peer review

User Generated

Znk417

Humanities

Description

- Review the papers as I demonstrated in class: provide comments in the margins, a brief note at the end, and then complete the Peer-Review Worksheet

-write a note on paper highly it 2-3 comment each paper.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Al-Khaldi1 Mansoor Al-Khaldi Pearson Bolt ENC1102 17 September 17 Can Secularism save Middle East? In ancient times empires fall just because they relied on religions in the matter of politics. Before Nation-State system, religion was the bonding force in most of the areas. But, we aren’t living in ancient era. This is 21st century and there are no empires left in any part of the world. Nation-State system was established in 17th century and this system separates political institutions from religious institutions and enable them to make their own decisions away from the shadow of religions. Although this seems like a wise step but this act creates a new issue for the world. Asia, South America, North America, Australia, Africa, and Europe mostly adopted democracy. Political and religious institutions are separated but there is one region in which a confusion prevails and that is Middle East. Middle Eastern states are mostly the followers of Islam and it is the region where various conflicts are going on. Arab Spring was the time when almost every state was in chaotic state. Some states are disturbed by external factors and some can’t seem to handle internal problems. Some of those internal and external factors claim that the problems of Middle East can only be solved through secularism. The root of Middle Eastern problems is the old monarchy system where one ruler has the power and religion has authority over all other institutions. Over this issue, there is a division formed. There are governments like Kingdom of Saudi Arabia who totally supports the idea of Middle East without secularism. Their stake is the preservation of customs and their own rule. Then there are voices like non-Muslim Arabs, democratic political parties, and modernist Muslim thinkers who oppose the idea of inseparability of politics from religion. These two stakeholders have their own goals, but they both hold goodwill for the people of Middle East. Their ways are different, ideas are different but goals are common. It seems that due to clash of ideas both stakeholders will not come together in near future until there’s a workable solution to the issues of Middle East. Secularism can save Middle East or not? It is the basic question. Many parts of Middle East are war torn e.g. Syria. To resolve this issue in Middle East a political change is must. Like some democratic Al-Khaldi1 monarchies, powers must remain with first stakeholders i.e. government but with some amend, institutions must be separated. There are several examples of such states. In England, their customs are alive but there is democracy. A similar structure can resolve Middle Eastern problems. People will get what they want and rulers will stay in power with some amendments. That’s how both stakeholders will get what they want. The matter of religion is always a sensitive issue for Middle East. For example, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is an Islamic state but world criticize them for their strict policies. This isn’t an easy task to take rulers of these Islamic countries and revolutionary parties at one platform. That’s why first we have to understand what are the goals and beliefs of both stakeholders and what will be the circumstances that lead them to a common ground to resolve the debate on the issue of secularism in Middle East. Additionally, Muslim people can never be separated from the spirit of Islam that’s why if the common ground suggest a secular way for Middle East, it must not violate the basic rules and regulations of Islam otherwise the common people will never except such secularism in Middle East (Wu 17). John L. Esposito, modernization and development theory had for decades maintained unequivocally that “the development of modern states and societies required Westernization and secularization. Religion would then become restricted to private life. And if some spoke of the privatization of religion, others predicted the marginalization and ultimate disappearance of traditional belief.”. (19). This is what happening in Saudi Arabia. Saudi rulers are ruling in their country from 1932 (Fawcett, 2005). Almost a century is about to past, they have the ultimate power. Power is the first stake that these rulers have. Even if it is monarchy, presidency or any other system. Middle Eastern countries seem to follow their leaders without any questions. Sharia law is implemented in whole Saudi Arabia. Women aren’t allowed to drive cars. Prisoner’s punishment is different from the rest of the world. Rulers have their own will. On the other hand, these rulers have a rivalry with Iran, another Islamic state whose sect is different from the sect of Saudi Arabia. The purpose is simple, rulers want people to follow them blindly and people are doing the same. Middle Eastern states are in a fixed condition of a long time and they simply don’t want change (Hamid, 2011). Arab monarchies were long thought to be more favorable to democratization than republics. Monarchs who enjoyed popular legitimacy and political security are on balance more Al-Khaldi1 willing to take risks, the argument went, gradually letting go of power and embarking on potentially destabilizing reforms. Since kings do not depend on elections to maintain power, they have less to fear from holding them (Wu, 22). In short, the goal of these Middle Eastern governments is to hold their offices and maintain the already existing