Sharia law and the Arab Spring

[pampango]

The strong showing of Tunisia’s moderate Islamists in Sunday’s election and a promise by Libyan National Transitional Council leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil to uphold Sharia have highlighted the bigger role Islamists will play after the fall of the autocrats who opposed them.

Q.: “Should we expect a very conservative form of Sharia law, along Saudi or Sudanese lines?”

Eric Chaumont (France’s National Centre for Scientific Research):
A.: “Certainly not. In Saudi Arabia, the law which is implemented is, by rights, what is called ‘Hanbali’. It is one of the four doctrines of Sharia law and the strictest of all. Yet Libya has a ‘Maliki’ tradition, which is a more flexible doctrine.”

Q.: “Tunisia has just voted in its first post- Ben Ali elections, putting the Islamists ahead. Should an Iranian-style scenario be feared in all these countries that have set themselves free?”

Eric Chaumont:
A." “Certainly not Iranian-style for two reasons: the Iranian revolution is no longer the stuff of dreams for anyone in the Arab-Muslim world because of its obvious failures from a social point of view. Secondly, we should not forget that Iran is a country with a Shi’ite tradition. And what separates Shi’ite Islam from Sunni Islam is essentially political so it is very unlikely that there will be an Iranian-style scenario.”

http://www.euronews.net/2011/10/26/sharia-law-and-the-arab-spring/

[MedleyMisty]

1. But I heard

that Muslims are all scary terrorist brown towel heads! I'm afeared! They can't handle democracy! They need to be raped and tortured and exploited by dictators!

/sarcasm

It's sad how I've seen that prejudice between the lines of anti-Libyan revolution statements.

[pampango]

2. "Muslims/Sharia!" seems intended to have the same effect that "Communist!" used to have.

"They are out to kill us or convert our system to one like theirs." "They are all the same and "they" are not like "us"."

Keep folks afraid and you can get away with a lot of stuff. And we all know which party specializes in using fear as a electoral tactic. :)

[riderinthestorm]

3. Your very selective editing is noted. You conveniently left out this part of the interview

from your very own source ...

"euronews:
“Will this Islamic law be a step backwards, notably for women’s rights?”

Eric Chaumont:
“That is a certainty, based on Western criteria. Muslim law, of whichever persuasion, is not favourable to women’s position in society from the point of view of personal status, inheritance rights etc and, as a general rule, it is a law that makes women subservient to men.”




And by extension that means glbt rights will be trampled, so will religious minorities etc.

There IS a lot of variation between Iranian style sharia law and Saudi Arabia (degrees of difference - whew!) - you at least represented that correctly but painting anyone who is concerned over these statements as somehow vaporizing over nothing is wrong imho. Sharia built into the founding documents of any country enshrines patriarchy and discrimination at best and dangerous theology at worst. Libya and Tunisia have many 21st century examples of secular constitutions to glean from. If we cannot point out the problems in codifying religiosity in a country's founding documents now, then when?

[pampango]

4. None of us would be comfortable living under strict Sharia law.

By "western criteria" it is not acceptable and should not, to the extent that a foreign country can have any influence, be encouraged or tolerated. It is still important for people to understand that Sharia is not just what we see in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia.

A democratic government in North Africa or the Middle East is destined to have Sharia in their constitutions, even the secular liberals in those countries acknowledge that. Some believe that Sharia will be one of not the guiding basis for legislation as is the case in Turkey. Over time democracies offer more hope to change social attitudes that dictators have done. I won't be happy with much that those democracies do, but I think they hold hope for the future than the governments they are replacing.

Tunisia Liberals See a Vote for Change, Not Religion

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/26/world/africa/tunisia-liberals-see-a-vote-for-change-not-just-for-islamists.html

The liberals interpreted the results of the vote in Tunisia, the first of the Arab Spring, as a call for change, not necessarily an embrace of religious rule. But they also cautioned that voters had been looking to punish those secular parties that appeared to pick a fight with religion.

The urgent message for liberals in Egypt, Libya and elsewhere across the region was: “Avoid anything like being for a civil war between secularists and Islamists,” said Moncef Marzouki, a veteran human rights activist, whose party, the Congress for the Republic, ranked second to the Islamist party Ennahda in the preliminary tally.

“We owe our success,” Mr. Marzouki said, “to the fact that we talked to the secularists, saying: ‘Look, all of us come from a very important human rights background, and we are going to fight for civil liberties. But we are not going to fight against Islamists. We don’t want an ideological war between secularists and Islamists.’ ”The message to Islamists, he added, was: “ ‘We are for Islam to be the religion of the state, but you must be very cautious. We are not going to give up our fight for civil freedoms.’ I am profoundly convinced that we can promote human rights and women’s rights, etc., without fighting against Islamists.”

[riderinthestorm]

5. Sorry but I hope that none of us would be comfortable living under Sharia law period

Strict or not. It's crap for women, glbts, religious minorities etc.

Why do so many DUers defend this shit?

Tunisia and Libya have a chance to create a new constitution free from ANY religious influence. The scant religiosity in our own founding documents have been a major headache and we count ourselves as at least as religious as any Islamic state. A wholly secular document is the only way to ensure a civil society.

Sorry but I don't buy cultural relativism as an excuse for this. Saying "we are for Islam to be the religion of the state", means that people are going to be discriminated against and patriarchy will run rampant.

[moondust]

6. Which is the more difficult task?

Writing and enforcing a constitution that grants new rights to a population that has never had them or writing and enforcing a constitution that takes rights away from a population that is used to having them/takes them for granted?