From: amehdi@src.honeywell.com (Hossien Amehdi)
Subject: Re: Minority Religions in Iran (was executed baha'i)
Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 21:25:03 GMT

In article <MIB.92Apr16163455@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:
>In article <1992Apr16.190922.8114@cco.caltech.edu> bes@cco.caltech.edu (Behnam Sadeghi) writes:
>
>   I asked for examples of religious discrimination against Jews, not
>   against Muslims!  Jews are represented porportionate with their
>   population (in fact, they are probably over-represented). If it
>   wasn't for the fact that they are guaranteed a seat, they would
>   have been very unlikely to gain any representation.  Look at
>   Britain: There are two million Muslim citizens in that country with
>   no representation in the government.  Look at the U.S., there are
>   about four million Muslims in this country with no representation
>   in the Congress.

>
>This is nuts, and exposes the problem with proportional
>representation.  ...
>
What is the alternative? What do you propose? I think if the 
representation of religious minorities are not guaranteed in
Iran, most probably they will not have any representation in 
the House! This is because of their small population percentage
with respect with the Muslims. So in theory this law has been
adopted to protect the right of religious minorities! For example,
only about 1% of Iranians are Jews!


>My representative isn't gay, and yet, I have a
>representative in Congress.  ...

I am lost, What are saying here? Are you saying you are gay
but your representative in Congress is not gay but still
represents you! If that is what you are saying, so what!

>My representative doesn't have brown hair,
>and yet, I have a representative in Congress. ...

Are you saying that you have brown hair but your Congress rep.
doesn't! If so, what does this have to do with the discussion here?

>My senator isn't Protestant, and yet, I have a representative
> Senator in Congress.

Same here!! What are you trying to say!
>
>If those four million Muslims vote, then they have an effect, and they
>are heard.  To claim that a religious group is *entitiled* to
>proportional representation makes no more sense than to claim that
>blue-eyed people are entitled to proportional representation.
>
First of all not all those 4 million people could vote, for one
thing they are not all adults and reached voting age! And to the
best of my knowledge the participation of American Muslims in
voting is small, mainly because there is hardly a Muslim running
for a seat in the house or the senate and if there are any I have
not heard of their names!

Your blue-eyed proportional representation idea in this country would
probably work againt the blue-eyed people because even though the
majority of people might be blue-eyed but they are over-represented in
both the house and the senate. you see this kind of law might work
let say in country x, where blue-eyed people are in minority and there
is chance that they would be denied representation if there are no laws
preventing it!




>	-mib
>--
>Michael Innis Bushnell    | I give you a new commandment, that you 
>Email: mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu | love one another.  Just as I have loved 
>Phone (H) +1 617 625 4518 | you, you also should love one another. By
>Phone (W) +1 617 253 8568 | this everyone will know that you are my
>			  | disciples, if you have love for one another.


with regards