Respect for religious customs has limits
21 June 2006 by Stardust
Here is another issue that I ran across while reading Yahoo’s opinion column that concerns giving religious folks an inch and them taking a mile.
Should we put a limit on religious customs?
Whole article from USA Today – 6/13/2006
Muslim women in the USA have been asking the public to accommodate their religious beliefs about modesty, a trend that some Muslims worry will provoke a backlash.
In some recent examples:
• In Lincoln Park, Mich., Fitness USA relented when Muslim women demanded that the gym wall off a co-ed aerobic center from their women-only section because men could see them working out.
• In Bridgeview, Ill., a Muslim school says it wants its girls’ basketball team to play road games against non-Muslim schools provided the public schools ban men and teenage boys from the game.
• In North Seattle, Wash., a public pool set up a swim time for Muslim women in which men, even male lifeguards, are banned.
Seems like we now we are not only going to have legal battles with fundie xians, but now are up against fundie Muslims, as well.
In all of the examples, businesses and public facilities were asked to accommodate followers of one interpretation of Islamic law that says the sexes must be separate if women are not covered with headscarves and modest clothing.
“You’re not going to make your American, Christian and Jewish friends to feel comfortable … which in the end could create a dislike for Muslims that is unnatural.”
But other Muslims see the trend as an issue of civil rights.
Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of Muslim Public Affairs Council, says the right to petition for special accommodation based on religious beliefs is protected by the First Amendment.
But in these cases, as I see it, this is forcing people to cater to their religious beliefs which violates the rights of others.
“Whether a woman wants to cover her hair or not is her personal choice,” he says. “As long as it’s not imposed on the rest of society then I don’t see any problem.”
Walid Phares, a professor of Middle East studies at Florida Atlantic University, sees it as an early sign in the USA of a global Islamic movement to pressure Western society into abiding by Islamic laws.
“These demands exist because there is an ideology of a militant movement to slowly but surely demand more,” Phares says. “They will be building on it.”
But Ebrahim Moosa, professor of Islamic studies at Duke University, says the requests are attempts to integrate with U.S. culture. They show “that America can become their home,” he says.
What do you here at GifS think about this?
21 June 2006, on 6:07 pm
Disgusting, absolutely disgusting. That last comment belies a complete misunderstanding of the concept ‘melting pot’. Apparently the Islamic idea of a melting pot is to make all other cultures ‘melt’ into their own, not the other way around.
21 June 2006, on 6:18 pm
Disgusting? Absolutely. However, it\’s very typical. As much as I despise fundie xians, muslims scare the living fuck out of me.
Hey, maybe we\’ll get lucky and they\’ll wipe each other out a\’la apocapyto!
21 June 2006, on 7:03 pm
Ok so tell me why they left their homes of origin? Oh yeah they were at war with their brothers. Or they came to the US to do what?
I never have understood why people come to the US only to bring the culture that forced them out in the first place. Or they come to the US for freedom. Then they establish the rules of culture that denies freedom and expect us in the US to abide by their rules.??? WTF
A private business is not required to accomodate these people. The anti discrimination laws say only for hiring and allowing people to join etc. But no mention of special religious accomodations. So the fitness club did it as a business decision. I think it is segregation. Maybe someone should inform them that we have done away with that as oficial policy because of how utterly WRONG it is. Why encourage them?
21 June 2006, on 7:30 pm
If you want to swim in a coed, public pool, wear the damned burqa or go home. If you can’t play your sport in front of any and everyone, stop playing. Don’t join a coed gym if you’re so all fired up about modesty. There are all female gyms all the fuck over. If you want a driver’s license, you’ll have to take off the headscarf so we can see what you look like, white muslim lady in Florida.
But, Raindogzilla, you say, how can we deprive good jeebus-fearing men and les-bi-ladies the opportunity to ogle some well-turned ankle and nose? Pick up your god card at your local goddery and run along to the asylum where you belong. Leave the here and now for those of us “here” and “now”, go in that round room, the Rapture will be in the corner.
Not to sound like one of those Little Green Fascists, but perhaps this is the actual “jihad”. All the carnage, the explosions, and the beheadings, mere distractions, meant to make us so appreciative of the “moderate”, peaceful muslims in our midst that we pay them no mind. It’s not entirely outside the realm of reality to say that they’ve already got France and Germany by the short and curlies and they’re- see above- making inroads here. Political correctness, tolerance, could they be our downfall? However, taking a step back from the Michael Savage bully pulpit, an overview of their leadership, their mismanagement of obscene oil monies, the schisms within the faith itself-wahhabi vs. shi’ia vs. sunni, leads one to the conclusion that they are not capable of such a “cunning plan” (hat tip to Baldrick). I’ve completely lost track of what my point was…
21 June 2006, on 8:30 pm
Give them an inch and they will take a mile. Europe made that mistake and look where it got them. Uber-tolerance (and guilt for their colonial past) had them sitting back and letting radical mosques preach violence in their midst. England is now struggling with this issue big time, since the London bombers were “regular English lads” radicalized not by going off to Afghanistan, but by going to a local radical mosque.
I absolutely agree with Stardust: respect for religious customs has limits. When you come into a free society, expecting all the benefits of its tolerance (I know, there are plenty of intolerant places in America, but it ain’t Saudi Arabia by a longshot), and then you want it to comform to your intolerant ways… No. I’m sorry. That’s not how the social contract works. They should receive a resounding “fuck you.” You’re welcome to stay and be a good, contributing member of society, but we’re not gonna institute your fucking sharia law here.
21 June 2006, on 8:46 pm
Oh yeah and one more thing. If they want to live by sharia law or thier vengence laws they can stay in the mid east. We won’t be buying any here.
21 June 2006, on 8:51 pm
I would like to offer my humble opinion on this article.
“Businesses and public facilities were asked to accommodate followers of one interpretation of Islamic law”
I think that businesses and public facilities should do that on one occasion: that those who want accommodations demonstrate that current arrangements obstruct or significantly hinder their life. What I mean is when we look at other groups of people such as those in wheelchairs, public properties have been fitted with wheelchair accessible ramps because lack of them obstructed the person in the wheelchair to access a building or something else. Unless they make wheelchairs that fly, there is no way to get over stairs or other obstacles by the person in the wheelchair themselves. Same is with people who are blind of deaf, the accommodations for them include closed-captioning and Braille on some ATM machines and probably other devices as well. There are likely to be other disabilities/accommodations but I won’t mention them.
