When a country punishes its citizens differently based on race/religion!

[Godobeyer]

That's not what your constitution says. I really find it amazing that you're telling me I'm wrong without even addressing the fact that my source was THE CONSTITUTION OF ALGERIA. Your OP...not mine, but yours...stated 'Imagine that you were living in a country that treated you differently depending on your race or religion.'

http://eng.babelmed.net/cultura-e-s...-for-the-algerian-presidential-elections.html

Indeed you wrong ,Algerian constitution allowed to female to be president .

Leader of a far leftwing party, Louisa Hanoune, is a well known political figure and has been for fifteen years already, but this year Louisa Hanoune has created a precedent. Her candidacy in the presidential elections, to be held on the 8th April, has recently been recognized by the constitutional council, making her the first woman in Algerian history to officially set her sight’s on the position of president of the Republic.

This event is not only a first in Algeria but in the entire Arab world. Only six candidates were recognized by the constitutional council. Many candidates presented in the press as ‘political tenors’ were refused access to the presidential election campaigns, while other ‘tenors’ preferred to throw in the towel. It’s in this context that we can justly appreciate the achievement of this woman.

It's a fair point, but it's a different point. Democratic process means (unfortunately) the unwashed masses have a large control over politics, and popularism runs rampant.
Case in point, no affirmed atheist had been Prime Minister of Australia until very recently, and her atheism certainly cost her votes. Also, no woman had been Prime Minister of Australia until recently. In both cases, these factors made it more difficult to become elected. However, time does move on, and attitudes do to. However, the very FIRST thing that needs to happen in order to move this process forwards is that the constitution of the country needs to allow for the election.

Then, most often, there will be a period of time when nothing happens. A trailblazer or two will push forwards, and quite possible fail, but without the constitutional ability to push for election, this can NEVER happen.

So no...Australia hasn't had a Muslim Prime Minister. We do have a senior, elected government minister who is a Muslim, if that's of any interest.
(Ed Husic) He swore his oath on the Quran, as he is entitled to. Can one swear on a Bible in Algeria? Can one swear without a religious document?

We also haven't had an openly gay Prime Minister, although there have been several senior government officials who were gay. There also have been plenty of indigenous Australian politicians, but none who were made Prime Minister.

For comparitive purposes, consider the following list of who can and cannot become members of parliament in Australia...there is no separate rule for the Prime Minister, as he is simply the senior member of the elected party.

Who is eligible;


Source : http://www.aec.gov.au/elections/candidates/files/nomination-guide-candidates.pdf

And so, of course, the disqualification clause becomes important. Clearly otherwise, you only need to be an 18 year old citizen. Male, female, Christian, atheist, Muslim, or pagan...

So, the following is s.44 (as mentioned above);


Source : http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Constitution

There is NOTHING in our laws preventing women, gays, Muslims, atheists or anyone else from sitting in parliament. Furthermore, women, gays, Muslims and atheists have all been elected to our parliament, and served on the front bench of a government. Unlike a presedential system, the party elected has a leader, and that is the Prime Minister. The people themselves don't elect in a Prime Minister.

Hopefully you read through that. It's an important point and difference. Our (Australian) laws are not discriminatory, as per the evidence I have listed. Algerian law is.
However I am not going to pretend that Australians are not discriminatory. There are bigots on every country on earth. If Australian law included systemic bigotry, however, I would feel compelled to do what I could to change that (little as it may be).

There are some very minor allowances for bigotry within our workplace laws, in my opinion, and I have signed petitions to voice my opinion on this to the government. It's not a lot, I know, but I feel strongly that the laws of the land MUST be free of discrimination if we can ever hope for the people to also be.

I hope you can reflect on this.




Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean.
I am fine with a Muslim being a leader of Australia, as long as they are a secularist. The constitution is fine with a Muslim being leader of Australia whether they are a secularist or not. I would readily admit that being a Muslim makes it more difficult to get elected, but Ed Husic is an example of a Muslim who not only was elected to government, but received a front bench position (ie. senior government minister).

Further, people like Waleed Aly appear on one of our most popular news and current affairs shows. This helps provide a human face to Islam, and he is both intelligent and articulate, which further helps people who may not commonly be in direct contact with Muslims to see the variances amongst them, just as exist with ALL groups.

Watch the following and see what you think...

For elect the president in Algeria . who made the law is honest enough , and wise because that's would take the country in politic problems or religious problem (which may lead to civil war) if a non-Muslim take a control of country 98% Muslims .

anyway
It's seem you missed the point of my thread , It's about treating differently (minority/majority) on punishement law .
when a citizen commit a crime the government punish him depend his religion/race. that's Israel what happened in Israel .

oppression the minority by demolish their homes, build homes for majority ( total opposite treatement) in Israel .

Very good video .

I like the wisdom and justice of some Westerns about Muslims

I sincerely apologize for the wall of text, but I think you are honestly trying to explore these issues, and so I wanted to provide some information to you.

No problem , I like to listen to others (different) opinions , please tell me more about your thoughts

 

[Godobeyer]

There are already several people that are posting Algerian laws that discriminate against different races and religions. I don't need to add to it. Lewisnotmiller posted the Constitution of Algeria showing the discriminatory laws, but you are ignoring it.

I notice that you continue to ignore the discrimination present in laws in every Muslim majority country.

as I told to Lewis "It's seem you missed the point of my thread , It's about treating differently (minority/majority) on punishement law .when a citizen commit a crime the government punish him depend his religion/race. that's Israel what happened in Israel ."

 

[Godobeyer]

That was a very high-quality post lewisnotmiller. Bravo.

@Godobeyer, I hope you read it thoroughly and understand. If anything is unclear, please ask for clarification. We can get SG or DS in if needed

Thank I understood him very well


but if you follow a bit what I am trying to say in my thread, it's not about rights of election (gender or other religions) , it's about punishement of minority differently to majority , and oppression the minority (demolish homes) .

Do you get it my thread's point ?

 

[Kirran]

Thank I understood him very well


but if you follow a bit what I am trying to say in my thread, it's not about rights of election (gender or other religions) , it's about punishement of minority differently to majority , and oppression the minority (demolish homes) .

Do you get it my thread's point ?

Yes. I do. But no country is perfect. Least of all any in the Middle East, sadly.

 

[LuisDantas]

For elect the president in Algeria . who made the law is honest enough , and wise because that's would take the country in politic problems or religious problem (which may lead to civil war) if a non-Muslim take a control of country 98% Muslims .

In that case, why would it be wrong or unwise to bar Muslims from Western politics?

 

[Godobeyer]

In that case, why would it be wrong or unwise to bar Muslims from Western politics?

I am not talking about all degree of politics , I am talking about top leader (President) .

that's may would make intern problem when majority (Westerns) discover that their president is a Muslim .

I just imagine that , if majority (religion) accept to be leading by minority (religion leader) , that's would be very rare in human history or impossible .

 

[lewisnotmiller]

In that case, why would it be wrong or unwise to bar Muslims from Western politics?

I guess this wasn't aimed at me (!), but in case it's unclear, I would be totally against any race, religion, gender or sexuality restriction in qualification for office in my country, and would fight (as in debate/protest) against it.
I do find myself wishing there was some sort of beefed up protection constitutionally over any rollback of secular structures, but that could be better catered for than I am understanding based on my quick research.

 

[LuisDantas]

I am not talking about all degree of politics , I am talking about top leader (President) .

that's may would make intern problem when majority (Westerns) discover that their president is a Muslim .

I just imagine that , if majority (religion) accept to be leading by minority (religion leader) , that's would be very rare in human history or impossible .

That is a mistake, Godobeyer. And because it is such a frequent mistake, people have good reason to be wary of Islam.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I am not talking about all degree of politics , I am talking about top leader (President) .

that's may would make intern problem when majority (Westerns) discover that their president is a Muslim .

I just imagine that , if majority (religion) accept to be leading by minority (religion leader) , that's would be very rare in human history or impossible .

No. Only if the government and/or society were organised on religious lines.
It would be no big deal for a non-Christian to lead Australia, and indeed it's already happened, although we're a majority Christian country (still).

To be clear, though, we have a Prime Minister, not a President, which is a small difference practically, but important organisationally.

 

[Godobeyer]

That is a mistake, Godobeyer. And because it is such a frequent mistake, people have good reason to be wary of Islam.

Do you think that could majority accept to be leading by minority (religion leader) ?
when the percentage reach 90% to 99% ?

 

[Godobeyer]

No. Only if the government and/or society were organised on religious lines.

This is how Algeria , and most of Muslim countries

It would be no big deal for a non-Christian to lead Australia, and indeed it's already happened, although we're a majority Christian country (still).

To be clear, though, we have a Prime Minister, not a President, which is a small difference practically, but important organisationally

btw Is that happened before ?

Do you think that most of Australians accept to be leaded by non-Christian ?

I think yes for athiest but others religions like Islam or Judiasm or Hinduism ...etc , I don't think it's easy to be real.

 

[LuisDantas]

Do you think that could majority accept to be leading by minority (religion leader) ?

I expect that, yes. And I would reject attempts at "protecting" people from that "risk".

when the percentage reach 90% to 99% ?

Religion is not supposed to matter nearly that much, particularly when the leader is elected or otherwise representative.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think yes for athiest but others religions like Islam or Judiasm or Hinduism ...etc , I don't think it's easy to be real.

Judaism deals with that all the time. So do we Atheists. So do most non-Muslim communities really.

 

[Godobeyer]

Judaism deals with that all the time. So do we Atheists. So do most non-Muslim communities really.

This is interesting , is that happened that Jew be a leader of Christian country ?

How about China and India , and South America ?

 

[Godobeyer]

I expect that, yes. And I would reject attempts at "protecting" people from that "risk".


Religion is not supposed to matter nearly that much, particularly when the leader is elected or otherwise representative.

I think we are on disagreement on this matter

 

[LuisDantas]

This is interesting , is that happened that Jew be a leader of Christian country ?

How about China and India , and South America ?

I do not expect the religion of a president or prime minister to be a significant attribute of his person. If it is, then we are in trouble.

Instead, I would expect his ideas and goals to matter far more.

So sure, why not a Jewish President or PM in any of those places? Or a Hindu or Sikh?

I'm actually more worried about certain Protestant Christians... and Muslims. Even Bahai. Most anyone who sees their God-beliefs as being a Big Thing, really.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think we are on disagreement on this matter

Unfortunately, that does seem to be the case indeed.

It is really a shame. And it underscores why I must always be wary of Muslim politics.

 

[dgirl1986]

I live in a western country where indigenous australians are on the recieving end of a LOT of institutional racism and racism from the general public. It is disgusting and horrifying.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

http://eng.babelmed.net/cultura-e-s...-for-the-algerian-presidential-elections.html

Indeed you wrong ,Algerian constitution allowed to female to be president .

It's interesting to me. I can't find evidence of a constitutional change, in fact. The Constitution, as at 2008, expressly doesn't allow for a non-Muslim, or for a woman, or for someone under 40.
I understand what you are saying about the constitutional council allowing for Louisa Hanoune to run, but is there something I am missing here? Is there a constitutional amendment? I honestly can't find one. It appears as if Louisa is being allowed to run despite it being contrary to the constitution, which is a whole other can of worms.

Source : http://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/alg72556.pdf
Refer Article 73.

Those constitutional amendments (2008) removed the limitation of a two term Presidency, which was...well...timely, let's say, for the President. And now the Constitutional Council has approved a candidate who appears quite simply unconstitutional on AT LEAST gender grounds, and quite possible religious grounds, given her left-leaning background.

So, whilst I applaud a woman, maybe even an atheist running, it's unconstitutional, which is worrisome. To say the least. What is the role of the Constitutional Council, one might ask?

For elect the president in Algeria . who made the law is honest enough , and wise because that's would take the country in politic problems or religious problem (which may lead to civil war) if a non-Muslim take a control of country 98% Muslims .

It's honest enough, and I understand religion and government are inter-connected in a way we don't really do things here. But regardless of cause, and regardless of whether it is morally correct to do so, the constitution clearly doesn't treat Algerian citizens equally based on gender and religion. neither do some other laws, but the Constitution is obviously the most fundamental document to look at.

anyway
It's seem you missed the point of my thread , It's about treating differently (minority/majority) on punishement law .
when a citizen commit a crime the government punish him depend his religion/race. that's Israel what happened in Israel .

I understand the OP. Honestly, I do. And I don't know enough about the specifics to have a strong opinion, since most of the information we get here is difficult to assess from a bias standpoint. That's not a knock on any particular group in the ME, I just find it hard to sort propoganda from fact at this distance.

I guess what I was trying to convey is that an awareness of self is important in all these cases. People (worldwide) seem quick to cast stones.
There is obviously no issue with you having an opinion on Israel's law and processes, regardless of Algeria's. I am not trying to directly compare the two. But in the OP, you made the following statement :
"Imagine that you were living in a country that treated you differently depending on your race or religion."

It struck me as hyperbolic. This wasn't you pointing out a specific instance of something you had problem with, but literally inviting the readers (ie. including me) to imagine living in a country that treated me differently depending on race/religion. So I did as you asked. I started with Algeria, since it is how my brain works. To put it simply, if an American said something like 'Imagine living in a country that restricted your freedom' I would immediately being looking at how freedoms are restricted in America. If an Israeli said 'Imagine living in a country where the press is biased' then I would immediately begin researching Israeli press freedom.

It's not that I'm trying to be a smart-arse, I just place a high level of value on self-awareness and reflection, and hope I can encourage others to at least look at their own situations AS WELL as others.

oppression the minority by demolish their homes, build homes for majority ( total opposite treatement) in Israel .

Tell you what, I'll try and put some time into researching this as well. No promises I'll have a strong opinion, but I'll look into it.

Very good video .

I like the wisdom and justice of some Westerns about Muslims

I find him a very impressive speaker.
I'm not sure if you remember, but there was a story about a Muslim woman who donated money to charity every time someone slandered her for her religion on social media (this was around the time of the Paris attacks). That was his wife. So, an impressive couple.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/australia-...-unicef-every-hate-tweet-she-receives-1528895

No problem , I like to listen to others (different) opinions , please tell me more about your thoughts

Cheers. I like listening to yours too, even if our opinions differ. It makes me think, which is why I am here.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Still despite that, you obviously didn't click on the link I linked in my previous post. If you did, you would have read that Israeli Jewish citizens who were suspected on terrorist charges against Muslims are also complaining about being tortured by the Israeli government. So your complain is baseless.

I tried to read the link you gave, but it wanted me to subscribe, so I only got the heading and a couple of photos.