Sudan Ends 30 Years of Islamic Law by Separating Religion, State

[sun rise]

Some good news. It appears the 'high water mark' of countries with strict Islamic law is finally starting to end.

Sudan Ends 30 Years of Islamic Law by Separating Religion, State

Sudan’s transitional government agreed to separate religion from the state, ending 30 years of Islamic rule in the North African nation.


Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and Abdel-Aziz al-Hilu, a leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North rebel group, signed a declaration in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, on Thursday adopting the principle.


“For Sudan to become a democratic country where the rights of all citizens are enshrined, the constitution should be based on the principle of ‘separation of religion and state,’ in the absence of which the right to self-determination must be respected,” the document states.

 

[stvdv]

Some good news.

Thank you for sharing good news. Indeed good to hear, at least I assume (and hope) that people who live there are happy with it too.

 

[danieldemol]

Some good news. It appears the 'high water mark' of countries with strict Islamic law is finally starting to end.

Sudan Ends 30 Years of Islamic Law by Separating Religion, State

Sudan’s transitional government agreed to separate religion from the state, ending 30 years of Islamic rule in the North African nation.


Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and Abdel-Aziz al-Hilu, a leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North rebel group, signed a declaration in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, on Thursday adopting the principle.


“For Sudan to become a democratic country where the rights of all citizens are enshrined, the constitution should be based on the principle of ‘separation of religion and state,’ in the absence of which the right to self-determination must be respected,” the document states.

Thanks for sharing the good news

 

[Revoltingest]

Hoping it works out for them.

 

[FearGod]

Some good news. It appears the 'high water mark' of countries with strict Islamic law is finally starting to end.

Sudan Ends 30 Years of Islamic Law by Separating Religion, State

Sudan’s transitional government agreed to separate religion from the state, ending 30 years of Islamic rule in the North African nation.


Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and Abdel-Aziz al-Hilu, a leader of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North rebel group, signed a declaration in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, on Thursday adopting the principle.


“For Sudan to become a democratic country where the rights of all citizens are enshrined, the constitution should be based on the principle of ‘separation of religion and state,’ in the absence of which the right to self-determination must be respected,” the document states.

Syria is a secular state, I don't know what is the religious law in North Korea.

 

[Yerda]

Syria is a secular state, I don't know what is the religious law in North Korea.

Ok. Is secularism to blame for the problems in these places?

 

[FearGod]

Ok. Is secularism to blame for the problems in these places?

what kind of leadership regardless of religion or non-religion.

 

[Cooky]

what kind of leadership regardless of religion or non-religion.

It's not that simple. Secular leadership revolves around protecting citizen's liberty, while Islamic leadership revolves around following an outlined path, and getting everyone to strive for it.

With one there is no actual destination... Just getting people to not harm one another... But with Islamic governments, the destination is Islam. It is outlined and expected to be worked toward by all. But ideologies can't be goals... They're just paths... So the whole system is a lie and fails because of it.

 

[Cooky]

Ok. Is secularism to blame for the problems in these places?

The problem is other fabricated goals... Based on a different kind of ideological destination... it's all fraud.

...There is no destination. We're just here to live, and until we all come to understand that the government's role is merely to assist us in just living, and nothing more, we can't have peace.

 

[Cooky]

Wherever ideology rules, there will be corruption and war. Forever.

 

[FearGod]

It's not that simple. Secular leadership revolves around protecting citizen's liberty, while Islamic leadership revolves around following an outlined path, and getting everyone to strive for it.

With one there is no actual destination... Just getting people to not harm one another... But with Islamic governments, the destination is Islam. It is outlined and expected to be worked toward by all. But ideologies can't be goals... They're just paths... So the whole system is a lie and fails because of it.

Actually all laws and decisions beside the leaders should be chosen by the public opinions according
to Shura and it's very close to democracy if not even better.

 

[Cooky]

Actually all laws and decisions beside the leaders should be chosen by the public opinions according
to Shura and it's very close to democracy if not even better.

It wouldn't matter since a government tainted with an adherence to Shura, and leaders bound to it, poison the system with ideology to begin with.

The only government that is good is a government without a destination, whose sole purpose is to care for the well-being of those aboard it and nothing more.

 

[Tambourine]

It's not that simple. Secular leadership revolves around protecting citizen's liberty, while Islamic leadership revolves around following an outlined path, and getting everyone to strive for it.

The Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and the Syrian Assad regime all were secular regimes.

 

[Cooky]

The Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and the Syrian Assad regime all were secular regimes.

I covered that in the next post... #9.
Solidified it in # 10.

Do you agree with those posts?

 

[Tambourine]

I covered that in the next post... #9.
Solidified it in # 10.

Do you agree with those posts?

No, those are just baseless and riddled with faulty or unproven assumptions, much like your characterization of "Islamic leadership".

Can you make an evidence based argument?

 

[Cooky]

No, those are just baseless and riddled with faulty or unproven assumptions, much like your characterization of "Islamic leadership".

Can you make an evidence based argument?

I'm not trying to prove anything though... I'm trying to have a conversation based on a thought I had. If you don't like conversations based on individual thinking, but prefer *only* evidence based sharing of already known "knowledge", then that's your own limitation... It's not my problem.

 

[Tambourine]

I'm not trying to prove anything though... I'm trying to have a conversation based on a thought I had. If you don't like conversations based on individual thinking, but prefer *only* evidence based sharing of already known "knowledge", then that's your own limitation... It's not my problem.

Yes, it's become rather evident to me that you aren't basing your opinions on the real world.

So how is government set up in the fictional world that you thought up so far?

 

[Cooky]

Yes, it's become rather evident to me that you aren't basing your opinions on the real world.

If I'm not basing my opinions on the real world, then what might I be basing them on exactly? Where do you suppose thoughts and opinions could come from if not the real world?

So how is government set up in the fictional world that you thought up so far?

Have you ever considered that constitution based governments have no long-term *goal* plan? That some governments are merely set-up to protect people from harm, and that's it?

Have you ever considered that ideology based governments, such as communistic ones and Islamic ones, tend to fail due to their ideological *goals*..?

At least consider the proposition!

 

[Tambourine]

If I'm not basing my opinions on the real world, then what might I be basing them on exactly? Where do you suppose thoughts and opinions could come from if not the real world?

I suppose your thoughts come from your brain, but perhaps you have a particularly creative alternate explanation you want to share?

Have you ever considered that constitution based governments have no long-term *goal* plan? That some governments are merely set-up to protect people from harm, and that's it?

Have you ever considered that ideology based governments, such as communistic ones and Islamic ones, tend to fail due to their ideological *goals*..?

At least consider the proposition!

So the governments in your mind are set up only to protect people from physical harm, and nothing else?
No property rights, no legislation to support incorporation or stock trading, or to protect certain trades and economic sectors, no legal support for accredition or public education, no justice apparatus for managing civil disputes?

 

[Cooky]

I suppose your thoughts come from your brain, but perhaps you have a particularly creative alternate explanation you want to share?

When we train our minds to focus properly to interpret our physical environment, and block out as much 'noise' as possible, our eyes become.open to reality.

So the governments in your mind are set up only to protect people from physical harm, and nothing else?
No property rights, no legislation to support incorporation or stock trading, or to protect certain trades and economic sectors, no legal support for accredition or public education, no justice apparatus for managing civil disputes?

None of these things project an ideological goal though... They're just preserving the peace in a fluid reality, and as the times carry on, other people-protecting laws are enacted. There is no long term agenda..

Can you explain what the long term goals of Austria are? What is the ideological goal your government is actively working toward 100 to 200 years from now?

I would assume there is no goal, just like the U.S. has no goal, but yet Communist China has goals taking over swaths of land, and building islands in the middle of the ocean. China has goals that might include a global communist world! A utopian dream!

Communist Korea also had ideological goals, until others who didn't share that ideology crushed their goals, and so we see how ideological goals *always* produce corruption until eventual chaos ensues.