Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: boracaybill@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 23 Jun 2006 19:33:12 -0700
Rose Melinis wrote:
But there are limitations:<details snipped>
The point made by blue tubi, though, and for which I provided cites,
was that filipino muslims in ARMM are exempted from some RP laws,
statutes, and codes which would apply outside of ARMM (in particular -
generally germain to this thread - provisions of the Philippine Family
Code relating to Marriage) in favor of alternative muslim tribal and
religious laws. The limitations which you mention would insure that
the alternative muslim tribal and religious laws are not applied to
non-muslims, which nobody was arguing that they would be.
Or am I missing something here?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: Pauleen Luna
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: Rose Melinis
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- References:
- Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: boracaybill
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: Rose Melinis
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: boracaybill
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: blue tutubi
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: boracaybill
- Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- From: Rose Melinis
- Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- Prev by Date: Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- Next by Date: Re: Advantage of the Vote of No Confidence in the Parliamentary System
- Previous by thread: Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- Next by thread: Re: Manila Standard Op-Ed: The Right to Faith
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|