The governmental system of many western countries is democracy. However, let's suppose that they were taken over by the waves of Muslim immigrants. These in time would no doubt support Sharia Law. What types of freedoms are in an Islamic state? Would the citizens be granted the right to choose the religion they want, or would they be forced to accept Islam according to the Quranic verse: “If any one desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him, and in the hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost.” (Surah 3:85). How about the right of a Muslim to change to another religion? Would that action be acceptable, or would it mean that whosoever changed from Islam would be charged with apostasy which is punishable by death? Mohammad said “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.” Hadith Al Bukhari (One of the six major collections of Hadiths) Vol. 9:57.
The United States has a system of government that gives citizens the right of self-rule through duly elected officials of their choice. These representatives write the laws that best concur with the wishes of the people to maintain their way of life. They have a say in what amount of taxes are levied, and how the funds are to be spent.
One important principle in this great system is the separation of church and state.
This is a principle which is hard to reconcile with Islam; as it is a system not only of faith, but of politics as well. It is built on an opposing concept, for “Islam is a religion and a state.” According to Islam, Sharia law is the principal source of legislation:
“We have sent down to thee the book in truth, that you might judge men as guided by God.” (Surah 4:105). If Sharia is the basis for law, what are some of the rules and regulations that might be eventually imposed under a Muslim head of state? Here are just a few examples:
Stealing: punished by hand amputation (Surah 5:38)
Adultery: punished by public flogging (Surah 24:2)
Drinking: punished by 40 or 80 lashes
Dominican Catholic priest preaches on the important topic of separation of Church and state.
Politicians use religion to sidestep reason. We must preserve the separation of church and state. Reason and Faith are incompatible in a democracy. Progress is impossible when logic and questioning aren't on the table.
Our leaders and leaders to be have too long ignored the principles of the Separation of Church and State that our young country was founded upon.
Looking at country's much older than ours such as Israel, Iran, and others that have not had this separation from within their governments should be a powerful indicator of how our freedoms and rights can be taken if we do not insist on Separation of Church and State in our country's policy making decisions.
Instead, at present, we are in a trend of using religion as a control mechanism, swaying public sentiment in issues, not on the objective and ethics of the issue, but on the religious overtone applied to the issues. Countries have been at war with each other, fell into fascist and dictatorship states for centuries because this simple principle was not observed or replaced with religion to facilitate control over its population.
We can not allow this to continue in our society, or we will lose our society.
Religion is a personal and individual belief to each one of us in a free society.
Lets keep it that way!
Music: Time by Pink Floyd David Gilmour
What do you think about Separation of Church and State?
Katherine Harris has made yet another absurd statement and Keith Olbermann caught it last night.
Did our founding fathers intend for America to be a Christian nation? Are we ignoring our history? Discover the 10 Truths About America's Christian Heritage.
Learn more at www.CoralRidge****/L2D.
Send this video to a friend!
What is the legal role of the Bible and Christianity in the United States?
(Image source: NDTV)
BY NATHAN BYRNE
ANCHOR MEGAN MURPHY
Anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks could have a global security firm feeling — well — insecure.
Behold “The Global Intelligence Files.” WikiLeaks promises to publish five million emails belonging to Stratfor which it says…
“…provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations … and government agencies … The emails show Stratfor’s web of informers, pay-off structure, payment-laundering techniques and psychological methods.”
Stratfor hit the damage-control trail Monday, warning of impostor emails phishing for clients’ private info. The company’s CEO posted this video on its website…
“I wanted to warn you that individuals continue to send out false communications that appear to be from Stratfor, but are not. … Our website, stratfor****, is the most secure place for you to communicate with us.”
The leaks began flowing Monday, via WikiLeaks’ media partners. Like Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar, which published some of the emails looking “inside the world of a private CIA.”
So, how did WikiLeaks get its hands on five million alleged pieces of electronic correspondence? The New York Times says…
“WikiLeaks did not disclose how it obtained the e-mails, but Stratfor acknowledged in December that its data servers were breached by a group of hackers known as Anonymous. The loose-knit group publicly supports WikiLeaks.”
The hacktivists at Anonymous didn’t come right out and claim responsibility. But there’s this — on Twitter…
“Stratfor is trending worldwide. Congrats on the amazing partnership between #Anonymous and #WikiLeaks to make all 5 MILLION mails public.”
Anonymous made no bones about hacking Stratfor back in December. Now, a writer for Forbes suggests, it all comes together.
“The leaderless collective Anonymous once acted as WikiLeaks’ vigilante avenger … while WikiLeaks kept a careful remove from their offensives. But … Anonymous now says it’s upgraded its relationship with WikiLeaks from friendly acquaintance to partner.”
Wired wonders if this is a return to power for WikiLeaks.
