From: Damien Sullivan (phoenix@ugcs.caltech.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 23:22:58 MDT
> experiences of being both an American woman with all the freedom that
> entails and a woman who lived as a Muslim woman, at times complete with
> hijab, among Arab Muslims for years. This experience, which I claim, is what
> informs my view when I say that the women of Iraq, in spite of being more
> liberated that their Saudi counterparts, are still entitled to the label
> "un-liberated". It doesn't take a government to oppress women. The
Well, I don't know that much about the women of Iraq; most comes from a
mid-1990s Economist article, on how Iraq was becoming more religious under
sanctions, with Baghdad women who'd been proud of their Western hairstyles
turning to the veil. And Iraqi suffrage is universal, as is Iran's. Not
terribly meaningful under the Baath party, but they got their fake vote just
like everyone else... only 45% female literacy in Iraq though, according to
the CIA (vs. 66% in Iran.) So, I don't know. I'd just caution you against
assuming the Arab Muslims of Iraq are the same as the Arab Muslims elsewhere.
> Iraq's Hussein may have headed a secular government, and I have not been a
> student of government; however, how secular can a government truly be when
> that government takes government funds to build religious worship sites?
> Hussein built mosques; he was in the process of building what was to be the
> largest mosque in the world. Doesn't a truly secular government mean that
> there must be a separation of mosque and state?
One thing to note is that Saddam's religious activity pretty much dates to
after Gulf War I and sanctions and all that. Part of painting himself as a
new Saladin against the Christian imperialists of America. There's a big
"catering to public opinion" aspect here.
But perhaps more to the point is that no, total separation isn't necessary.
Many if not most of the countries of Europe have state-supported churches --
Britain and the Anglicans, various countries with their Lutheran churches.
Yet they're functionally pretty secular -- sometimes more so than the United
States, with stricter constitutional separation, but more mixing from the
beliefs of the politicians and the populace.
More germane to our concerns, I'd propose, is the extent of Islamic law, as
opposed to Islamic subsidy. And I think Iraq was quite distinct from the
theocracy and sharia of Iran and Saudi Arabia. Possibly Hussein was moving in
that direction, or would have if he thought it'd help him, but it's hard to
tell.
-xx- Damien X-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 23:30:27 MDT