system in Middle East. Opposite to these governments, there are parties with more democratic agendas, parties who want to separate political institutions from religion. During the protests of Arab Spring, protestors from different parties and groups demand more freedom and they protested for secularism. In the results, Egypt and Tunisia, both led by unpopular presidents, were the first to go. The other likely candidates for revolutions Libya, Yemen, and possibly Algeria are all republics. But there is a difference between removing presidents and removing monarchs. Muhammad ʿAbduh, a prominent Muslim modernist thinker, claimed in his book “Al-Idtihad fi Al-Nasraniyya wa Al-Islam” that no one had exclusive religious authority in the Islamic world. He argued that the Caliph did not represent religious authority, because he was not infallible nor was the Caliph the person whom the revelation was given to; therefore, according to Abduh, the Caliph and other Muslims are equal. ʿAbduh argued that the Caliph should have the respect of the umma but not rule it; the unity of the umma is a moral unity which does not prevent its division into national state (Abduh, 1993). The argument of Muhammad Abduh was based on the ideas of Islam. Modernist thinkers thought secular Islam as the base of a developed Muslim society. That’s why their goal was to change conventional system with a secular system. According to the scholar, Eliezer Tauber: He was of the opinion that according to Islam 'the rule over the nation is in its own hands and its government is a sort of a republic. The caliph has no superiority in law over the lowest of the congregation; he only executes the religious law and the will of the nation.' And he added: 'For the Muslims, the caliph is not infallible and not the source of revelation.' And therefore, 'the nation has the right to depose the imam-caliph, if it finds a reason for doing so (Tauber, n.d.). Now that the goals and ambitions of both governments in Middle East and modernist thinkers are clear. Let’s get towards a workable solution that can resolve the debate on the issue of either secularism is good or not for Middle East. Most powerful example is of Turkey. Turkey is a living example for other Middle Eastern states. Mustafa Kamal Pasha introduced a system Al-Khaldi1 where Muslims are living under the rules and regulations of their religion but their political institutions are separated from religion (Challenges to Secular Movements in the Middle East, n.d.). People have more freedom and opinion. A society like Turkey must be the role model for Middle Eastern states who always fight with each other on small affairs. Only problem that exist is the will of rulers to save their rules in case of a changing system. The solution to this problem is the democratic monarchy like Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, and Bahrain. These monarchies are constitutional monarchies. Some of these states save themselves by adopting constitution after Arab Spring protests in their states. These two examples have proven to be workable, so the middle way for Middle East by which both stakeholders will be satisfied is the adoption of a system that will be the amalgamation of Turk and constitutional monarchy systems. That’s how people of Middle East will get their rights in proper sense. Al-Khaldi1 Work Cited Abduh, Muhammad. al-Idtihad fi al-Nasraniyya wa al-Islam. In al-A'mal al-Kamila li al-Imam Muhammad ʿAbduh. edited by Muhammad ʿAmara. 1993. Cairo: Dar al-Shuruk. Print. Challenges to Secular Movements in the Middle East: A Comparison of Islamic and Secular Actors in Turkey and Tunisia. IDRC. n,d. Web. 8 September, 2017. https://www.idrc.ca/en/project/challenges-secular-movements-middle-east-comparisonislamic-and-secular-actors-turkey-and. Fawcett, L. International Relations in the Middle East. 2007. Oxford University Press. p 123. Print. Hamid, Shadi. Why Middle East Monarchies Might Hold On. The Atlantic. 8 March 2011. Web. 8 September 9, 2017. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/03/whymiddle-east-monarchies-might-hold-on/72170/. Tauber, Eliezer. Three Approaches, One Idea: Religion and State in the Thought of 'Abd alRahman al-Kawakibi, Najib 'Azuri and Rashid Rida. In British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies Vol.21. 2010. Print. Wu, Bingbing. Secularism and Secularization in the Arab World. n.p, n.d. PDF. PEER-REVIEW WORKSHEET: Reviewed By: Instructions: Read through your peer’s essay, making notes in the margins, highlighting, circling, etc. Then answer the questions below in 2-3 sentences. Introduction: What is the writer’s thesis? How does the writer prepare the reader for the essay? After reading the introduction, what do you expect this essay to be about? Body Paragraphs: What do you think of the paper’s overall organization? Do the paragraphs make sense where they are? Should anything be rearranged? What’s the strongest paragraph? Why does it work so well? Which paragraph needs the most work? What advice/insight can you provide to help? Conclusion: Does the conclusion just repeat the same info as the intro? If so, how can the writer adjust the conclusion to look ahead instead of reflecting on what’s already been written? Why was this essay worth reading? What did the writer teach you that you didn’t already know? Closing Remarks: What was the best part of this essay? What should the writer make sure to pay attention to as he/she revises this draft? Alexis 1 Shawenda Alexis Professor Bolt ENC 1102 7 September 2017 Abortion: Pro-Life vs. Pro-Choice To commence with, a question may be what exactly is abortion. Any individual may have their different perception of what abortion means. According to Meriam-Webster, it