unfortunately, this hasn't happened for hundreds of years.
When was it done correctly?

Just out of curiosity has anyone actually signed the pertition since I posted this thread?