The Glade 4.0

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,580 ... latestnews

And I thought New York Construction workers where supposed to be bad.

_________________
"Life isn't divided into genres. It's a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky."
— Alan Moore

I despise Islam...but then I despise Christendom too. But to give Islam the benefit of the doubt, they started 500 years after Christianity did, and socially, they are currently 500 years behind Christianity as well. Things were no better for women in Christendom 500 years ago. (Different, yes, but certainly no better.) In another few centuries (probably much less due to our influence--maybe even decades, if the social climate in places like Iran are any indication) they'll have caught up to the rest of the civilized world.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

It’s all about emersion. These fully covered women are sexy to them cause they lack female contact. Throw a shot of Las Vegas, a shot of Ibiza, A shot of Rio, and a big dash of Amsterdam. Add them in and the harassment will stop in no time.

Actually, this has very little to do with Islam. This is the way women were historically treated in the Arab world. This is the very treatment that Muhammad intended to change when he wrote the Koran. He was under the impression that if he gave a religious edict to make women the property of men, that those men would protect their women from various sexual harassment. Unfortunately, the Prophet did not foresee that if you take a bunch of men who want to behave as though they own every woman on Earth and lay down a divine edict that men own every woman on Earth, the result is rampant immoral behavior. You would think Allah would have pointed that out to his last prophet, but apparently that was not the case.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Unless you happen to BE a muslim, in which case this is all precisely as Allah intended, since all is Insha'allah.

According to Islam, the opening verses of the Koran were provided to Mohammed on the Night of Power, or Night of Measures/Night of Decree. Pretty much everything that happens is, according to Islam, as God is willing. If you've ever seen "Kingdom of heaven", the exchange between Salah Ad Din and his advisor is quite accurate in describing Islamic thinking; the advisor takes exception to the idea that preparation wins battles because battles are decided by Allah's will. Salah Ad Din points out (correcting himself in the process) that Allah ordained that he should be leader, and he is insisting on proper preparation.

Subterfuges of thought like that are necessary in the Islamic world. In fact, it's hard to even train most Iraqi soldiers to properly aim their weapons because "Insha'allah I will hit my target" and hence the frequent employment of firearms as more of a fire hose. Even the celebatory firing in the air is not considered hazardous because if someone is hit by a falling bullet, well, that was Allah's will.

In any case, such an unforseen consequence cannot, in Islam, be considered a problem because it was as Allah willed it. The Prophet cannot be cricticized, since it was also Allah's will that he have noble intentions.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

There are branches of Christianity that follow the same thought. That's what happens when backwards assholes get ahold of a religion that, on the surface, tells them exactly what they want to hear.

The point of my post was that Arabs are not this way because of Islam. To the contrary, Islam is this way because of the culture it evolved in.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Interesting comments DE. It doesn't surprise me a whole lot, but it really explains some things about that culture.

In some ways it sounds very similar to the sentiment "God has a plan" that you hear occasionally in the Western world. Although typically you don't see quite the same amount of fatalism here.

Personally, I've always liked "Luck favors the prepared".

In a sense, yes, that's true. However it is not an inherent tenet of Christianity as a whole, and in those Christian denominations that do think that way it's neither to the same degree (you would be hard-pressed to find any Christian who would think that irresponsible celebratory firing is excusable because any injuries are God's will, for example) nor is it an overtly expressed way of approaching life or faith. "God willing" is not considered an excuse for failing to execute one's own responsibilities. There are definitely some similarities, which is to be expected because Christianity and Islam are related religions, but the thought is not really the same, just similar. Islam has this thinking in a more overtly acknowledged and defined way.



Up to a point, yes. However, the nature of Islam in this regard has very much encouraged Arab culture to continue along the lines it has for some 1400 years. At one point Arab/Islamic culture was a pinaccle of scientific and mathematic achievement. That has not generally continued to be the case in part because of this principle.

This sort of thinking has implications for practically every aspect of life. Taken to an extreme, this renders it impossible to make a decision since making any decision could be construed as taking for yourself Allah's authority to determine events. More enlightened and sophisticated thinkers such as Salah Ad Din will tend to rise to the top because they can appreciate that Allah has obviously (from their point of view) placed them in their position and desires them to make decisions.



Like I said, there are definite similarities. To be very brief, Isha'allah would be similar to the way some people append "God willing" to the end of a declaration that they intend to do something, but with much more weight. Whereas a typical Christian saying "God willing" would mean "I'll do everything I need to in order to execute my course of action, and if some circumstance still prevents it, that's God's will". Insha'allah extends that more to "God will allow or even ordaint he preparations and my success to happen if He wills me to do this."

Exactly the degree to which this is taken would, of course, depend on the particular muslim you talked to. Salah Ad Din would doubtless give a very different answer than most members of Al Quaida.



This is really not quite the same thing, although it certainly pertains. Another way of saying it is "Hope is not a plan". Essentially it's saying "You can only forsee so much, but that's not an excuse for not preparing for anything you should have forseen."