states abortion “is the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: such as a spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation, compare miscarriage or induced expulsion of a human fetus.” (Meriam-Webster, 1828) Across the United States, the issue of abortion is a concerning problem in our society. As reported by Health Care for Women International “Abortion is one of the most common surgical procedures performed on women in the United States, with at least three in 10 women experiencing at least one abortion by age 45. Nearly half of all pregnancies are unintended, and about four in 10 of these are terminated by abortion. Twenty-two percent of all pregnancies end in abortion.” (Medoff, 2016) Abortion even influenced the U.S election process between the democrats and the republicans. Individuals protest, movements and rallies about abortion. There are two sides in this debate, pro-life and pro-choice. These two sides contradict each other immensely. As stated in an article on Collins “Someone who is pro-life thinks that women do not have a right to choose whether to continue their pregnancy and give birth to a child and that abortion is wrong in most or all circumstances.” (Collins, 2017) As for pro-choice, according to an article on Feminist Women’s Health Center it states “To be pro-choice is to support self-determination to make decisions free Alexis 2 from judgment. Pro-Choice is the responsibility to yourself and the freedom to decide to take control of your own life process. Pro-Choice is not just about reproduction but the freedom to decide your life course with the support and respect of others. It represents power and pride in self.” (FWHC, 2002) Both pro-choice and pro-life individuals have surfaced decisions about having a common ground about the topic of abortion. Furthermore, pro-choice, and pro-life women and induvial have different perspectives and views about abortion. There are different organizations and groups that pronounce each of their perspectives publicly. As for the pro-choice side, they had a movement of organization and activisms in the abortion conflict. According to a book reference from Staggaenborg, it referred to the emergence which legalized abortions in the states. “In the 1960s a movement led by family planning activists and feminists emerged to challenge state anti-abortion laws, resulting in the landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion throughout the U.S. Using interviews with the past and present activists and historical records of movement organizations, this book traces the development of the "pro-choice" movement from its origins through the 1980s” (Staggenborg, 2000) More on individuals who believe abortion should be a choice for women. There may be women who experience rape or incest that may not want to keep their child. As stated in an article on Heroic Media there are numerous reasons such as “Reason number one: Too Young or Immature. Not ready for responsibility (32% of total). Reason number two: Economic (30% of total) Reason number three: To avoid adjusting life (16% of total). Reason number four: poor relationship with the father (12% of total). Reason number five: Enough Children already (8% of total) So those five reasons accounted for 98%. The remaining 2% of the reasons included rape, incest, physical health of a mother, and fetal health.” (Heroic Media, 2015) An organization for the pro-choice side would be NARAL Pro-Choice America, which they believe Alexis 3 in “Each day, we organize and mobilize to protect that freedom by fighting for access to abortion care, birth control paid parental leave and protections from pregnancy discrimination. We believe abortion must remain legal and accessible. We are the foot soldiers who work to ensure that abortion access is not only protected but expanded for every American.” ( Naral, 2017) I believe that choosing to keep or abort the unborn child, is an immense and important decision that should be taken wisely. To continue, to the perspective of the pro-life individuals, they believe that abortion is murder and is like taking away an innocent human life. Also, abortion could lead to medical complications for pregnancy later in their adulthood life. My mother’s best friend since childhood had a couple abortions throughout her life. As she entered her adulthood and middle life, she regrets all those abortions because now she can’t have children anymore. The abortion created a complication in her can give birth to children. There is a reason why some people believe that every child should have the right to live. According to TFP Student Action, it states the reasons why they support the pro-life side of abortion: "Abortion Offends God, Procedure abortion is never a mere personal choice but a grave offense against God and His creation. Life starts conception, living beings come into existence all at once and gradually unfold their world of innate potential. Mankind must protect innocent life,” Pregnancy termination" stops the beating heart of an innocent human being and is in direct contradiction to this most basic premise of human nature. Lastly, abortion is unsafe, the abortion industry is largely unregulated; LifeDynamics.com compiled a list of 249 women killed by legal abortions.” (TFP, 2009) From these two perspectives, I believe it’s a matter of a person’s opinion on what they particularly believe in. There are some pro-life movements that go as strict as leading women to legal actions to a person who completes abortion. As stated in an article about the United States pro-life movement “Pro-life supporters believe that any Alexis 4 endangerment to the unborn fetus should be a criminal offense. They believe that