NationStates Jolt Archive

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

Muslim medical students are refusing to obey hygiene rules brought in to stop the spread of deadly superbugs, because they say it is against their religion.

Women training in several hospitals in England have raised objections to removing their arm coverings in theatre and to rolling up their sleeves when washing their hands, because it is regarded as immodest in Islam.
advertisement

Universities and NHS trusts fear many more will refuse to co-operate with new Department of Health guidance, introduced this month, which stipulates that all doctors must be "bare below the elbow".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

But the Islamic Medical Association insisted that covering all the body in public, except the face and hands, was a basic tenet of Islam.

"No practising Muslim woman - doctor, medical student, nurse or patient - should be forced to bare her arms below the elbow," it said.

Dr Majid Katme, the association spokesman, said: "Exposed arms can pick up germs and there is a lot of evidence to suggest skin is safer to the patient if covered. One idea might be to produce long, sterile, disposable gloves which go up to the elbows."

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

Me...and most people..they just arn't represented on the over-leftwing NSG...

I dont know the long elbow length gloves seem to be fine to me

For a second there I thought the poster said 'New Mitanni.'

I think it would come under extenuating* circumstances surely?

*I'm such an awesome speller :p

Snip

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.
Snip

I dont know about you but I dont think I would trust my doctor to be bringing in un-verified medical protection equipment in from home ...

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

Why don't they just have them wash hands in a public women's bathroom and wear extra long surgical gloves? :(

they should not be able to go against the laws of hygiene but maybe they could wear extra long surgical gloves?

Oh, I see. And that's why Saudi Arabia doesn't have a national soccer team? Oh, wait, they DO! And they wear those shorts like any other player!

But, and already anticipating the fact that we would point out the OBVIOUS broad-brush flaw in your lack-of-an-argument, you go and say "that there are a few is bad enough" as an attempt to deny the ENTIRE group of Muslim women the right to practice medicine? On the basis that "there are a few"? Fine, but let me give you a taste of that logic. As, by that logic...

...the US soldiers shouldn't be allowed to run prisons. That there are a few torturers is bad enough...

...whites shouldn't be allowed to hold public office. That there are a few white corrupt politicians is bad enough...

...Christians shouldn't be allowed to become doctors. That there are a few who refuse flood transfusions is bad enough...

...and so on.

Speaking of doctors, your argument needs one to perform an autopsy on it, as it was killed right here.

Me...and most people..they just arn't represented on the over-leftwing NSG...


Thats not fair, Im sick of it.


However, Im sick of all religions expecting the rest of society to conform to their superstitions and archaic beliefs, be it Muslim or Christian.

I don't find myself getting two worried over the fact that some medical students wish to respect their religious beliefs while continuing their studies.

There does not seem to be any indication that these women were demanding to forgo the standard hygienic practices and continue to deal with the public.

I tried to find out more, but it seems that the Telegraph is the only newspaper that is reporting on this.

Oh dear, yet another ebil moslem thread veiled in a thin layer of medical concern. Cause golly, there aren't any female Muslim physicians in the United States and even if there were they'd all poke and probe with their filthy hands.

:rolleyes:

Notice the OP wasn't so quick on the trigger to bitch about Evangelical pharmacists denying people prescriptions based on their own personal beliefs... oh wait, that's because he didn't bitch about them at all.

:rolleyes:

Oh dear, yet another ebil moslem thread veiled in a thin layer of medical concern. Cause golly, there aren't any female Muslim physicians in the United States and even if there were they'd all poke and probe with their filthy hands.

:rolleyes:

Notice the OP wasn't so quick on the trigger to bitch about Evangelical pharmacists denying people prescriptions based on their own personal beliefs... oh wait, that's because he didn't bitch about them at all.

:rolleyes:




Of course not. Because premaritial sex and contraceptives are bad:headbang::rolleyes:


Seriously, religions in general have groups who are obnoxious and they all expect the rest of society to conform to what they view as "right".

Thats not fair, Im sick of it.


However, Im sick of all religions expecting the rest of society to conform to their superstitions and archaic beliefs, be it Muslim or Christian.
I'm not a big supporter of the religious (Christian) right either....My main problem with the Republican party is that they have to cater to the religious right....so that the capitalists, the militaristics/nationalists and the religious all have to lay in bed together...I hate it.

I wish we had a multi-party system.

Problem is...the extremes of Islam are alot worse and alot more common than of Christianity. I live in Florida which is 110% a Christian/conservative state...and life is 100% normal..and I'm Jewish. Couldn't say the same living in a Muslims/conservative state...

Because the majority of Muslim women are women.

I thought you would know that..

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?
Not anywhere near as fed up as with these near daily reports of evil Muslims. :p

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

I'd like to observe two things. 1st is that just because a small minority of Muslim women refuse to conform to these practices doesn't mean you should outlaw all Muslim women from practicing as doctors (it sounded like you were hinting at that). If the individual can't conform to the medical practices, then they shouldn't be allowed to practice, whether they are Muslim, a women, or otherwise.

2nd The IMA is completely wrong, this type of covering is a Middle Eastern cultural thing. It by no means is a central tenet of Islam.

Problem is...the extremes of Islam are alot worse and alot more common than of Christianity. I live in Florida which is 110% a Christian/conservative state...and life is 100% normal..and I'm Jewish. Couldn't .

Note the important part, Florida. As in, in the United States. A country that has certain laws preventing a theocracy. Don't pretend your state is "110% Christian/conservative state", it's not. It might have a heavily conservative christian bias, but there's only so much a christian right can do in america. Don't pretend that a true christian theocracy would be any better.

Problem is...the extremes of Islam are alot worse and alot more common than of Christianity.

Even if you were correct, this has nothing to do with the OP.

I'd like to observe two things. 1st is that just because a small minority of Muslim women refuse to conform to these practices doesn't mean you should outlaw all Muslim women from practicing as doctors (it sounded like you were hinting at that). If the individual can't conform to the medical practices, then they shouldn't be allowed to practice, whether they are Muslim, a women, or otherwise.

2nd The IMA is completely wrong, this type of covering is a Middle Eastern cultural thing. It by no means is a central tenet of Islam.

Thank you for posting this response because this is exactly what I would have posted. The covering is cultural and by no means practiced by more then half of Muslim women.

If people really would like to learn how another culture operates then I say go and spend some time with them. I hear all sorts of misguided ideas about Muslims in their homelands from Westerners and I hear the same in Muslim nations about the West. Anywhere I go I try and correct the perceptions that people wrongly have on either side. As for this it is a small group in my opinion and no more. It is just over exaggerated by the media. Also, what happened to just plainly telling people no or sorry we cannot accommodate your needs that way? Instead it is made into a big deal and is blown out of proportion.

While I don't have any objection to Muslims practicing medicine, I think we should be careful about bending the rules in order to satisfy deeply rooted cultural beliefs, I don't want to set any sort of precedent which makes it easier for religious people to be 'above the law', especially if it is at the expense of peoples safety.

Note the important part, Florida. As in, in the United States. A country that has certain laws preventing a theocracy. Don't pretend your state is "110% Christian/conservative state", it's not. It might have a heavily conservative christian bias, but there's only so much a christian right can do in america. Don't pretend that a true christian theocracy would be any better.

Seeing as Christians are the majority in the country by a lot, if they wanted to turn the country into a theocracy, they could do so with little difficulty. The fact that they haven't done so (unlike Iran, Afghanistan, Libya and the likes) just proves what TAI says, that Christians over here, however much their rhetoric scares you, tend not to be as rowdy. At least not for now.

Wait, the United States *isn't* an elected Theocracy? You could have fooled me.

Several of the major debates in the country come down to religions fighting, frequently Christian reactionaries and athiest radicals. The entire war on "terror" has been labelled a "crusade" by Bush, which certainly has major religious connotations. Heck, one of the presidential candidates for the Republicans right now wants to put the constitution into the world of God! (Although how he expects anyone to read Arameic in the US is beyond me.) The point is, the country already is controlled rather heavily by the religious right, and they do just as much damage as any other group of fanatics. Two religious groups are amongst the three most powerful lobbyers here, when there *should* be a division of church and state. We *might* be better (I'm not sure of it) but we're not better by as much as people might like to think.

With regards to the Original Post, let them wear the elbow-length gloves, that makes more sense than bare skin anyways. If I was a doctor, and had a cut on my arm, I wouldn't want that anywhere *near* a sick patient. That's just common sense. By turning this into an East-West debate they're just grabbing attention and picking fights. It's moronic. Cultural tolerance means finding something to do that makes sense. If Christianity required something like that, you can bet they'd never be able to not allow it.

Thank you for posting this response because this is exactly what I would have posted. The covering is cultural and by no means practiced by more then half of Muslim women.

If people really would like to learn how another culture operates then I say go and spend some time with them. I hear all sorts of misguided ideas about Muslims in their homelands from Westerners and I hear the same in Muslim nations about the West. Anywhere I go I try and correct the perceptions that people wrongly have on either side. As for this it is a small group in my opinion and no more. It is just over exaggerated by the media. Also, what happened to just plainly telling people no or sorry we cannot accommodate your needs that way? Instead it is made into a big deal and is blown out of proportion.

I was just wondering about that, in fact. We have PETA activists and abortion bombers doing far more extreme things, but it always seems to come down to "Muslims not conforming to Western cultural norms" that make the headlines. They certainly have the lion's share of the terrorists, but this is a none issue. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but sometimes I wonder if this is just the media playing up anti-Muslim sentiment, funded by the government, to help justify the Iraq war. I just heard my friend expressing her rage that the Muslims don't allow women to dress the way they want, therefore equating them to something less than human...

Seriously, religions in general have groups who are obnoxious and they all expect the rest of society to conform to what they view as "right".
Amen. There are extremists in every religion and they expect the Government to cater to their every whim, whether they be Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or any other Religion.

No reason for our medical establishment to cater to extremists.

I know plenty of Muslim women. None of them cover up their whole body. Most don't even wear the hijab.

I was just wondering about that, in fact. We have PETA activists and abortion bombers doing far more extreme things, but it always seems to come down to "Muslims not conforming to Western cultural norms" that make the headlines. They certainly have the lion's share of the terrorists, but this is a none issue. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but sometimes I wonder if this is just the media playing up anti-Muslim sentiment, funded by the government, to help justify the Iraq war. I just heard my friend expressing her rage that the Muslims don't allow women to dress the way they want, therefore equating them to something less than human...

Our media isn't censored or bribed by the government. They're naturally fucked up.

How is it "over leftwing"? We're all here of our own free will, after all...

I think he means the leftists majority. Here, I'd say the majority are leftists of some kind. Followed by a strong libertarian minority and a few conservatards.

Me...and most people..they just arn't represented on the over-leftwing NSG...

How is it "over leftwing"? We're all here of our own free will, after all...

Inane. Anyone entering a sterile environment where infection is not only possible, but probable, they should be required to do everything in their power to reduce the risk.

Interestingly, the largest culprits in US hospitals are poorly maintained and long fingernails as well as rings. Both should be heavily discouraged (read: banned) in the interest of disease control.

How is it "over leftwing"? We're all here of our own free will, after all...

We don't believe what TAI believes, that's how :rolleyes:

Me...and most people..they just arn't represented on the over-leftwing NSG...


Hi, from the left wing here, and I am tired of it too...But mostly because I am tired of that vile religion, which sugarcoats itself to gain acceptance among the ignorant of the west.


I was just wondering about that, in fact. We have PETA activists and abortion bombers doing far more extreme things, but it always seems to come down to "Muslims not conforming to Western cultural norms" that make the headlines. They certainly have the lion's share of the terrorists, but this is a none issue. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but sometimes I wonder if this is just the media playing up anti-Muslim sentiment, funded by the government, to help justify the Iraq war. I just heard my friend expressing her rage that the Muslims don't allow women to dress the way they want, therefore equating them to something less than human...
And when was the last time that an abortion clinic was blown to pieces? How many people did it affect? See, with Islam, its an EVERYDAY thing. Everyday we are given something else in the news, showing us how we need to respect their belief and practice, because its the nice thing to do. Even if it goes against our standards, including, in this case, medical standards that can determine the health of patients.


2nd The IMA is completely wrong, this type of covering is a Middle Eastern cultural thing. It by no means is a central tenet of Islam.
Wrong again.

There is a hadith that is narrated by Aisha(the young wife of Mo) saying that after one of the paedoprophets friends(umar) saw a women taking a piss outside at night, he went to Mo-Mo and said that the women should be clothed anytime theyy are not inside. Miraculously, a few days later Mohammad had a "special" revelation from Allah, saying that women are to be clothed anytime they are not inside.


here are the verses showing that covering is mandated(from Islamic websites too, so they are more biased to islamic truth)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/024.qmt.html#024.031
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.058
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.032
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.053

Hi, from the left wing here, and I am tired of it too...But mostly because I am tired of that vile religion, which sugarcoats itself to gain acceptance among the ignorant of the west.

Yeah, you're really left wing :rolleyes:

Yeah, you're really left wing :rolleyes:

If he called Christianity a vile religion, would you hesitate to call him left wing then?

Hi, from the left wing here, and I am tired of it too...But mostly because I am tired of that vile religion, which sugarcoats itself to gain acceptance among the ignorant of the west.It isn't far off from Christianity.



And when was the last time that an abortion clinic was blown to pieces? How many people did it affect? See, with Islam, its an EVERYDAY thing. Everyday we are given something else in the news, showing us how we need to respect their belief and practice, because its the nice thing to do. Even if it goes against our standards, including, in this case, medical standards that can determine the health of patients.
And when was the last time a pharmacist refused to fill a prescription because they are "Good Christians"? And how many people were impacted by the IRA? How about some good ol' fashioned asshattery with the WBC and their frequent protests of funerals? Maybe the klan? Or Timmy McVeigh? The 2002 Soweto bombings or Buford O. Furrow, Jr who shot up a Jewish daycare center in California? And yes, these are all recent.Christians wash their hands of the same blood as their muslim bretherin.

If you will paint with a wide brush, beware the drips and splatters.


Wrong again.

There is a hadith that is narrated by Aisha(the young wife of Mo) saying that after one of the paedoprophets friends(umar) saw a women taking a piss outside at night, he went to Mo-Mo and said that the women should be clothed anytime theyy are not inside. Miraculously, a few days later Mohammad had a "special" revelation from Allah, saying that women are to be clothed anytime they are not inside.


here are the verses showing that covering is mandated(from Islamic websites too, so they are more biased to islamic truth)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/024.qmt.html#024.031
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.058
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.032
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.053
[/QUOTE]
Christians are mandated to do many things most do not do. What's your point?

Yeah, you're really left wing :rolleyes:

I didn't know that left wing meant you bent over and took it from anyone. I thought it had more to do with helping people, instead of telling people to help themselves, like the conservatives do. I thought it was more about how we should focus on truth, instead of emotion? And I have all the room in the world to call Islam a vile religion, because I have seen it from the inside looking out. I don't understand how calling out a system of oppression, lies, and insanity is incompatible with being left wing. Please enlighten me.

I didn't know that left wing meant you bent over and took it from anyone. I thought it had more to do with helping people, instead of telling people to help themselves, like the conservatives do. I thought it was more about how we should focus on truth, instead of emotion? And I have all the room in the world to call Islam a vile religion, because I have seen it from the inside looking out. I don't understand how calling out a system of oppression, lies, and insanity is incompatible with being left wing. Please enlighten me.

From the inside looking out? How long were you in Islam exactly?

And if you want to use single examples to show how bad something is, I suppose I can use single examples for the contrary.

If Islam is so intolerant and kills unbelievers, why has no one killed you since you converted?

Why hasn't anyone told you it's ok to go fuck kids?

Why hasn't anyone tried to recruit you on a kill infidels campaign?

Because it's not Islam you dumbass!

-snip-

Dunno. Why shouldn't crotchety Vietnam vets get Ph. D.s?

From the inside looking out? How long were you in Islam exactly? Long enough to see it was getting me no where but darkness.

And if you want to use single examples to show how bad something is, I suppose I can use single examples for the contrary.
So your Quran, which isn't supposed to be ambiguous, or contradictory....is both now? ;)


If Islam is so intolerant and kills unbelievers, why has no one killed you since you converted? Because I live in America?

Why hasn't anyone told you it's ok to go fuck kids?
Oh, I had a few Muslim "scholars" say that as long as they were nine, then it would be okay, because that was how old Aisha was when she was molested by Mohammad.

Why hasn't anyone tried to recruit you on a kill infidels campaign?Again, i live in america. Had I lived in Saudi Arabia, the Islamic spiritual land, perhaps I would have been recruited. ;)


Because it's not Islam you dumbass!

No, I think it very much so IS Islam. Speaking of dumb...What about the fact that Mohammad said it was okay to drink camel piss? Or how about the time a fly flew into his soup, and he ate it, and told the people that one wing had poison, but the other had the cure? Or how about the winged mule that took Mohammad to Paradise(this was before he died). Yeah, it sounds rather idiotic to me. :)

Long enough to see it was getting me no where but darkness.Which would be how long?
So your Quran, which isn't supposed to be ambiguous, or contradictory....is both now? ;)
As is the bible

Because I live in America?
So?

Oh, I had a few Muslim "scholars" say that as long as they were nine, then it would be okay, because that was how old Aisha was when she was molested by Mohammad.
That's disturbing, but I seriously doubt that those were respected Imams
Again, i live in america. Had I lived in Saudi Arabia, the Islamic spiritual land, perhaps I would have been recruited. ;)
Doesn't necessarily make a difference


No, I think it very much so IS Islam. Speaking of dumb...What about the fact that Mohammad said it was okay to drink camel piss? Or how about the time a fly flew into his soup, and he ate it, and told the people that one wing had poison, but the other had the cure? Or how about the winged mule that took Mohammad to Paradise(this was before he died). Yeah, it sounds rather idiotic to me. :)

Like other religions there is stupidity in it, just because you had a bad experience with Islam, does not mean that Islam unto itself is evil.

What about the fact that Mohammad said it was okay to drink camel piss? Or how about the time a fly flew into his soup, and he ate it, and told the people that one wing had poison, but the other had the cure? Or how about the winged mule that took Mohammad to Paradise(this was before he died). Yeah, it sounds rather idiotic to me. :)

What about when Jesus went to a fig tree that wasnt bearing fruit (probably dead, read on) and commanded it to bear him fruit. When that tree did not bear fruit, he cursed it saying it would never bear fruit again. And it never did bear fruit again...probably because it was FUCKING DEAD.


See, no religion has a monopoly on stupid stories

I think these women are just trying to get some publicity or are just plain stupid. One of the fundamental ideals of Islam is cleanliness and this argument the students are making goes totally against that. Plus even if they are so ardent of being modest infront of men I think there is less than nothing to fear in the way of sexuality while in the OR or ER.

I haven't heard of this kind of issue in other countries with lots of Muslims people such as Turkey.

Long enough to see it was getting me no where but darkness.
So your Quran, which isn't supposed to be ambiguous, or contradictory....is both now? ;)


Because I live in America?


Oh, I had a few Muslim "scholars" say that as long as they were nine, then it would be okay, because that was how old Aisha was when she was molested by Mohammad.

Again, i live in america. Had I lived in Saudi Arabia, the Islamic spiritual land, perhaps I would have been recruited. ;)



No, I think it very much so IS Islam. Speaking of dumb...What about the fact that Mohammad said it was okay to drink camel piss? Or how about the time a fly flew into his soup, and he ate it, and told the people that one wing had poison, but the other had the cure? Or how about the winged mule that took Mohammad to Paradise(this was before he died). Yeah, it sounds rather idiotic to me. :)

Clearly not an "insider" then.

You're quoting Hadith, which have been, throughout history, nonsensical and contradictory.

Still, no Muslims threatening you with death are there?

One can justify almost anything if with the Hadith, so I have little respect for such "scholars". Though do tell me how many Muslims you know that are married with 9 year olds.

Which would (if you were recruited in Saudi Arabia) only prove that Islam is not the homogenous evil entity that you'd like it to be.

Hadiths, which perhaps you'd like to source. There's a rather painful method of tracing such statements to someone near the prophet, and most don't make it. Perhaps you'd like to link them and trace them back.

I never understood why, but it seems the extremists are always the root of the problems. In any religion, from hinduism to christianity to islam to atheism. Its always the fanatics and the people that cater to them that cause the trouble in society.

Oh great, it seems the right-wing media are playing up the same old non-issues of mass distraction again, some day people are going to realize that teh ebil homosexuals and muslims aren't going to affect their life in any way...

Yes radical Islam does not affect anyone ever, lets just ignore it :rolleyes:

And when was the last time that an abortion clinic was blown to pieces?

Most recent bombing? June, 2001, not all that long ago. As for cases of arson, the most recent fire set an an abortion clinic in a case of arson was less than 2 months ago.

In the last 10 years there have been three bombings and twenty seven cases of arson.

In the last 10 years there have been almost seven hundred anthrax threats.

How many people did it affect?

If you don't see how violence against abortion clinics affects every single woman in the united states capable of having a child then I really don't thing I can ever explain it to you.

Speaking of doctors, your argument needs one to perform an autopsy on it, as it was killed right here.
Yet another instance of a fact overdose, that's my prognosis.

But the West just adores anything and anyone who can claim to have been a former Muslim that confirms their ebil moslem beliefs. Why else would Ayaan Ali-Hirsi's Ebil Moslem Rant In Book Form be such a best seller?
Don't forget that the Christian West also loves stories (fiction or nonfiction) about supposed Muslims converting to Christianity and fleeing an 'oppressive world', you would be surprised the amount of books exist on the subject.

Also, Christians love the persecution complex, ie 'Christians being persecuting by teh ebil muslims in the Middle East'...

Let's not generalize too much. There are plenty of people in the West that realize Islam isn't evil.

*raises hand*

Yay! Timewarp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdu7xoHU9DA) again.

There is a hadith that is narrated by Aisha(the young wife of Mo) saying that after one of the paedoprophets friends(umar) saw a women taking a piss outside at night, he went to Mo-Mo and said that the women should be clothed anytime theyy are not inside. Miraculously, a few days later Mohammad had a "special" revelation from Allah, saying that women are to be clothed anytime they are not inside.


here are the verses showing that covering is mandated(from Islamic websites too, so they are more biased to islamic truth)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/024.qmt.html#024.031
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.058
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.032
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.053

and just what about these verses do you find so much worse than similar ones in the letters of paul?

i didnt see anything but that women must be dressed modestly, cover their bosoms and wear some kind of cloak when they are outside.

there is plenty of room in that for the differences between modest iranian dress and modest afghani dress.

So your Quran, which isn't supposed to be ambiguous, or contradictory....is both now? ;)

Isn't your bible supposed to neither be ambiguous or contradictory? Want me to find you a few hundred examples of it? Where exactly did you develop this nonsensical audacity to try and point out all the little nonsensical propositions and innacuracies in the Quran, while basing your faith on a text that is at least as nonsensical, contradictory and full of bullshit.

Is raping a 9 year old girl any less offensive than killing an adulterer by throwing rocks at her until she's dead? Really?

I thought you said left wingers were not supposed to be "ruled by emotion" and instead by reason and intellect. Seems to me you're doing quite a good job at holding up one religion to a standard yours is entirely incapable of meeting. Isn't there something about people living in glass houses?

Oh wait, I forgot, the christian bible is fine with people throwing stones. As long as it's at gay people, however.

Oh great, it seems the right-wing media are playing up the same old non-issues of mass distraction again, some day people are going to realize that teh ebil homosexuals and muslims aren't going to affect their life in any way...

I think these women are just trying to get some publicity or are just plain stupid. One of the fundamental ideals of Islam is cleanliness and this argument the students are making goes totally against that. Plus even if they are so ardent of being modest infront of men I think there is less than nothing to fear in the way of sexuality while in the OR or ER.

I haven't heard of this kind of issue in other countries with lots of Muslims people such as Turkey.

Indeed, it appears to be a rather isolated incident, considering how many Muslim womyn doctors there are.

Like other religions there is stupidity in it, just because you had a bad experience with Islam, does not mean that Islam unto itself is evil.

But the West just adores anything and anyone who can claim to have been a former Muslim that confirms their ebil moslem beliefs. Why else would Ayaan Ali-Hirsi's Ebil Moslem Rant In Book Form be such a best seller?

But the West just adores anything and anyone who can claim to have been a former Muslim that confirms their ebil moslem beliefs. Why else would Ayaan Ali-Hirsi's Ebil Moslem Rant In Book Form be such a best seller?

Let's not generalize too much. There are plenty of people in the West that realize Islam isn't evil.

"No practising Muslim woman - doctor, medical student, nurse or patient - should be forced to bare her arms below the elbow,"
Well that could certainly make things hard for a doctor.

Female Muslim patient: My arm is hurting quite badly. Can you tell me what is wrong.
Doctor: I'm not sure. May I have a look at your arm?
Patient: No.
Doctor: Umm...

Maybe it's time to design some shirtsleeves of the finest silk, such that they are almost invisible to the naked eye - fit only for an emperor.

Let's not generalize too much. There are plenty of people in the West that realize Islam isn't evil.

Yeah? Who? Bush and his cronies certainly believe Islam is ebil. He wants to :mp5: all the Moslems.

FYI: Im from the west and I do not believe that Islam is evil. Some of the practicionars are, but that is true of all religions.

Yeah? Who? Bush and his cronies certainly believe Islam is ebil. He wants to :mp5: all the Moslems.

FYI: Im from the west and I do not believe that Islam is evil. Some of the practicionars are, but that is true of all religions.