My favorite example of this was a kid in college who liked Battletech a lot (which I played only a few times). He always had this "strategy" or maybe it was a mech build that would give him an instant win as soon as he got in range.. provided he rolled a 12 on 2d6 on some check or other. Needless to say he was surprised that it only worked... about one time in every thirty-six.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

One of the primary objections to HIGCC that the far christian right has is that God is in control of the temperature, therefore anything that happens is His will. The thinking is represented even in the Senate, where Inhofe is happy to leave the problem in the capable hands of his deity.

I don't think there's as much difference between modern christianity and modern Islam as Taly claims. The press certainly is more willing to cover extremist Islam than extremist Christianity, but you need look no farther than the religious communities that take so negative an opinion on women that girls are subjected to forced marriage and rape in their early teens, sometimes earlier.

Hell, I had a Pentecostal fencing student that had to smuggle in sweat pants to train in because she was required to wear floor length skirts.

_________________


It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show

Wow, that was a measured, even, and intelligent response to the topic at hand.

_________________

Yes, some people do have silly objections to scientific theories, although that says nothing about the actual validity of the theories. This is more similar to Insha'allah in many respects, but not really in the same category as far as affecting individual behavior.



I don't know what Christian extremists you're talking about here. I also see little reason to think that the overall level of conflict caused by Chrsitianity at the present time approaches that of Islam. I know of no Christian nations known to be sponsoring groups like Hezbollah or Hamas, nor currently pursuing a nuclear arms program directed at the destruction of another nation they have no real reason to have a conflict with.



And? This is the U.S.; she's free to convert to whatever she wants. We don't have Pentecostal religious police here. Has it occured to you that she tpossibly thinks this is an acceptable price to pay for maintaining her faith?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Although thankfully it is now a thing of the past, Ireland and the IRA fit that bill pretty well, and it wasn't too very long ago that they were active.

We Irish were never all that good at terrorism. I'd say it wasn't for lack of trying, but yes, it was for lack of trying.

For more details, and a sure-fire solution to extremism in the middle east, see my St. Patrick's Day 2008 Peace Initiative, complete with footnotes!

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Has it occurred to you that she possibly is unaware that she has a choice?

It is possible that she has decided its an acceptable price to pay. It is also rather unlikely, otherwise why would she be taking a class that requires her to wear sweat pants, and then actually complying with that requirement? That isn't really maintaining her faith, which would involve dropping the class and taking one more appropriate to a religion that forbids women to wear anything other than long, flowing skirts and long-sleeved shirts. Although I will concede that faith may actually be that cheap to those of a more religious bent than I.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

No, such a thing has not occured to me actually. She is evidently enrolled in college and is able to see women around her who don't feel compelled to even attend a Pentecostal church much less follow whatever rules her congregation thinks important. There are no religious police here, and even if there's heavy family pressure to conform, the fact of the matter is that it is perfectly legitimate for an adult to decide to follow certain practices in order to please loved ones.



I don't really see why you think that makes it unlikely at all. You're certainly in no position to determine whether anyone's faith is cheaper than yours or not, nor what would constitute maintaining her faith. How do you know she doesn't feel guilty about this? Or that she thinks this particular rule is nonsense but in general agrees with Pentecostal tenets and therefore continues to in her faith?

Quite frankly all you're doing here is saying "she's a hypocrite or else she's being oppressed because I've persoanlly decided that only one course of action is acceptable for her if she really is faithful."

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

I was unaware that you could claim to follow a religion, ignore its teachings and rules, and furthermore go out of your way to hide the fact that you're ignoring its teachings and rules, and still be considered pious and faithful. I suppose it's okay because she can just ask Jesus to forgive her sins later. Wasn't there supposed to be some parable about how it's not that easy, and you had to do more than just pay lip service and actually start walking the walk? Seriously, if your religion believes it's wrong for women to wear pants, how **** hard is it to not take a fencing class? Monty's not teaching American History I, here.

And of course her parents can't possibly be at fault in any way, because the Bible says to honor them.

So what I'm really saying is the hypocrisy of Christianity knows no bounds. Not just this girl. You are making allowances and excuses for someone because they happen to claim to pray to the same invisible man as you do, where you have previously voiced your disapproval for the exact same actions and beliefs when carried out in the name of a different invisible man. Someone slapped the Christ label on it, and somehow it became okay.

Or, perhaps cast in another light, because the story came from Monty it must obviously be biased with an agenda against Christianity. That isn't very different from all the ***** about Fox News I've read on this board in days past. Why should it be any more acceptable when you do it?

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Amen shalom mohalla Cthulhu unicorn purple-monkey-refrigerator. I will live forever!

Infidel! It is purple-monkey-dishwasher!

_________________

You for got the Flying spaghetti Monster, I would hate to be in your shoes.

_________________
History of the Condom
In 1272, the Muslim Arabs invented the condom, using a goat's lower intestine.
In 1873, the British somewhat refined the idea, by taking the intestine out of the goat first.

The terrorists still study Michael Collins. He is the father of modern terrorism in many ways.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

I hate to break this to you, but yes, as a matter of fact you can do that when you're part of a denomination that itself is a result of people repeatedly breking off forming new churches and making new rules. That argument works fairly well for Catholicism because it has set, defined teachings and rules, but there is no consistent Pentecostal doctrine; it's a conglomoration of generally similar churches.