In both cases, the inability to walk, see, or hear of those affected by disability could be scientifically tested and corroborated by independent witnesses. They are simply unable to overcome those problems by themselves, so the accommodations must be made. Now, what is the “practical” reason for accommodating those disabilities? Their religion says that it is forbidden to mix men and women? If they can scientifically prove that god exists or statistically link religion with reality, I will gladly jump over the chasm that separates religion and reality and join them on the other side to demand accommodations. If they can prove that their inability to play or swim with male individuals is a physical or mental disability and not just a side-effect from a delusion, then I will gladly support them in their cause. Otherwise, if we start granting special accommodations to superstitions and delusions, then we all be working on that for the rest of our human existence, since there is an immeasurable number of superstitions and delusions, as well as new ones emerging every day.
One such example is when my coworker said that I will be attacked by a giant rat in the middle of the night because I told her that I was an atheist. Does this mean that I should demand accommodations also such as for government to provide me with a supply of giant brooms and giant rat traps to protect myself?
21 June 2006, on 9:39 pm
I agree. This kind of thing needs to be stopped in its tracks. Just this evening when I was walking to my car near the train station in Hicksville, Long Island, I noticed a car passing me by and something about the appearance of the driver looked odd to me. Then I realized it was a Muslim women who was so completely veiled that there was only a slit for her eyes. A young lady standing next to me on the curb waiting to cross the street noticed her to and said “that looks dangerous to me” meaning that the Muslim women’s peripheral vision must be compromised by the veil.
21 June 2006, on 9:56 pm
Raindog says:
If you can’t play your sport in front of any and everyone, stop playing. Don’t join a coed gym if you’re so all fired up about modesty.
Plus, what, the brothers and fathers of the girls on the opposing teams aren’t allowed to come to the freakin’ games? If you want to play a team sport — um, duh — you’re gonna need other teams to play.
21 June 2006, on 10:17 pm
Jimmer said:
I think it is segregation. Maybe someone should inform them that we have done away with that as official policy because of how utterly WRONG it is. Why encourage them?
Ramen, Jimmer.
21 June 2006, on 10:18 pm
Plus, what, the brothers and fathers of the girls on the opposing teams aren’t allowed to come to the freakin’ games? If you want to play a team sport — um, duh — you’re gonna need other teams to play.
Catholic and other xian schools play each other in sports all the time and it\’s kept pretty free of religion except to put up with a \”word of prayer to gawd\” when the xian schools are hosting. If fundies, muslim or otherwise, are that \”anal\” about interacting with the outside world, they should just have their own little cult leagues or don\’t play at all. I remember how long it took for people to accept co-ed anything and that is how it is here and I don\’t think we should start going backwards. It\’s bad enough we are struggling against abortion rights still.
21 June 2006, on 10:23 pm
The problem is there are too many policy makers out there just looking for a chance to suck up to any cause that makes them look like the “good guys” regardless of the consequences to the rest of society. Is there a single politician with any semblance of a backbone willing to stand up to this? I doubt it. There’re all dickless.
21 June 2006, on 10:24 pm
Tommy said:
A young lady standing next to me on the curb waiting to cross the street noticed her to and said “that looks dangerous to me” meaning that the Muslim women’s peripheral vision must be compromised by the veil.
Do Muslim women do any of the banking in their families? Because she couldn’t walk into a bank like that.
Here is an incident in France dealing with that exact issue and they called it discrimination (scroll down a bit). And the bank even said the guards were “over-zealous”:
The French bank Société Générale has admitted to turning away a Muslim woman from its branch in Paris on Monday, December 22 2003, after she refused their demands to take off her hijab. Further more the bank has refused to apologise, saying that the "over-zealous" security guards were following orders to deter robbers.
At least they didn’t apologize. But what the fuck is “over-zealous” about detering people from wearing masks into a bank?? Would you feel comfortable standing on a bank line with people wearing masks?
21 June 2006, on 10:32 pm
It really is simple. This is what religion does to some (a lot of) people. It makes them insane!
Religion makes followers so warped, so frightened, so subject to the dictates of others that they willingly give up this beautiful REAL world.
They do not see the real world as beautiful. They see only its warts and not its beautiful and wondrous real pleasures and joys. They cannot conceive that we have EVERY right to responsibly enjoy these earthy joys and to responsibly make more. THEY LIVE HERE ONLY TO GET TO THE NEXT LIFE.
Worse yet the insanity drives them to deny the REAL world to others, and even worse to act to make this world a sort of hell on earth (dangerous, stifled, etc.) for all those that suffer their infestation in their mist.
And EVERY religion that fosters such insanity (some religions are less prone to be problematic) denigrates women. It makes them scared second class citizens. It makes them slaves of some sort. Many women cannot escape compiling because they are physically trapped to begin with. But many — free in the west – readily become insane and subjugated because they think it saves them from having to deal with a world they have been brainwashed to believe is evil.
Bottom line: The INMATES MUST NOT RUN THE ASYLUM!!! WE CANNOT LET THEM!!!
21 June 2006, on 10:33 pm
This seems like mostly a non-issue to me. Some of the comments here are surprisingly heated.
Where is the “taking of the mile”? All i see in the examples is asking for inches. They’re not demanding that everyone adopt their customs. They just want to be able to maintain theirs. Yet there are exaggerations about muslims trying to get sharia instituted into US law, and insinuation that foreigners must be assimilated into the dominant culture or else they can stay out. Why this hysterical reaction?
21 June 2006, on 10:40 pm
Mentat — read much about what’s been going on in Europe with these fundies who just want “an inch” at first?
21 June 2006, on 10:40 pm
Where is the “taking of the mile”? All i see in the examples is asking for inches. They’re not demanding that everyone adopt their customs.
The problem I have, for one, is that they are demanding that we participate and accomodate their religion by going against even a simple freedom of going to see kids play a sports game. It’s not like we are going into their churches and saying “hey, you can’t do that.” Why all this work to keep separation of church and state if you are only going to apply it to the xians?
21 June 2006, on 10:47 pm
Mentat, the mile taking has thus far been confined to France and Germany but the slope here seems slippery. And, keep in mind that we are every bit as adamantly opposed to Xians trying to take a mile as well. The Deist founders of this country separated church and state for a reason. They’re all welcome to practice whatever personal insanity they favor in the privacy of their place of worship or their home- hell, I don’t even mind them wearing a crucifix or a burqa in public so long as they take the latter off for identification purposes. Despite their arguments to the contrary, one’s religion is a choice and not something innate- so as to legislate against it’s discrimination. Here’s something no one wants to see here.
21 June 2006, on 10:49 pm
Mentat
Because it is INSANE to live in the year 500 when you are in the modern 21st cenury… because this country is based on the PRESENT and the FUTURE and not prone to hold on to the past (that’s what makes the western world great — Europe thrived when it finally let go of some of its past and traditions) — Because we worked hard to tear down stupid stifling barriers and hang ups.. And because if you want to live in the year 500 form your own club, buy your own piece of land, etc. .. it is a free country … just don’t contaminate our FREE space … because again – it religous like “those” hold an INSANE perspective and insanity left to have its ways is DANGEROUS to freedom — NO need to argue over degree – a spade is a spade!!!
21 June 2006, on 10:53 pm
They’re not demanding that everyone adopt their customs. They just want to be able to maintain theirs.
I worked with a young African-American woman at my last job who served with the Air Force in Saudi Arabia for nearly a year and she said she could not go off base unless she wore Hijab for her own safety. She said it was very hot and uncomfortable to wear, and she never left the base very often. Seems they want their way in their homeland, and in ours, too.
I am not saying that these people should not have the right to practice their beliefs, but they are going to far by including us in those practices. (Unless we choose to enter one of their mosques.)
21 June 2006, on 11:48 pm
The problem here isn’t that we won’t give them an inch, no. Too much tolerance is a bad thing. They have a right to practice their beliefs, not one to be treated specially because they hold them. That’s the issue here. They’re not taking the mile, we’re giving it to them inch by inch.
22 June 2006, on 12:29 am
“Where is the “taking of the mile”? ”
“• In Lincoln Park, Mich., Fitness USA relented when Muslim women demanded that the gym wall off a co-ed aerobic center from their women-only section because men could see them working out.
• In Bridgeview, Ill., a Muslim school says it wants its girls’ basketball team to play road games against non-Muslim schools provided the public schools ban men and teenage boys from the game.
• In North Seattle, Wash., a public pool set up a swim time for Muslim women in which men, even male lifeguards, are banned.”
What fucking part of this is asking for inches? Asking to BAN men from games and pools to accomodate their religious bullshit?
Let me tell you how this works. Government, should be blind to religion. People can believe the craziest shit they want, it’s irrelevent to government (or should be anyway). If it affects others’ rights, it gets the smack down, just like anything else that supresses others’ rights.
Does this mean gov’t allows people to discriminate against religious people? Not if the religious people aren’t harming anyone. Gov’t should view an attack on religious people who are doing no harm as anybody else who is doing no harm. Therefore, religion remains INVISIBLE.
22 June 2006, on 12:37 am
I live in a secular society and a secular nation. My thoughts on this are that being in a secular nation people can practise whichever religion they choose as long as it does not conflict with secular law.
Should religions be able to petition governments to make exemptions for them so society is more in accordance with their religious beliefs?
I think not. And I think this should apply to ALL religions which exist in a secular nation.
A secular nation says you can practice your beliefs if they do not conflict with secular law, it does not say, we will make exemptions for you so your beliefs can fit more comfortably in a secular society.
22 June 2006, on 1:21 am
“• In Lincoln Park, Mich., Fitness USA relented when Muslim women demanded that the gym wall off a co-ed aerobic center from their women-only section because men could see them working out.
• In Bridgeview, Ill., a Muslim school says it wants its girls’ basketball team to play road games against non-Muslim schools provided the public schools ban men and teenage boys from the game.
• In North Seattle, Wash., a public pool set up a swim time for Muslim women in which men, even male lifeguards, are banned.”
What fucking part of this is asking for inches? Asking to BAN men from games and pools to accomodate their religious bullshit?
Ramen, Ford. Thanks for stating the obvious. They demanded that a gym wall off a co-ed aerobic center! They fucking got them to build a wall. Hello?? Come into my society and start demanding that walls be built after we have spent the last few centuries tearing them down? Can I get a resounding “FUCK YOU?”
And it’s not just about government. Clearly, as in the case of this gym, they must be threatening boycotts in order to change private organizations.
I would have told them to go spit. They can work out at home. What do they care what their bodies look like, anyway? Nobody can see them except their sexist husbands.
22 June 2006, on 1:29 am
On a completely unrelated note: I miss Rockstar Ryan. Would love to hear what he has to say about all this shite. And Marcus (who at least still comes around a bit — thanks for the fun new Metamorphosis, dude).
22 June 2006, on 1:34 am
BTW, this posting on the Yahoo page is unintentionally hilarious in its first sentence:
I think our American culture could be blessed if it gave more attention to modesty.
Ha!
“Man, check out the babe. She’s almost unnoticeable, dude.”
Also, the question is not “Should we put a limit on religious customs?”, it’s “Should we allow people to dictate how we live based on their religion?”
22 June 2006, on 1:51 am
Sean: I haven’t yet been made aware of the goings-on in Europe. Can you provide some specifics? I know only of France’s ban on burqas (or hijab–do the terms mean the same thing?), which is entirely in the opposite direction.
Stardust: You are right, i must amend my comment. The public school example, unlike the others, that is definitely “asking for a mile”. However i can’t say they’ve really “taken” anything as yet. Surely the public school has simply refused to accede. Did the muslim school attempt some legal action, or even some kind of protest? If so they should be admonished, opposed in some fashion.
Raindogzilla: I’m uncomfortable with slippery-slope arguments, as they are too often fallacious. For example, one could argue that hate speech should be banned, on the grounds that if we give the racists this inch, pretty soon they’ll be taking the mile of getting discrimination passed into law, and from there, we’ll be back to lynchings again. It seems that your picture of the statue of liberty wearing a burqa is just such an exaggeration.
ConcernedJoe: I agree it is insane, but i don’t think that we need to go insane about how muslims are trying to take over and drag us back to the dark ages. I may be wrong but that sentiment appears to be the reason behind France’s action in this regard, which really does seem like persecution.
Ford: I’m conceding that my generalization has understated the effrontery of the second example, involving the public school. Will you concede that you overstate the effrontery of the other examples? The first one involves an apparently private business adapting to the desires of its customers. The third one indicates nothing about banning males from pools–only the allocation of some exclusive time for muslim women. If that time is proprtional to the number of muslim women in the community, then is it really a case of them demanding too much? If it isn’t too much, should we deny them it anyway, for fear that later on, they may demand other things which are too much?
22 June 2006, on 2:26 am
I’m with Mentat – none of the examples is a big deal: in each case the businesses and schools get a choice whether to treat some customers or parts of the community differently to others. If a gym wants to extend its clientele by catering to Muslim needs, why shouldn’t they? It’s no different to putting a TV on the wall because some folks like to watch it. The school can decide if they want to play basketball under such circumstances – the girls will probably have a different experience without the men around for once. My local swimming pool is not always open to the public, because schools want to use it – what difference does it make whether it’s Muslim women or school children?
Of course, these Muslim demands are very hard to relate to – not wanting to reveal hair or skin is to me indicative of a deeply disturbed state of mind. But hello, everyone, our world is crazy, it’s filled with religious people who genuinely believe bizarre things – they are entirely on the wrong track, yet somehow we’ve got to try to get along with them. If these Muslims go to the gym, play basketball and swim – I reckon we’ve got a much better chance of doing just that.
22 June 2006, on 2:45 am
Ian, the private school can play however it wants, but if it asks a public school to accomodate their ass-backwards way of thinking, then they’re infringing on other’s rights. I do however agree that the businesses can take any stance they want. Like the private schools, they are private entities who can conduct their business how they choose. Just don’t ask for public accomodations.
22 June 2006, on 2:52 am
Sexist behavior is not a custom which should ever be respected. We aren’t going to segregate blacks and whites because a few churches in the country want that either.
22 June 2006, on 2:59 am
King Retard, I think the public schools should be able to choose whether or not to play them under those conditions. If they refuse, fine. But I think it should agree – what harm is done by playing matches without men or boys present? – and the good it does of bringing people from different parts of society together is obvious. The argument about rights is a hard one to make, because rights are always competing – the real problem is to decide which should take precedence. This is not a case of needing to limit religious custom to protect society – it is a case of respecting religious custom so that society can keep functioning.
22 June 2006, on 3:37 am
If i may pose a little thought experiment regarding sexual segregation: In the case of the swimming pool, i’m pretty sure that there are separate changing rooms for males and females. Strictly speaking is this not an example of sexual segregation? Yet it is so entrenched in our culture, that we think of course it must be this way. Strange men and women do not undress in front of each other. But imagine if modern US culture was as free as ancient Greek culture, and we had no separate changing rooms for men and women. Suppose then some immigrants come and say that they want separate changing rooms.
Is this situation analagous to what we have now, or is the analogy invalid? Dicuss.
22 June 2006, on 3:56 am
“I think the public schools should be able to choose whether or not to play them under those conditions.”
My tax dollars? Fuck you.
You know what I’m gonna do? I’m gonna start a religion. This religion will mandate that everybody with 20/20 vision wears a purple helicopter beanie. Then, I’ll fight to have certain public places require that anybody with 20/20 vision either wear a stupid purple fucking beanie, or get lost. Society needs to function right?
“The first one involves an apparently private business adapting to the desires of its customers.”
Yeah, I included that only because I happened to highlight it before copying and pasting. Yeah, private places can do blah blah blah, I typed this out in detail and with sincerity the first time but I’m just retyping it because my fucking computer fucked up and I lost an entire comment that took ten minutes to type so fuck it.
“The third one indicates nothing about banning males from pools–only the allocation of some exclusive time for muslim women. ”
I don’t have any idea how public pools work. Are they gov’t public or private owner letting anybody come in?
Bottom line is this. An inequality in rights is an inequality in rights. It doesn’t matter how “small” this infringment is, it’s still a fucking infringment, just like with the whole “In God We Trust” fiasco. Size of the infringment is IRRELEVENT. If it’s an infringment on rights, then it is a problem that sohuld be prevented and/or corrected.
Fuck I wish I hadn’t lost my last comment, it had so much more fire and was better typed, if there weren’t sleeping people in this house right now I would put my fist through the fucking monitor. Losing a comment and having to retype it is like falling on your ass during a choreographed dramatic entrance and trying to go back and redo it. Fuck, what asshole decided to put forward and back browser buttons on the sides of a goddamn mouse? And what asshole makes a browser that doesn’t preserve the current information when pressing the back button?
22 June 2006, on 4:00 am
“Strange men and women do not undress in front of each other. But imagine if modern US culture was as free as ancient Greek culture, and we had no separate changing rooms for men and women.”
You’ve stumbled on a lovely idea my friend.
22 June 2006, on 4:05 am
Mentat: Being from India, I would think you would have less patience with radical Islam. There are a ton of pieces about what has happened in urban settings such as Amsterdam and London over the past few years. Where long-standing tolerance is being put to the test by an influx of intolerant fundie Muslims. I mentioned the London bombings as an example of how intolerance breeds in the middle of a progressive society.
There are tons of things to link to, and I promise I shall at least by the week end. I have a big deadline looming Friday.
And I have to say to both you and Ian… I’m still with Ford.
Ford: I’m conceding that my generalization has understated the effrontery of the second example, involving the public school. Will you concede that you overstate the effrontery of the other examples? The first one involves an apparently private business adapting to the desires of its customers.
Economic blackmail by prejudiced radicals to force a business to create segregation, something we had to legislate against to end the Jim Crow South. Businesses in the Jim Crow South were, no doubt, responding to their communities’ demands and economic blackmail for decades. That’s why it took government to make it illegal. I do not want to go back to those days.
The third one indicates nothing about banning males from pools–only the allocation of some exclusive time for muslim women. If that time is proprtional to the number of muslim women in the community, then is it really a case of them demanding too much? If it isn’t too much, should we deny them it anyway, for fear that later on, they may demand other things which are too much?
It is too much. If I am a lifeguard at that pool (I swim at a community pool and am very aware of how the lifeguard shifts work), and I am told that I have to lose hours and pay because I am a man and those hours are allocated for Muslim women and other females only, I have been descriminated against based on gender and nothing more. I am not asking to walk into the female locker room. I am asking to be able to do my job as a lifeguard. And these people say I should be denied those work hours because I am a man??
22 June 2006, on 4:11 am
Ford said:
Fuck, what asshole decided to put forward and back browser buttons on the sides of a goddamn mouse? And what asshole makes a browser that doesn’t preserve the current information when pressing the back button?
Hey, dude. You’re a mod, remember? You can submit your comment and then go back into the mod area and edit it to your heart’s content. Feel the power again, Ford!
22 June 2006, on 4:24 am
Yeah, but I just don’t feel the same passion going back to put words that have run cold into my comment. Just don’t feel the same fire man. It feels like when you’re watching a porno and then it suddenly switches from the chick to the dude’s face but you can’t stop fappin’ ’cause you’ve reached the point of no return.
22 June 2006, on 6:04 am
Mentat and others thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Mentat says: “ConcernedJoe: I agree it is insane, but i don’t think that we need to go insane about how muslims are trying to take over and drag us back to the dark ages. I may be wrong but that sentiment appears to be the reason behind France’s action in this regard, which really does seem like persecution.”
While Mentat did not mean any offense I am sure and none taken I will comment. Being passionate about rational and sane concerns is not the same as “insanity” or “to go insane”.
I believe the drive in any FREE society must be to make itself more FREE, less constrainted, more equal in opportunity, more rational, and less “traditional.” That is how all progress has been made… that is how peace prospers. So while I would generally defend passionately the right for a religous woman to wear a burka (as totally insane that I think that symbol of repression is) in public settings.. and a private institution can have a “burka only” section if they choose for economic or other reasons .. I would OPPOSE such vigorously if that INSANITY some how made the rest of us second class citizens or in some way made our society less progressive.
Let me try to recast this in a different example: a pharmacist working in a private drugstore has every right to object to some legal drug on religious grounds. BUT NO way can that pharmacist have the right to select what drugs they dispense to me on their religious grounds. Pray for me; work the political system; QUIT the business – but you in the pharmacy as a pharmacist (even in a private store) have NO right to impose your religion on me. Why? because a drugstore (the pharmacy) has a PUBLIC service nature to it, regardless of “ownership.” Same applies to a “haircutter” (cannot refuse a “black”), etc. etc. Private health clubs can do as they please for the most part, BUT if they have a PUBLIC nature to them (say the “Y” that gets community funds) or they are a monopoly that have services tied up .. well they HAVE to be secular in their dealings. Else society will be run by the insane people. Dangerous stuff.
22 June 2006, on 6:15 am
I guess there just aren’t enough Muslim majority countries in the world.
22 June 2006, on 8:14 am
My only (vain?) hope is that the christocratpublicans realize that they have a way to stop this muslim idiocy – and it’s actually sticking to that ‘wall of separation’ thingee. Of course, in doing so, they’d have to own up to their own excesses – so will they cut off their own noses to spite other people’s faces?
22 June 2006, on 8:50 am
Stuff such as this has been going on for years here in Europe. I am really interested in how the americans are going to solve this.
Has it already gone so far that muslims refuse to shake the hands of women including secretaries of state?
22 June 2006, on 9:03 am
In the 60s and earlier there were separate drinking fountains for blacks and whites. A simple thing, but racist no less. There were separate toilets, separate swimming times, and you all know our history of segregation. These muslims are wanting to segregate non-muslims from public places in order to accomodate THEM in the land of the FREE because of their religious superstitions. This would never be tolerated by us if it happened to be xians.
I find it interesting how we fight against xians to maintain our freedoms that have been fought for so long, but make excuses and get soft on defending those freedoms when it comes to muslims. We will repeatedly asshat a xian, but many of us are reluctant to do it to a muslim. Is it because of the war?
There is no need to \”hate\” muslims, but we need to give their beliefs the same scrutiny that we give xians. You don\’t see Amish or Mennonite groups going to public places and demanding the outside world accomodate them. They do not go to public places that offend them, or they just plain ol\’ stay in their own superstitious world.
22 June 2006, on 9:23 am
From how I see it, this is not merely about “respecting” their beliefs, they think ALL should follow these rules that allah has set down for the whole world. This is the same thing that xians believe about their gawd. We could say the ten commandments is just a “little thing”? We can let the xians have it displayed in public places and the rest of us just ignore them. Or is that a quick prayer in the morning to accomodate the xians is a little thing, too? We can just close our ears out of respect to them. But these little things lead to other things…once a religion wins the “little things” it just snowballs. That’s how religions who wish to convert people operate. Muslims believe we all need to convert to islam the same way xians believe we all need to be “saved.”
22 June 2006, on 9:37 am
Mentat Says:
Sean: I haven’t yet been made aware of the goings-on in Europe. Can you provide some specifics? I know only of France’s ban on burqas (or hijab–do the terms mean the same thing?), which is entirely in the opposite direction.
Yeah, a number of these are conservative publications, like Foreign Affairs, but on this issue I am not afraid to admit some affinity with American conservatives. Now if we can just convince them that blind allegiance to everything the Right does in Israel, regardless of the atrocities involved, is not a-okay — plus open a discussion of the fact that Xian fundies here in America want the same things as these radical Islamists.
The Moor’s Last Laugh
Radical Islam finds a haven in Europe.
Wall Street Journal
Europe’s Angry Muslims
Robert S. Leiken
From Foreign Affairs, July/August 2005
Going Dutch?: Multiculturalism and Islam in Europe
Theo van Gogh
Van Gogh was a member of the Dutch republican society Republikeins Genootschap which advocates the abolition of the Dutch monarchy, and a friend and supporter of the controversial Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn who was assassinated in 2002. He was also a staunch supporter of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, although he revised his stance to a more neutral one in 2004.
Pim Fortuyn
One of Fortuyn’s fears was of pervasive intolerance in the Muslim community. In a televised debate in 2002, “Fortuyn baited the Muslim cleric by flaunting his homosexuality. Finally the imam exploded, denouncing Fortuyn in strongly anti-homosexual terms. Fortuyn calmly turned to the camera and, addressing viewers directly, told them that this is the kind of Trojan horse of intolerance the Dutch are inviting into their society in the name of multiculturalism[3]“.
When asked by the Dutch newspaper Volkskrant whether he hated Islam, he replied: “I don’t hate Islam. I consider it a backward culture. I have travelled much in the world. And wherever Islam rules, it’s just terrible. All the hypocrisy. It’s a bit like those old Reformed Protestants. The Reformed lie all the time. And why is that? Because they have norms and values that are so high that you can’t humanly maintain them. You also see that in that Muslim culture. Then look at the Netherlands. In what country could an electoral leader of such a large movement as mine be openly homosexual? How wonderful that that’s possible. That’s something that one can be proud of. And I’d like to keep it that way, thank you very much.” [4]
Europe vs. Radical Islam
Europeans should have started a discussion about how to integrate [Bullshit. How to stop bending to their every demand in a free society. The did integrate. England is still struggling with its colonial guilt an PCism too much to admit the sources of their problem. How more integrated do you want to get?] their Muslim minorities a generation ago, before the winds of radical Islamism had started to blow. The cartoon controversy, while beginning with a commendable European desire to assert basic liberal values, may constitute a Rubicon that will be very hard to re-cross. We should be alarmed at the scope of the problem, but prudent in responding to it, since escalating cultural conflict throughout the Continent will bring us closer to a showdown between Islamists and secularists that will increasingly look like a clash of civilizations.