abortion, which many deem to be a fetal homicide, is a criminal act and that prosecuting abortion providers is an opportunity to protect unborn children and their mothers. Opponents of fetal homicide laws argue that such legislation is contrary to individual freedoms as they could lead to more infringement on women’s rights and access to health care. In some countries with strict abortion laws, women have been arrested and investigated after having an unintended miscarriage. If US pro-life initiatives are successful, abortion providers could face prison time for performing the procedure and mothers who are deemed to have endangered their fetus could also face criminal penalties.” (Daniels, 2016) An organization that also supports the pro-life movement side would be National Right to Life organization, their goal is “Working to restore legal protection to the most defenseless members of our society who are threatened by abortion, infanticide, assisted suicide and euthanasia. The mission of National Right to Life is to protect and defend the most fundamental right of humankind, the right to life of every innocent human being from the beginning of life to natural death” (Nrlc, 1968) Assuredly human life is precious and valuable, individuals should be accounted for a life. Concludingly, certainly both stakeholders oppose each other and seems to be at odds. The reason why is one is anti-abortion and the other is pro-abortion, or pro-life and pro-choice. There’s been a rise of concern if both pro-life and pro-choice abortion will ever come to a compromise. This may come to a surprise, but pro-life and pro-choice individuals do agree on certain things. For example, favor paid leave, favor sick leave, and favor $15 minimum wage. There have been rallies and discussions for these two opposing stakeholders to reach a compromise. As I’m thinking about the stakeholders, I believe there is one thing that they also have in common. They both have in the type of way care for the child’s well-being. For example, for the pro-choice women, she Alexis 5 may want to abort her child because she doesn’t want that child to enter a world of poverty depending on her financial stability. As for the pro-life women, she may want to give birth to the child but not keep it, and put the child up for adoption so they can be with a more well-suited family. Both stakeholders, I believe need to reach a specific compromise to achieve their purpose. In other words, both sides will be happy with the agreement. These discussions could be held at state meeting specifically about abortion. Also, another way could be for each side discussing their views in a peaceful manner, maybe through protest to achieve their purpose. Reaching a compromise for both pro-choice and pro-life individual is difficult since both their opinions are equally valuable in their point of views. The first compromise could be for the new generation and present should refuse to take part of the abortion wars and listen to both views on both sides of the topic. There are certain things that need to be in place for the compromise to be accomplished. For example, individuals shouldn’t have a short-sighted mindset view. Being open to listening to other individual’s views, like the pro-choice and pro-life women. The second compromise I believe would work, is to let each side do as they please. Meaning if one person wants to keep their child they can. If the other wants to abort their child that’s their choice. At the end of the day, I believe each person has a conscience and will certainly do the right thing if they desire to. Alexis 6 Works Citied “Abortion.” Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster, www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/abortion. Accessed 11 Sept. 2017. Attebery, Brett . “The Top 5 Reasons Why Women Choose to Abort Their Babies.” Heroic Media, 23 Feb. 2017, heroicmedia.org/the-top-5-reasons-why-women-choose-to-abort-theirbabies/. Accessed 11 Sept. 2017. Daniels, Nila, MPH. "United States Pro-Life Movement." Salem Press Encyclopedia, January. EBSCOhost. “Definition of 'pro-Life'.” Pro-Life definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary, www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/pro-life. Accessed 11 Sept. 2017. Medoff, Marshall. "Pro-Choice Versus Pro-Life: The Relationship between State Abortion Policy and Child Well-Being in the United States." Health Care for Women International, vol. 37, no. 2, Feb. 2016, pp. 158-169. Staggenborg, Suzanne. Pro-Choice Movement : Organization and Activism in the Abortion Conflict. Cary :Oxford University Press, 2000., 2000. EBSCOhost, ezproxy.lib.usf.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login. What does Pro-Choice mean to you?, 4 Oct. 2002, www.fwhc.org/take-action/pro-choice.htm. Accessed 11 Sept. 2017. “10 Reasons Why Abortion is Evil & Not a Pro-Choice.” TFP Student Action, 15 May 2009, www.tfpstudentaction.org/blog/10-reasons-why-abortion-is-evil-not-a-pro-choice. Accessed 11 Sept. 2017.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

PEER-REVIEW WORKSHEET:
For: Mansoor Al-Khaldi – Can Secularism Save Middle East
Reviewed By:
Instructions:
Read through your peer’s essay, making notes in the margins, highlighting, circling, etc. Then
answer the questions below in 2-3 sentences.
Introduction:
What is the writer’s thesis?

The writer’s thesis is that “internal and external factors claim that the problems of Middle East
can only be solved through secularism”. However, the writer points out that there are divisions
on the issue.
How does the writer prepare the reader for the essay?

The write...


Anonymous
Really great stuff, couldn't ask for more.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags