Dress Code

Just the tip of the iceberg. The hatred of the west and our liberties has always been the core of their fanaticism. I am still amazed at the ignorance of those people who say we can get along with the extremists in their ranks.

A segment also believe in slavery, especially sex slaves to keep men from cheating. (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sex...ls-preferably-blondes-from-russia-need-apply/)

I know, the logic confuses me as well, but it goes with their Sharia beliefs.
 
Please refrain from biased blanket statements.

Did you know that the "Islamic" dress code was actually started in cultures that predate Islam, specifically, Judaism and Christianity? It's kind of like how Christianity co-opted pagan rituals, i.e. the winter solstice became Christmas and the spring equinox became Easter. It helped ease the transition to new religions.

Have you seen a nun lately? If so I'll bet you didn't see her head.
 
hmmm.... a nun dress code enforcer.

Sounds like a good goverment job with benefits!

Go get em Banjo!
guitarist.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]

Have you seen a nun lately? If so I'll bet you didn't see her head.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes - And nobody forced her to wear the clothes she had on.

I do agree that blanket statements should be used with caution, it is the extremists that we should be worried about.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Please refrain from biased blanket statements.

Did you know that the "Islamic" dress code was actually started in cultures that predate Islam, specifically, Judaism and Christianity? It's kind of like how Christianity co-opted pagan rituals, i.e. the winter solstice became Christmas and the spring equinox became Easter. It helped ease the transition to new religions.

Have you seen a nun lately? If so I'll bet you didn't see her head.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which one of my or Jamin's statements were "biased blanket stements?" And did you read yours after you wrote it?

And what's your point? Therefore it's OK to arrest and brutalize women because they show an ankle or their chin? Why the relativist justification of Iranian moral police? Just to take a cheap shot at Christianity?
 
When these codes were established the "infidels" were much closer geographically than today but still infidels. So, they see a decline in maintaining the moral standards that form the basis of the country's belief system. They decide on stricter enforcement of such laws in order to raise the level of observance. Um, sounds familiar.

I've heard this kind of talk from many who live here in the U.S. How about schools that create and enforce dress codes? Or those that feel attire with a specific connection to a religious belief should be banned as not conforming to that country's standard (think France here). In some orthodox christian religions a women must cover her head, wear black for the rest of her life after her husband passes away, the list goes on.

What's that line, something about casting the first stone.....
 
This thread is off to a good start.
grin.gif


I'm not looking at it through "religious lenses". (Though it can spill over that direction very easily).

I was more or less amazed,shocked, angered, ect... that, "More than 70,000 trained forces were sent out on the streets in Tehran and other cities to enforce the plan, according to the U.K. paper."

So, I was trying to visualize how many people that was. Think of attending a packed stadium. Some stadiums can pack in that many (or more). So, 70,000 men will be doing all sorts of heinous crimes against women in the short future. How sad and confusing is that?

These future victims need prayer for protection and aid.
 
If we (mankind) had elaborate equipmnet to detect and forecast ginormous earthquakes, in densely populated areas, shouldn't we (the rest of the planet) be responsible to rescue those people at risk?
 
Speaking of "biased blanket statements," did anyone see the colbert report yesterday? he did a segment on this dress code and it ended with him ripping his pants into short shorts.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please refrain from biased blanket statements.

Did you know that the "Islamic" dress code was actually started in cultures that predate Islam, specifically, Judaism and Christianity? It's kind of like how Christianity co-opted pagan rituals, i.e. the winter solstice became Christmas and the spring equinox became Easter. It helped ease the transition to new religions.

Have you seen a nun lately? If so I'll bet you didn't see her head.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which one of my or Jamin's statements were "biased blanket stements?" And did you read yours after you wrote it?

And what's your point? Therefore it's OK to arrest and brutalize women because they show an ankle or their chin? Why the relativist justification of Iranian moral police? Just to take a cheap shot at Christianity?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have absolutely no problem with Jamin starting this discussion, nor do I have any issue with what he posted.

tcsafety, it was the tone of your initial comment that I didn't like. The language you chose basically put all Muslims in the same category and I find that offensive. This is America, the land of religious tolerance.

I don't like dress codes or any kind of rules that try to control people. I really wouldn't care if people walked around naked all the time. Furthermore, I think it is morally reprehensible to make rules regarding any kind of lifestyle choices. Nobody should be punished for what they choose to do as long as they are not actually hurting others.

There was no "cheap shot at Christianity" whatsoever. There are lots of similarities between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. They are all Abrahamic religions and have cultural roots in the same places.
 
What about the dress code laws that have been passed in cities about low rider pants? How would you feel if you were a plumber? Would you feel the bias? Ooops...now the PC Police will be after me about my plumber bias...hjahahahha
 
Banjo: I understand and agree that putting all in the same category is wrong. It's happened with me with my religious faith as well as in my arboriculture career. I'm sure you have unfortunately been lumped into the same category of hackers by those who don't know any better, even though a comparrison of work would be night and day.

I know there is diversity in Islam. This is why I used the terms "fanaticism" and "extremists" to seperate those Muslims who are more radical in their beliefs. I believe those words put them in a different category. There is even a facinating diversity within the extremist ranks - Sunni, Shi'ite, Twelvers, Sufi, etc. There are also much more moderate Muslims within those ranks, except for possibly the Twelvers, that are great citizens of this country and wherever they live.

I apologize if you felt I over-reacted to your Christianity comments. While there have absolutley been many people doing things "in the name of Christianity" that are not Christian whatsoever, some trends and beliefs have a solid basis, even if implemented incorrectly and taken to an extreme. I should probably have taken your comment as actually supporting my point about extremists views.

There are simularities between the three Abrahamic faiths. However, the differences are greater and, IMO, much more interesting. How they each view the nature of God, human nature (who we are and how we are supposed to relate to Him and each other), the human condition (why we're so messed up), and how we are liberated from our condition are completely different when one looks at the details. I've found that most of the simularities are superficial, though sometimes facinating in a historical and sociological context.

As far as your comment about moral rules to control people and lifestyle choices, every society has to have these rules. There are usually much greater and far reaching consequences which those rules are trying to prevent. The immediate results may not be harmful, but may become so as more accept certain vices as virtues. Just like an early co-dominant it's best to treat it early. And as with most of arboriculture, prevention is some of the best maintenance we can do.

The question, and where societies differ, is what is the grounding, or justification, for demanding the adherence to those rules. Is it simply human-based, or are moral rules actually objective in nature? If Islam describes the correct way to view reality, then I'm screwed. If these Iranian Muslims are actually correct, then they should do what they are doing. However, if the basic Christian idea is correct, then I've got a shot. If there is no Supreme Absolute, then the question is meaningless outside of our own subjective world.
confused.gif
 
Humans are naturally aggressive animals, especialy young males. But we are thinking animals so we need to justify our aggression and antagonism somehow. Using 'religion' is one way to conveniently salve a bloody conscience. This is not slamming anyone's true faith by the way, whatever religion they may adhere to. Faith has nothing to do with extremism in my opinion.
 
I wouldn't believe such propaganda.. "they hate us because of our freedom", anymore than I believed the WMD garbage.. When people parrot the lines they've been spoon fed on cable news and even NPR, its clear to me that they have yet to free their minds..

How 'bout they hate us because we saddled them with 40 years of oppression, exploitation and brutality in the form of the Shah.. How 'bout they hate us because we've funded and backed the vicious treatment of the Palestinians by Israel? How 'bout they hate us because they see us an an imperial power, throwing our military might around to gain control of their resources, with military bases set up throughout the middle east.. How bout they hate us because they saw the reports of the hundreds of thousands of civilians that were killed in Iraq, which of course, that news was totally blocked out from our TV sets...

Now put you hand over your heart, and pledge allegiance to the flag a few times, hum a few bars of the star spangled banner, and remind yourself that Daniel is just a nut job...
 
Tom: Does that include non-religious worldviews as well?

Jeremy: I agree to a certain extent. How would you define bias?

Nora: I agree. Many have used religions to justify all sorts of horrific behavior. And if you read that religion's sacred books, you search in vain for their support.

Daniel: Nice closing, funny. I would say that one should look into claims and not just trust one source, media or otherwise. I have read what they themselves have said, and the liberties and freedoms enjoyed by the west are seen by them as a bad influence in their culture by causing moral decay. Therefore they believe to protect true Islam anything "western" must be rooted out. The more radical among them believe it justifies jihad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom