Fandom

VroniPlag Wiki

Maa/015

< Maa

31.377Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Seite hinzufügen
Diskussion0 Teilen

Störung durch Adblocker erkannt!


Wikia ist eine gebührenfreie Seite, die sich durch Werbung finanziert. Benutzer, die Adblocker einsetzen, haben eine modifizierte Ansicht der Seite.

Wikia ist nicht verfügbar, wenn du weitere Modifikationen in dem Adblocker-Programm gemacht hast. Wenn du sie entfernst, dann wird die Seite ohne Probleme geladen.

History and prospect of Islamic criminal law with respect to the human rights

von Mohamed Al Awabdeh

vorherige Seite | zur Übersichtsseite | folgende Seite
Statistik und Sichtungsnachweis dieser Seite findet sich am Artikelende
[1.] Maa/Fragment 015 01 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-16 13:28:54 WiseWoman
Feldman 2003, Fragment, Gesichtet, Maa, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 15, Zeilen: 1-24, 27-31
Quelle: Feldman 2003
Seite(n): 1 (Internetquelle), Zeilen: -
[Modern Western democracy grew up among pious Christians, many of them staunch Calvinists who emphasized man’s sinful and fallen nature, and] themselves grappled with the relationship between democracy and divine sovereignty.

Most Americans today probably believe that God, not man, is the measure of all things. It is doubtful whether the majority of Indians place humans at the centre of the universe, yet democracy thrives in India. The idea of the rule of the people has been flexible enough to place either the people or God or nature as supreme power of a society. On any of these views, the people still govern themselves within the area delineated by their capacities and right Islam has demonstrated a comparable degree of flexibility in its essence. The acknowledgement that God is sovereign turns out to mean different things to different people. It has encompassed the idea of free will for some people, while others have thought that a sovereign God must leave nothing to chance or choice. Rationalist Muslim philosophers thought that God was sovereign in the sense that he was the First Mover.

If the essences of Islam and democracy can be compatible, what about the practical institutional arrangements required by each? In particular, Islam, on most views, requires that the state does not exist in an entirely separate sphere from religion. But can a state that embraces religion be democratic? Britain has no separation of church and state. The Queen is Defender of the faith and head of the Church of England. Anglican bishops sit in the House of Lords, and anyone who wants to change the Book of Common Prayer must go through Parliament to do it. Yet Britain is the cradle of modern democracy.

To take another Western European example, in the German state of Bavaria, schools’ classrooms display a crucifix. [...] Nevertheless, no one seems to think that this makes modern Germany into something other than a democracy.

On the other hand, some people object vociferously to the suggestion that it might be possible to have democracy - especially liberal democracy - without a strict separation of Church and State. They argue that to be just to everyone, [democracy cannot impose one vision of the good life.]

Modern Western democracy grew up among pious Christians, many of them staunch Calvinists who emphasized man’s sinful and fallen nature, and themselves grappled with the relationship between democracy and divine sovereignty. Most Americans today probably believe that God, not man, is the measure of all things. It is doubtful whether the majority of Indians place humans at the center of the universe, yet democracy thrives in India. The idea of the rule of the people has been flexible enough to mean that the people or God or nature or nothing is sovereign. On any of these views, the people still govern themselves within the area delineated by their capacities and rights.

Islam has demonstrated a comparable degree of flexibility in its essence. Acknowledging that God is sovereign turns out to mean different things to different people. It has encompassed the idea of free will for some people, while others have thought that a sovereign God must leave nothing to chance or choice. Rationalist Muslim philosophers thought that God was sovereign in the sense that he was the First Mover. [...]

If the essences of Islam and democracy can be compatible, what about the practical institutional arrangements required by each? In particular, Islam, on most views, requires that the state not exist in an entirely separate sphere from religion. Can a state that embraces religion be democratic? Britain has no separation of church and state. The Queen is Defender of the Faith and head of the Church of England. Anglican bishops sit in the House of Lords, and anyone who wants to change the Book of Common Prayer must go through Parliament to do it. Yet Britain is the cradle of modern democracy. To take another Western European example, in the German state of Bavaria, the schools are Catholic religious ones, and every classroom boasts a crucifix. No one seems to think that this makes modern Germany into something other than a democracy.

On the other hand, some people object vociferously to the suggestion that it might be possible to have democracy – especially liberal democracy – without separation of church and state. They argue that to be just to everyone, democracy cannot impose one vision of the good life.

Anmerkungen

Kein Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan), WiseWoman


vorherige Seite | zur Übersichtsseite | folgende Seite
Letzte Bearbeitung dieser Seite: durch Benutzer:WiseWoman, Zeitstempel: 20130916133026

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki