The Election Denier
-
Governor Piglet added his calm voice of non-partisan statesmanly leadership
to Minnesota’s constitutional crisis yesterday: Just kidding. He’s doing
exac...
Florida is More Conservative than Kansas…
-
Let that sink in. Why do I say that? Because abortion on demand failed here
tonight. It passed in more rural states like Kansas. Legalization of
recreation...
Man-talking
-
Whenever I come across this Norman Rockwell painting, I always think of the
times in the 1960s when my grandfather would take me with him around the
holida...
2018 – A BLOGGING SABBATICAL
-
To my surprise, I have not written anything here in a year. I know that
blogging is such less popular than it was 10 years ago, but still, it is
surprising...
The Babylonian Trick
-
The estimable Hans Fiene, the pastor behind Lutheran Satire, puts a name to
a particular and time-honored technique for violating religious liberty.
He ca...
Personal and lectionary
-
I have been trying to move this place around, and things have got messy. At
present I’m restoring the backup Continue Reading
Conan, what is best in life?
-
Conan, what is best in life?
"Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations
of their women."
One party works that way.
The oth...
New Year Greetings
-
We’ve enjoyed having our whole family home for the holidays this year.
After a very busy fall, it has been good to come to a screeching halt and
just enjo...
The Reckoning
-
Harassing a woman is awful.
And believe it or not it's not lawful.
The gropers are paying.
'Cause the mobs are a-baying.
Damn sure they'll be getting their c...
The Needle in the Haystack
-
An Expose of Climate Model Error - an easily digested talk on the errors in
climate modeling and how they aren't handled correctly...
Week 1 NFC North QB ratings
-
Since most contributors to this blog root passionately for an NFL squad
within the NFC North division, it's the only division that matters here.
With that,...
No more dreams about dung
-
J.I. Packer once asked, ‘What normal person spends his time nostalgically
dreaming of dung?’ One who doesn’t understand Philippians 3.7–10: But
whatever ga...
9 years ago
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Good news from Saudi Arabia
A young woman out on a (prohibited) date apparently decided to beat the "wahhabi" out of one of the religious policemen which plague that country. People are starting to wise up about what radical Islam really means, praise God.
Different standards, yes, but when the religious police allow girls to burn to death because they can't get their abbayas on because they're burning up, there are some objective moral standards we can appeal to--I'd commend those in the Scriptures, as they do not commend burning girls to death because they cannot get their burqas on in time.
i think your scenario is a stretch. nobody is buring up under arab garb.
actually, it helps them keep cooler, and protects from the sun's rays. that is why it was developed.
99% of what arabs do is no different than what we do. we face the same sexual mores and social prssures, and love our moms,wives and daughters more than we love ourselves.
the women rule the arab world. you just dont see it from here.
"In a rare criticism of the kingdom's powerful "mutaween" police, the Saudi media has accused them of hindering attempts to save 15 girls who died in the fire on Monday. "
if the media prints it, the crown approves of it. the article also stated there was anger among the people.
so, how does this reflect on what you call 'radical' islam.
seems more like fundementalism, not radicalism.
this is the equivilant of the saudi press reporting on paul hill as reflective of christian fundementalist practice.
what we have is a tragedy based upon poor judgement. not the practice of islam.
"the women rule the arab world. you just dont see it from here."
Because it's simply not true. Women ruling the Arab world is not the reason women get beaten for being raped. It's not the reason THEY get punished every time an infraction of the code happens, and the men rarely do. It's not why every effort to provide basic education to girls is stopped, sometimes violently, where the radical flavor of the cu culture reigns.
It might have started out innocently in principle as an attempt to protect women and for them to retain modesty and dignity, but it has morphed and distorted into something quite the opposite. And Islam in principle offers no corrective to that distortion, whereas Christian ethics do.
The police allowing the girls to burn to death was consistent with the way the radical Islamic sexual ethic has evolved, not an aberration from it. Paul Hill is no parallel.
7 comments:
how many times have you seen a couple making out heavily in a public setting and said to yourself 'thats not right'?
different cultures have different standards of public mores. arab culture is stricter than ours.
we are stricter than europe.
the culture will change when the women demand it...
that is...
...when enough saudi men walk around with blue balls.
women wield the ultimate authority in any culture.
in short, this isnt about radical islam at all.
no more than restrictions on strip clubs and porno are radical christianity.
Different standards, yes, but when the religious police allow girls to burn to death because they can't get their abbayas on because they're burning up, there are some objective moral standards we can appeal to--I'd commend those in the Scriptures, as they do not commend burning girls to death because they cannot get their burqas on in time.
i think your scenario is a stretch.
nobody is buring up under arab garb.
actually, it helps them keep cooler, and protects from the sun's rays. that is why it was developed.
99% of what arabs do is no different than what we do. we face the same sexual mores and social prssures, and love our moms,wives and daughters more than we love ourselves.
the women rule the arab world. you just dont see it from here.
I wish it were a stretch, Gino. It really happened.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1874471.stm
"In a rare criticism of the kingdom's powerful "mutaween" police, the Saudi media has accused them of hindering attempts to save 15 girls who died in the fire on Monday. "
if the media prints it, the crown approves of it.
the article also stated there was anger among the people.
so, how does this reflect on what you call 'radical' islam.
seems more like fundementalism, not radicalism.
this is the equivilant of the saudi press reporting on paul hill as reflective of christian fundementalist practice.
what we have is a tragedy based upon poor judgement.
not the practice of islam.
"the women rule the arab world. you just dont see it from here."
Because it's simply not true. Women ruling the Arab world is not the reason women get beaten for being raped. It's not the reason THEY get punished every time an infraction of the code happens, and the men rarely do. It's not why every effort to provide basic education to girls is stopped, sometimes violently, where the radical flavor of the cu culture reigns.
It might have started out innocently in principle as an attempt to protect women and for them to retain modesty and dignity, but it has morphed and distorted into something quite the opposite. And Islam in principle offers no corrective to that distortion, whereas Christian ethics do.
The police allowing the girls to burn to death was consistent with the way the radical Islamic sexual ethic has evolved, not an aberration from it. Paul Hill is no parallel.
Post a Comment