January 14, 2005

Cooperation Makes it Happen: The Iraqi Election

The upcoming Iraqi elections have been the talk of the 'sphere and of NPR, Fox, and every other news organization. I have been listening and thinking.

For a government to be democratic the people must be accurately represented. In the United States, we are represented by number, but I wonder if it would be in the best interest of the Iraqi people to be represented by region according to their branch of Islam. Neither side seems willing to listen or to consider the other as valid. Why not divide up the country, Shi'ites, Sunni's, and Kurds each having their own provinces and given the amount of land according to the number of their population. Then each province could hold a representative election and presidential election placing in office whom they respect, will listen to, and follow. I just have this feeling that the way it is set up now isn't truly representative and will be viewed as a puppet government and thus rendered ineffective and disrespected by the majority of the Iraqi people.

I will gladly welcome, read, and consider any comments on the topic, as well.

Posted by Rae at January 14, 2005 03:41 PM

Rae,I've been reading some of your blogs and have some questions. What exactly do you mean that you are not a fundamentalist, but a reformed Christian? What is your definition of a fundamentalist? I think there are several definitions. What book would you suggest that I read to my 5 year old that she and I both would enjoy? We started to read "The Wind in the Willows" and we both found it soooo boring! Why is that considered a classic? Do you believe we should have gone to Iraq and exactly why? Where else should we go? XO

Posted by: chocolate at January 14, 2005 09:13 PM

I've been saying for over a year that Iraq would fair much better as United States of Iraq - sharing the natural resources according to population in each of the three states. The population is pretty much divided naturally that way already - why not make it official. Follow the Kurd's religious beliefs in the Kurd state - the Sunni religious style in the Sunni state and of course Shi'ites worship the way they believe. It's really hard for our United States population to understand (the real reason for the second amendment) how other countries believe so strongly in the connection of government to their religion.

The very meaning of the second amendment that our country was trying to avoid and to allow all religions to exist within our Christian "based" nation. Not to cancel the Christianity in our country.

Each of the three states or provinces would choose a governor, state representatives - just for the state. Then choose the national government for their military, highways, "everyone stuff" and natural resources. Keeping their laws governing individuals within their state. With the understanding that you may relocate to any of the states and follow that states laws. If a state would start to loose population - they may change their laws to reflect the desires of their people.

Posted by: chrys at January 14, 2005 11:00 PM

"Chocholate" (that's unique :D)-
1) A better way of saying this is that I believe that the grace of God overcomes any sin that I commit. That means that I reject the idea of losing my salvation. If grace isn't earned by good works, then it can't be lost due to "bad" works. I spent the better part of my Christian life afraid of God pulling a trump card on me. You know, I would have a "bad" thought and thought that if I didn't confess it, then I would lose my salvation. So I would immediately repent and think myself saved again. My salvation isn't dependent on my confession of sin, but the joy of my salvation is made better by confession. Also, if one can lose their salvation and baptisim saves (which I reject as well- it is following the example of Christ and is figurative of our death, burial and ressurection with Christ and is an outward example of the covenant the He makes with me), then why when someone "rededicates their life" aren't they rebaptized? So, while I do accept the "fundamentals" of the faith: the inerrancy of the word, the virgin birth and sinless life of Christ, his substitionary atonement, a literal six days of creation, etc. I believe that Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, etc. are also Christians.

2)My definition of a fundamentalist is someone who rejects that other denominations will be "saved" because they don't ascribe to their interpretation of the scripture (immersion, sprinkling, predestination, etc). Non-trinitarians don't apply here as I see the Trinity as completely scriptural and not created by creeds or man, thus eliminating any who deny the complete humanity and Deity of Christ. The thing is, most people think of fundamentalists as those Muslim extremists who have declared jihad on anyone of Western decent. Note the word- extremists. Most people who are fundamentlists aren't extremists. Many fundamentalists also reject fantasy literature or any literature without an obvious moral point. I think it is forgotten that God is the ultimate and perfect artist and doesn't and hasn't always expressed Himself in a didactic manner.

3)I would start with the original Pooh stories by A.A. Milne. Start with half a chapter. Perhaps A Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett. The Wind in the Willows does have some slow chapters and the beginning is definitely slow. Once I had read it to E, and was familiar with it, I just gave a brief explanation to the other girls and then forged on to chapter two. Sarah Plain and Tall is another good one. Just So Stories and Rikki Tikki Tavi by Rudyard Kipling are terrific, too.

4)Yes, I believe that the president holds preemptive authority, and those who subscribe to the "I Hate Bush" club easily forget that he isn't the only and won't be the last president to use preemptive force and based on the information he had at the time, he made the best choice. Do you think me liberal because I don't listen to conservative talk shows or have a differing view of how the elections should be handled? I prefer NPR because I feel that it sharpens me. I hear what is being said and have to examine why I disagree, not have someone tell me why I should be disagreeing. For me, my rhetoric and logic skills are enhanced. There is a lot more to NPR than overt liberal news reporting, and for those cultural and world reports, I listen, as well.

5)I do wonder if we are overcommitted in Iraq. I think that we should have done something in Rwanda during Clinton's presidency and I wonder to what extent we should be involved in Sudan.

And now, it is time for Saturday jobs and errands. Miss you, friend.

Posted by: Rae at January 15, 2005 11:16 AM

Nice idea on Iraq. The problem may not be the majority of moderate Iraqis. The problem is the militants that are in every region. The nicest thing about terror for the terrorist is that it is easy, does not take smarts or discipline and is cheap. They are everywhere in each state. The killing will continue.

Posted by: r at January 15, 2005 08:44 PM

Yes the killings unfortuately will continue so something constructive needs to be tried/started. The "little" "King on the Mountain" brigades will fade away as more and more of their "followers?" find satisfaction in their own province/state or country recognizing their needs - instead of the would be dictators who are selling vague programs for their futures.

Posted by: chrys at January 16, 2005 12:00 AM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?