Furthermore, you're making a false dilemma. Yes, you can break certain rules and still be generally pious and faithful. That's rather the point of Christianity. Church rules such as interpreting "modest dress" as long skirts for women are not inherently sinful to break; that's how Catholics get dispensations from Church rules. Since Pentecostals don't have a hierarchy or bishops or the same views on church leaders authority or even really consistent doctrine they just have to give themselves a dispensation and avoid creating an issue in church by advertising it.



Failing to wear a skirt is not a sin according to the Bible. The Bible calls for "modest dress"; it's merely a standard of that particular denomination.



Because that's not her religion; it's her denomination. Furthermore it's a Biblical interpretation in a denomination that generally takes the Bible quite literally.



Since there's nothing going on wrong here other than your sense of being offended at people following religious views you don't adhere to, no they aren't at fault because ther's nothing to be at fault for.



No I'm not making any special allowances. I'm pointing out that A) as usual you're making proclaimations about Chrsitianity when you really don't know wht you're talking about B) you're creating a false dilemma and C) there's absolutely nothing wrong with people following their own conscience about church rules and teachings. They don't have to satisfy you about jack ****; including your definition of hypocrisy that's constructed solely so you can look down your nose at people who believe sometihng you don't.



Or, maybe I said nothing of the sort and you're just making up bullshit and then asking "well why is it any different?" I have no problem believeing the facts he presented are true. I ahve a problem with you acting like you get to sit there and call people hypocrits for not being perfect in a religion whose entire point is that you can't be perfect and with rules whose nature you evidently don't understand beyond what lets you take cheap shots.

Edit: Since you're likely to just keep on making up bullshit and ignoring what I say to protect your sacred cow of Christian hypocrisy, let's have a little lesson in theology. First off, don't give me any more **** about defending people because they believe the same thing as me. I'm not Pentecostal; I think a lot of their theology is overly legalistic, historically and biblicly ignorant, and contradictory. That doesn't, however, mean that I think Pentecostal people are insincere in believeing it, or that just because they may not adhere to my or your idea of how they should adhere to their own doctrine (which, quite frankly, they know better than either of us) that they're necessarily hypocrites. Everyone is a hypocrite at some point; some people more often than others, There's nothing about religious hypocrisy that makes it any worse than any other, nor calls for special castigation, nor gives the nonreligious any moral superiority in castigating it.

First of all, Jesus gave authority to the Church in Mathew 16:19 and 18:18 and their surrounding discussion to decide earthly church matters that hadn't been given an explicit Scriptural command or one from Him:



When it comes to matters like requirement for modest dress, mandated explcitly and implicitly in a number of places throughout the NT and OT such as 1 Timothy 2:9 and 1 Peter 3:3-5, that is a highly subjective matter. What exactly is "modest" isn't discussed and since clothing in general changes greatly, as do other factors such as temperature and weather from place to place, and modesty is not merely a function of square nches of skin covered, someone has to decide what it means. In my church (Lutheran) it means "don't look like a streetwalker or a male stripper or something". In the Pentecostal church it means "women should wear long skirts."

However, this isn't an ironclad rule that needs to be followed legalistically to the letter. Jesus castigated people in a number of places for enforcing the letter of the law unmercifully, and regularly castigated the Pharisees for hypocritical legalisms.

Furthermore, there's a limit on church authority to make rules. Aside form the fact that they can't make rules that contradict Scripture, there's limitations on it. Romans 14 discusses not making unnecessary rules at length, especially verse 13:



and 1 Corinithians in chapters 8 through 10 discusses things that are not inherently sinful but may be a stumbling block for one's brother.

So: When this girl wears sweat pants to class she is not sinning by either violating any biblical command, nor by violating the authority of her church to rule on matters like modest dress. The rule is a general principle, and just because it doesn't make specific exceptions for situations like taking a shower, having sex with ones' spouse, or going to Monte's class doesn't mean she is violating it. By hiding it from others in her church all she is doing is avoiding placing a stumbling block, or making an issue of it. Should they be making an issue of it? No, they shouldn't but once again people aren't perfect and if your standard for Christians is perfect Christian behavior at all times, then I'd like an explaination as to why you don't seem to hold anyone else to a standard of perfect adherence to their own morals at all times either. Just because other people are imperfect and may misunderstand what she is doing or may not have thought this through does not make it ok for her to rub their noses in it.

Finally, the fact of the matter is that this thread is about what happens in Muslim/Arab countries and, as usual, it's a bum-rush to see who can be the first to start saying "but... but... Christians!" Amazingly, no one seems to make any effort to point out the similarities to Islam when the topic is Christianity in the first place. That wouldn't support the "trash Chrisitianity at every opportunity" agenda, now, would it?

The real fact of the matter is that you know jack-all about this girl and probably Monte hasn't sat down with her and had a calm, honest conversation about her beliefs. Just because you've found some legalism by which you can accuse her of hypocrisy doesn't mean that she is; it means you don't really understand Christianity and are just looking for an excuse to rant about it.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."