“If Anonymous continues feeding WikiLeaks with documents, the secret spilling site could return to a prominence that seemed lost due to technical difficulties, legal troubles, in-fighting and public fallings out with media partners …”
Stratfor, meanwhile, is offering all its web content for free — as a make-good for the security breach.
BY ALISON SCHUTZ
You're watching multisource US video news analysis from Newsy.
Thou shall not teach religion in public schools. That’s what some in Kentucky are arguing after a bill to offer Bible studies in the state’s public schools passes in the state senate.
WLWT reports this isn’t the first time the Senate resurrected a bill about the Good Book. It failed in the House once before because some thought it was unnecessary.
“In Kentucky - schools already have the choice of offering courses that teach the Bible. What Senate Bill 56 would do, is standardize the coursework. Some educators say a standard for teaching the Bible has the potential to make more school systems inclined to offer the class.”
The bill’s sponsor -- Senator Joe Bowen -- talked to Louisville’s WLKY.
"No doubt about it, the most important book ever written and obviously, it's had so much influence on our society and all of western civilization."
USA Today notes what few sources do: That this bill also “allowed students to substitute their own texts.”
WLKY talked with two Kentucky legislators who aren’t buying into toying with testament teaching.
One told the station he didn’t vote because he thought the bill threw academic credibility out the window.
And another -- a state House rep. -- who thinks the bill is meant to court Christian voters.
REP. MEEKS: "It's like waving meat in front of a dog, OK? You give them what they want."
The course would be an elective social studies course which would require students to know biblical content, characters, poetry, and narratives. The New American questions the history of public education’s rejection of religious and biblical references in holiday and prayer.
Noting some school districts make what they thought were politically correct decisions -- like removing American flags from their classroom.
“Yet, schools have comfortably accepted the role of instructing students in other areas that one should consider private or personal, such as sex education.”
So what do you think? Should separation of church and state stick in public school systems? Or should students be offered standardized schooling on scripture?
Like Newsy on Facebook and follow us on Twitter to receive daily updates.
Get more multisource US video news analysis from Newsy
Transcript by Newsy.
BY YIQIAN ZHANG
You're watching multisource world video news analysis from Newsy.
The Dalai Lama is retiring -- not from his spiritual role -- but from his political service in the Tibetan government in exile -- saying the Tibetan people need a freely elected leader. The announcement comes on the 52nd anniversary of the failed Tibetan uprising against Chinese rule.
“The Tibetan government in exile now is all set to change its constitution and elect a prime minister who will take over the political offices held by the Dalai Lama at the moment.” News X
By electing a successor, the Dalai Lama is departing from the historic practice of reincarnation. Traditionally, it is only after the death of the current Dalai Lama, that the Tibetan government and High Lamas will set out to find his reincarnated successor. The Chinese government has intervened in that history, and claimed approval rights for the Dalai Lama in the 1950s. So, is this move a step towards greater Tibetan democracy or is the spiritual leader simply playing olitics? The Hindustan Times quotes a Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman as saying, it’s a trick.
JIANG YU: “He has often talked about retirement in the past few years. I think these are his tricks to deceive the international community.”
Others say some good might come out of this. BBC China quotes a Bochum University professor – who says this boils down to a Tibetan-style separation of church and state.
“…(the) Dalai Lama announces his exit in the political realm and didn’t give up his position as spiritual leader. But his action means this medieval, traditional, very out-of-date system of unification of church and state will come to an end. … theoretically it’s advancement.”
But a Time magazine blogger says, The Dalai Lama knows exactly what he’s doing -- and he’s sending a strong message to the rest of the world.
“…a separate political structure will exist in which Tibet’s interests can be looked after by an independent leader. In that case, reincarnation will not be the salient issue. Democracy, as practiced by the Tibetan exile community, will be. How’s that for a deft move by a ‘wolf in monk’s robes?’”
Tibetans will vote for their new prime minister later this month. CNN’s Zain Vergee reports - the Dalai Lama’s announcement wasn’t a surprise.
“He’s going to put forward amendments and he wants a vote to happen on the successor. (FLASH) A lot of people are saying the Dalai Lama has worked so hard for the cause, giant just needs a break. This is just kind of symbolic, really, it’s so important this happening. Actually the Tibetan government in exile has not really made a lot of political progress in terms of what they want over the last few years.”
Finally - The New Yorker’s Evan Osnos predicts - the Dalai Lama might find it difficult to separate himself politically from the Tibetan cause.
“...despite his persistent attempts to renounce his political functions and pave the way for a new generation of leaders who can govern without the emotional and religious baggage he represents, he simply looms too large over the Tibet conflict to be there and not there at the same time.”
Follow Newsy on Twitter Newsy_Videos for daily updates.
Get more multisource world video news analysis from Newsy.
Transcript by Newsy.
TJ Huntley's plans to help the economy in Houston and tactics to keep the crime off the streets. www.tjhuntley****