September 6, 2005
Playing with Haddad
I'm kind of secretly glad the U.S. is playing with Iran's speaker of Parliament. The whole new Irnaian parliament is a fiasco and does not represent the Iranian people and should not be embraced by the international community.
However the ethical questions remain: Is the U.S. in a position to decide which delegate is representative of its people and which not? Whoever to decide about this should treat all countries equally. Then many Arab and African countries should be banned too.
What a morally complex world!
Posted by hoder at September 6, 2005 5:09 PMComments
If Iran were a secular liberal democratic state you would have tons of jobs and decent wages. The concern, as I see it (as a liberal secular American) is control by a religious elite unwilling to give up power to an unknown future. What is more important, religious slavery, or intellectual freedom? If Islam is a strong religion (along with Judaism and Christianity), then it should be more than capable of absorbing change through history.
- By: Kevin on September 12, 2005
- By: Kevin on September 12, 2005
---------
The Iranian Parliament may be a fiasco, but at least it provides you with a job; where would you be right now if Iran was secular liberal democratic state?
- By: anon on September 7, 2005
- By: anon on September 7, 2005
---------
I am officially glad of the game they play with Haddad!
- By: Marala on September 6, 2005
- By: Marala on September 6, 2005
---------
Post a comment
Note:
* Required
The following HTML tags are allowed in your comments: <a> <b> <i>. To make line and paragraph breaks, press return (don't use <br> or <p>).
The bold, italics, and link buttons (and associated shortcut keys) only work in IE 5+ on the PC.