While Europe Slept : How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within
A civil war on terrorism
Mr Wilders quotes Dutch academics who estimate that around 10-15% of the Dutch population of 1m Muslims sympathise with jihadist ideology.
Defending Germany’s Constitution
Almost all extremist Arab organizations currently active in the Middle East and North Africa have branches or at least individual members in Europe.
None of this is alarmist. It’s just what is happening. While we sit around and bite our nails trying to be all PC about this — that is not on the radical Islamists’ agenda. They give no thought to being sensitive or tip-toeing around our culture. They are walking right in the door and demanding that we bend to their will, and the West is accommodating them. This will be our downfall.
I have a gay co-worker who is one of the few people I can have real discussions about this with. Other Lefties freak out at the mere suggestion of minorities trying to impose criminally intolerant values on us. He says: “Fuck that. The Xian Right is bad enough. These fuckin’ people want me dead.”
22 June 2006, on 12:50 pm
Sean, i find that you are pulling me away from my original view and towards yours. You noted my Indian origin, which has given me pause to think: i have complained before of how hindu immigrants have attempted to bring the caste system with them. Thus i should likewise find muslim importation of their backward notions just as odious, and indeed i do.
Then, why did i have an initial reluctance to stand firm on that position? I don’t know. It could be, as Stardust suggests, a sympathy engendered by the war. Possibly it could be my sensitivity to immigration issues, particularly given the recent brouhaha about Mexicans. Probably mostly it’s my aversion the argument that tolerance will inevitably lead to the proliferation of “radicalism”, and the unstated corollary: to avoid radicalism we must become intolerant.
The jump from the examples given to the conclusion that these muslims are out to impose sharia law upon everyone, as if in some kind of conspiracy, struck me as bogus, and akin to a Red Scare. This is the incipient “insanity” that i remarked upon to ConcernedJoe. True, fanatical muslims living in places like Iran do want to impose Islam on the world. But are the fanatical ones likely to want to live in the US (or Canada)? I thought not.
I don’t know yet what to make of the articles you’ve provided. I will need to investigate further.
22 June 2006, on 12:50 pm
If Muslim women want their own segregated workout sections at the gym, then let some Muslim-American entrpreneur open up a chain of exercise clubs for Muslim women. That is what the free market is supposed to be best at.
22 June 2006, on 1:29 pm
“The jump from the examples given to the conclusion that these muslims are out to impose sharia law upon everyone, as if in some kind of conspiracy, struck me as bogus, and akin to a Red Scare. This is the incipient “insanity” that i remarked upon to ConcernedJoe. True, fanatical muslims living in places like Iran do want to impose Islam on the world. But are the fanatical ones likely to want to live in the US (or Canada)? I thought not.”
While that seems, on the surface, to be a good point, we all know that zealots will go anywhere, no matter the danger or threat of persecution to spread their religion. xtian missionaries still go to all sorts of backwater countries to prosetylize (sp?) why should we expect different from islam?
22 June 2006, on 1:59 pm
But are the fanatical ones likely to want to live in the US (or Canada)?
17 fanatical muslims were arrested after a foiled terrorist plot in Canada very recently. Yes, some do want to come here with no intention of joining the “melting pot”. Canadian police foiled a homegrown terrorist attack
22 June 2006, on 2:23 pm
we all know that zealots will go anywhere, no matter the danger or threat of persecution to spread their religion.
And here in the USA they are free to spread their religion, practice it and demand special consideration out of “respect” for their religion because they know we are “tolerant”.
My friend lives in Chicago Ridge (what used to be a very beautiful community not too far from Bridgeview where a muslim headquarters and mosque is) and across the street from her are condos filled with muslim families. They get away with breaking ordinance after ordinance because when the police try to enforce the ordinances, they cry “discrimination”. They have sofas on the front lawns, upholstered livingroom furniture on their outdoor patios, junk cars at the curbs, several families in one apartment, and so on. Other residents have been fined or evicted for such things. My friend has had damage to her house and property and sometimes they block her driveway and refuse to move their cars. She has tried asking nicely to please move their car so she can get out and they ignore her (and they are sitting IN the car!). If I hadn’t seen it with my own eyes several times, I would think she is just being prejudice. But she is not. (She is actually afraid of them.) Not all muslims are ignorant like this, but this shows that some muslims who choose to live here obviously do not like Americans. They aren’t even trying to get along with their white neighbors. So, then if they do not like us, or our way of life…what other reason do muslims who don’t like us have for coming here?
22 June 2006, on 3:02 pm
Sean, I don’t find my original view changing. There is no doubt that radical/fanatical Islam is incompatible with democracy, just as fundamental Xianity is; it is not possible to tolerate or respect those who don’t respect us. But our societies must be multicultural to some extent – that is the reality – we have to put up with some differences, and compromise on our own values and preferences to coexist with other cultures. Us atheists do this all the time for Xians of the less extreme variety.
So how different can we allow other cultures to be from the dominant culture? This is a matter of choice and will change from place to place, from culture to culture. Different cultures have different amounts of flexibility. (For instance, the age of consent in Spain is 13 – this is fine there, but is not going to work in the US.) Of course, Muslim women will not go to the gym, swim, or play basketball if we don’t bend a little – they are not flexible on this point. Yet they are not (yet) trying to change the culture, only trying to find a space for themselves within it. The Xians have already won many such battles, and we put up with it.
So we have to find a balance. I don’t pretend to know the answer of where the limit of respect for religious customs should lie – no one does – and it will be different in different societies. But societies do have to change as their population balance changes – all we can do is try to evolve in the right directions to keep our societies healthy.
To this end, there is another question that must be considered at the same time: how inflexible can we afford to be and still keep society functioning? I believe that the biggest factor in fanaticism of any kind is isolation – that is why cults need ‘retreats’ and media bans to keep people in line. Given that our societies are multicultural, we must encourage as much interaction between cultures as possible. So neither the gym nor the pool should allow the women only space or time to be Muslim only. In this way the requests of these women should be seen as positive for society, if managed right. There is no doubt dealing with other religions in this way puts us all on dangerous ground, but we can’t afford not to be – the alternative is even more dangerous.
There is a point at which we have to say Stop! I just don’t think we’ve got there yet. You guys do – I might just have to live with that
Thanks everyone for a great discussion.
22 June 2006, on 6:32 pm
Ian, Mentat, et al (friends though you may be on this site) I stand by my statement repeated below (sorry for being a repeater)….
“I believe the drive in any FREE society must be to make itself more FREE, less constrainted, more equal in opportunity, more rational, and less “traditional.” That is how all progress has been made… that is how peace prospers. So while I would generally defend passionately the right for a religous woman to wear a burka (as totally insane that I think that symbol of repression is) in public settings.. and a private institution can have a “burka only” section if they choose for economic or other reasons .. I would OPPOSE such vigorously if that INSANITY some how made the rest of us second class citizens or in some way made our society less progressive.”
I repeat this because we best realize that anyone in this day and age that needs separate facilities like that, burkas, etc. are insane and YES they do want to IMPOSE their insanity on us all and NO I am not insane – JUST rational about the situation — and we rationalists and freedom lovers best realize we are in a death battle fight for our FREEDOM. I am liberal UNTIL you tear the fabric of the FREE society I want us to live in. Sure, let insane people exist — BUT do NOT let them run the asylum!
I apologize for ranting – sorry – this has my fur up. Sorry for taking so much space to say what I want (scientist type – not a writer!)
22 June 2006, on 6:49 pm
ConcernedJoe
Ditto and RAmen! We would not allow Mennonites, Amish, Mormons, Xians or others dictate what we must do or not do according to their religious beliefs in a public setting…respect does not mean “join in” and go along with the banning of certain people, segregating certain people (and that is what it is when men and boys are banned from certain public events), and so on and so forth.
22 June 2006, on 6:55 pm
I go back to my earliest statements in this thread. They will take a mile. The London bombers were the product of their local radical mosque that preached violence just as vehemently as any mosque in the Middle East. Now there is all this hand-wringing over there to be as PC as possible about what tuened these “ordinary British lads” into murderers. There’s even this whole bullshit conspiracy theory that has been put out by the Muslim community there that they were duped into carrying those bombs. What the fuck? At what point does the liberal apologizing stop? They bombed your city!
CJ said: I am liberal UNTIL you tear the fabric of the FREE society I want us to live in.
Ramen. I have been saying this for years: the only thing that should not be tolerated in a free society is intolerance itself.
22 June 2006, on 7:11 pm
They will take a mile. The London bombers were the product of their local radical mosque that preached violence just as vehemently as any mosque in the Middle East.
Bridgeview is only about 23 miles from where I now live. (We used to live in Burbank which borders Bridgeview to the east.) I used to work at 8300 and Oketo and the Muslim American Society is located at 9210 S Oketo Ave. The Muslim Civil Rights Center is in the nearby town of Hickory Hills, IL. The area now looks like a muslim town in the middle east with signs on stores in arabic and women all wearing burkas and they stare at you as you drive through.
Mosques are being built all over with the help of these organizations. In recent months, several mosques have been built in the area, and persmission has just been given, despite protests and petitions from local residents, to be built in upscale Orland Park IL. Take a look at this scary information:
http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6463
* Mosque located in Bridgeview, Illinois, which has ties to the radical Muslim Brotherhood
* Has raised money for terrorist conspirator Sami al Arian
* Has raised money to honor the memory of Palestinian suicide bombers
The Mosque Foundation was formed in 1954 by 30 immigrant families from the Palestinian town of
Beitunia, with the goal of someday building an area mosque. Less than 20 years later, a plot of land was found in Bridgeview, Illinois, just southwest of Chicago.
In 1981 the Bridgeview Mosque was built, at a time when a rift that was beginning to form between those connected to the original Mosque Foundation and a new group of immigrant hardliners. These hardliners (including the prayer leader Sheik Jamal Said) consisted of members of the radical Muslim Brotherhood, the organization that spawned al Qaeda, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist entities.
The deed to the mosque was signed over to the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), a Saudi-related extremist organization that actively seeks to take ownership of American mosques. Currently NAIT owns roughly 300 mosques across the United States.
The mosque has raised $50,000 for the defense of Sami al Arian, the North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The mosque has also raised money “in memory” of dead suicide bombers.
22 June 2006, on 7:20 pm
And…back to my friend in Chicago Ridge…after 9-11 her muslim neighbors in the apartments and condos across the street danced in their front yards and hung off their balconies waving Palestinian flags and chanted stuff in language we don\’t undertand. She said it made her and her non-muslim neighbors so angry…but afraid at the same time. Police said they had a right to celebrate whatever they want, which is true…but it is very worrisome at the same time because we don\’t know what is being promoted in their mosques across the USA. It also angers me that they are living here, using our services, making money to send back to their homeland to aid in \”their cause\”.
22 June 2006, on 7:55 pm
From the archives of the Chicago Tribune is a great article (though long) that explains how an “inches” became a “miles.”
Hard-liners won battle for Bridgeview mosque
Among the leaders at the Bridgeview mosque are men who have condemned Western culture, praised Palestinian suicide bombers and encouraged members to view society in stark terms: Muslims against the world. Federal authorities for years have investigated some mosque officials for possible links to terrorism financing, but no criminal charges have been filed.
22 June 2006, on 8:10 pm
Here’s an idea. Get some of that mad, crazy oil money and build yourselves a harem/day spa, where the Muslim ladies could loll around the pool, sauna, gym, massage tables, waxing chair(you know, deep down, the muslim ladies want Brazilians)in the altogether, free from dirty, mentally disrobing, male eyes. The eunuch guards/attendants could be the remnants of all those out of date boy bands like N’SINK.
22 June 2006, on 9:09 pm
Let’s see how this one pans out:
Official: 7 arrested in Sears Tower plot
MIAMI – Seven people were arrested Thursday in connection with the early stages of a plot to attack Chicago’s Sears Tower and other buildings in the U.S., a federal law enforcement official said.
ADVERTISEMENT
The official told The Associated Press the alleged plotters were mainly Americans with no apparent ties to al-Qaida or other foreign terrorist organizations. He spoke on condition of anonymity so as not to pre-empt news conferences planned for Friday in Washington and Miami.
Miami U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta said in a statement that the investigation was an ongoing operation and that more details would be released Friday. Local media reported that agents were raiding a warehouse in Miami’s Liberty City section.
What do ya think? A bunch of radicalized Muslim-Americans, or a bunch of Timothy McVeighs?
22 June 2006, on 9:25 pm
“What do ya think? A bunch of radicalized Muslim-Americans, or a bunch of Timothy McVeighs?”
Elian Gonzales.
22 June 2006, on 9:26 pm
Sean – My guess is that they are like the group caught in Canada and are probably “inspired by al-Qaida” muslim-Americans. We shall see.
This makes me incredibly nervous since we live in Chicagoland, and I have a son who lives within walking distance to Sears Tower and my other son’s fiancee works a few blocks away. This stuff is all too crazy. While we are distracted with a war overseas, what the hell is going on HERE that we don’t know about? It’s good to know that someone is watching and caught the fuckers in Canada and Miami…but how many more groups are out there?
22 June 2006, on 9:35 pm
Newsflash: Chicago news reports that the alleged plotters may be a black radical muslim group.
22 June 2006, on 10:14 pm
They are innocent until proven guilty. I do wonder how you get a fair trial after the Attorney General gives a press conference and says you are a captured terrorist.
But yes… More proof that Iraq is a complete distraction — and only exacerbated the situation
22 June 2006, on 11:03 pm
Noone expected the Ayatoullah Khomeni To become the leader of Iran. Not so long as they had a Shah. But a few inches gave up a mile. And they were all muslims in the same country. See how they treat each other.
We have had enough of segregation, bigotry, gender prejudice, and all forms of Lune Addict nonsense to deal with. The last thing we need is more of it.
23 June 2006, on 10:38 am
Well, looks like there is no “imminent threat” to Chicago or anywhere else from the “alleged” terrorists in Miami. The media hype is irritating and they “cry wolf” and people get all tense and angry. Then we are told they have no connection to any outside terrorist organization. I hate how news comes out in sensational “bits and pieces” and is so dramatic that we don’t even know if something is a real threat or not.
Maybe they should be checking more into these mosques who are actually funding terrorists overseas who keep blowing people up on a daily basis using US money.
23 June 2006, on 11:14 am
Going back to basketball team playing against public schools and wanting to ban men from watching.
What about single parents? What about two income families? I work in healthcare, my hours are long and erratic, my husband’s schedule is all but set in stone. Does this mean that my daughter would be banned from playing because her father is the only one who can take her to the game? And don’t you dare think to tell either of us that he is to drop her off and not be responsible for where she is or what she is doing. Sickos of all sort walk the street, we know this, I’m not going to let a young teen roam about without supervision and become a statistic because of some fool’s superstitions.
And I agree with (?tommy) from earlier. Its a free society, a capitalistic society. I’m sure there is an ambitious Muslim business man out there who can start up female only facilities if the $ and need is truly there.
I know in my hospital we make every accomodation we resonably can to honour a patient’s beleifs. I work in a racially/religously diverse area; I have covered my hair, I have avoided making eye contact, I have removed my Brighid’s cross (sentimental thing, no connection to St. Brigit or xian), etc. However I draw the line at public bullying and tax dollars.
I would no sooner allow a Muslim Cleric to dictate my life, rights and freedoms than I would a Christian Priest or a Jewish Rabbi or any other sort of ‘holy man’.
23 June 2006, on 11:36 am
I know in my hospital we make every accomodation we resonably can to honour a patient’s beleifs. I work in a racially/religously diverse area; I have covered my hair, I have avoided making eye contact, I have removed my Brighid’s cross (sentimental thing, no connection to St. Brigit or xian), etc. However I draw the line at public bullying and tax dollars.
flame821 – Wow, you are much more tolerant that I would be! But I can see that the working in the environment you do, the patient’s best interest comes first.
I don’t think I could respect someone’s beliefs so far as to cover my hair, and remove jewelry, and so on. I just feel that this is a country of diversity and if we had to abide by other people’s beliefs we would go crazy trying to keep up with them. I can see if you enter into their holy places or homes for whatever reason to abide by certain practices, but I think respect goes BOTH ways.
23 June 2006, on 1:08 pm
23 June 2006, on 2:51 pm
Star said
Well, looks like there is no “imminent threat” to Chicago or anywhere else from the “alleged” terrorists in Miami. The media hype is irritating and they “cry wolf” and people get all tense and angry. Then we are told they have no connection to any outside terrorist organization. I hate how news comes out in sensational “bits and pieces” and is so dramatic that we don’t even know if something is a real threat or not.
Kill your television. 24-hour “news” is the bane of the information age.
23 June 2006, on 4:07 pm
Kill your television. 24-hour “news” is the bane of the information age.
Sean – You are absolutely right. I usually don’t even have television on, but husband is a tv-a-holic. Internet news is just as bad. The last headline I read was “Business an usual at Sears Tower despite plot”….no shit!
This is going to be redundantly reported again and again till election time and then forgotten.
24 June 2006, on 9:09 am
RIDICULOUS! If you want to follow your “rules” stay the hell in your own countries and follow them there. Don’t come to the US (or Canada) and expect US to change the way we do things. If my daughter is playing in a basketball game, my husband and my sons should be able to come and watch her. If they don’t like it, they can have their own damn leagues or stay in their own countries. This is beyond foolish IMO.
24 June 2006, on 10:10 am
Am i the only one that finds the idea of them wanting to be hiddin from the world while they’re doing things, a lil’ hot. The idea that they are doing something that they don’t want me to see makes me wanna see it more.
24 June 2006, on 10:18 am
stardust1954 Says
Kill your television. 24-hour “news” is the bane of the information age.
Sean – You are absolutely right. I usually don’t even have television on, but husband is a tv-a-holic. Internet news is just as bad. The last headline I read was “Business an usual at Sears Tower despite plot”….no shit!
Oh, I dunno about that. On the Internet I can follow any story I want in any of a million directions, from Reuters to the CBC to the BBC to Al-Jazeera, to a plethora of blogs and independent sources in order to draw my own conclusions.
24 June 2006, on 10:33 am
Oh, I dunno about that. On the Internet I can follow any story I want in any of a million directions, from Reuters to the CBC to the BBC to Al-Jazeera, to a plethora of blogs and independent sources in order to draw my own conclusions.
Sean – I should have been more specific…when saying the internet was just as bad I was referring to Yahoo, MSN, Netscape…front page online news. My apologies for not being clear on that. You are right that with the internet we can dig much deeper and do our own research on any subject and from many, many sources.
24 June 2006, on 1:21 pm
Stardust: That’s some wild shit about Bridgeview. Let’s open a Secular Humanism Center there asap.
24 June 2006, on 5:44 pm
I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the pope.
24 June 2006, on 8:09 pm
I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the Pope I want to be the pope.
From what I understand it’s not that great a job.
26 June 2006, on 12:58 am
I wish religion was outlawed all together, shows how tolerant I’am when it comes to religion and other bullshit. There needs to be legislation on religion esspecially what they do with there finances because when you break it down to the core there just a bunch of dodgy businesses. People who ask for things to change because of there religion should be told to piss off and legislation should be introduced to stop this kind of thing from happening from all religious groups because in the end religious is oppression.
Governments have way to many ties with religion and I guess its hard for the USA with there “nation under god” crap and having a fundie as a president.