Although it's not the lead story in the New York Times, nor is it the lead in the story, it's now clear that the Bush administration, through its Ambassador in Iraq, has brokered a deal to allow Islam as the state religion in Iraq, and as " 'a primary source of legislation' in the new Iraqi constitution, with the proviso that no legislation be permitted that conflicted with the 'universal principles' of the religion. The latter phrase raised concerns that Iraqi judges would have wide latitude to strike down laws now on the books, as well as future legislation."
The NY Times also reports that Ambassador Khalilzad "backed language that would have given clerics sole authority in settling marriage and family disputes." This would, of course, cancel out current Iraqi laws that give women far greater rights now, at least on the face of it.
Does it surprise anyone that this American administration which prays for and works toward fundamentalist religious law in the United States, would not also support fundamentalist religious law in Iraq? Despite the fact that one is Christian and the other Islamic makes little difference in the social, cultural and economic effect.