Kind of proved the point didn't you?

Well, first of all, the preferred spelling is Muslim

Maybe you preffer it, but I like Moslem better. It is not meant to be offensive in any way. And if you think it is well thats your problem.

And Bush and his cronies don't represent the "West", even if they do hate Islam.

He kind of does actually. He represents America, which is one of the main components of western society.


Kind of proved the point didn't you?

My friends consider me an exception, an oddity.

Yeah? Who? Bush and his cronies certainly believe islam is ebil. He wants to :mp5: all the moslems.

Well, first of all, the preferred spelling is Muslim.

And Bush and his cronies don't represent the "West", even if they do hate Islam.

Hi, from the left wing here, and I am tired of it too...But mostly because I am tired of that vile religion, which sugarcoats itself to gain acceptance among the ignorant of the west.



And when was the last time that an abortion clinic was blown to pieces? How many people did it affect? See, with Islam, its an EVERYDAY thing. Everyday we are given something else in the news, showing us how we need to respect their belief and practice, because its the nice thing to do. Even if it goes against our standards, including, in this case, medical standards that can determine the health of patients.



Wrong again.

There is a hadith that is narrated by Aisha(the young wife of Mo) saying that after one of the paedoprophets friends(umar) saw a women taking a piss outside at night, he went to Mo-Mo and said that the women should be clothed anytime theyy are not inside. Miraculously, a few days later Mohammad had a "special" revelation from Allah, saying that women are to be clothed anytime they are not inside.


here are the verses showing that covering is mandated(from Islamic websites too, so they are more biased to islamic truth)

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/024.qmt.html#024.031
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.058
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.032
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/033.qmt.html#033.053

Two things.
A- The hadith is not actual Islam, regardless of what the scholars love to say. The only vital component to Islam is the Quran (since it is the word of God, according to muslims). The Hadiths and the Sharia are interpretations created by man, which a Muslim is not obligated to follow (even though a majority do).

B- I only flipped through your examples, but the ones in Sura 24 only say that women are to cover their breasts, which is no more than what Westerners and Christians expect.

Of course, Bush, with a less than 40% approval rating truly represents America, which, I will remind you contains much less than half the population of "the West".

He is still the leader of the country. Hitler was the leader of Germany before and during WWII, he was "representitive" of the "average" German.

We are not talking about population. We are talking about a culture/civilization. The West is a culture and most of the West listens to American music, watches American movies and watches American television. America is very much a representation of the West.

Maybe you preffer it, but I like Moslem better. It is not meant to be offensive in any way. And if you think it is well thats your problem.



He kind of does actually. He represents America, which is one of the main components of western society.

Of course, Bush, with a less than 40% approval rating truly represents America, which, I will remind you contains much less than half the population of "the West".

What you do is tell the dumbasses if they won't was their hands, don't go looking for jobs where you have to wash your hands.

Why don't they just have them wash hands in a public women's bathroom and wear extra long surgical gloves? :(

A public bathroom, male or female, is not exactly a sterile environment. :rolleyes:

He is still the leader of the country. Hitler was the leader of Germany before and during WWII, he was "representitive" of the "average" German.

We are not talking about population. We are talking about a culture/civilization. The West is a culture and most of the West listens to American music, watches American movies and watches American television. America is very much a representation of the West.

He will not be the leader much longer.

That a rather Amero-centric view of the "West". The West is really as much Europe and its culture as it is the US. In fact, the US is founded of off European culture, not the other way around. It's also false to say that everyone follows American culture, in fact, many in the West cannot even speak English.

Ultimately, the US is part of the West, but not even close to being its representative.

Clearly not an "insider" then.

You're quoting Hadith, which have been, throughout history, nonsensical and contradictory.

Still, no Muslims threatening you with death are there?

One can justify almost anything if with the Hadith, so I have little respect for such "scholars". Though do tell me how many Muslims you know that are married with 9 year olds.

Which would (if you were recruited in Saudi Arabia) only prove that Islam is not the homogenous evil entity that you'd like it to be.

Hadiths, which perhaps you'd like to source. There's a rather painful method of tracing such statements to someone near the prophet, and most don't make it. Perhaps you'd like to link them and trace them back.

Plan on responding, Zilam?

they should not be able to go against the laws of hygiene but maybe they could wear extra long surgical gloves?

Aren't they supposed to wash before putting on the gloves?

He is still the leader of the country. Hitler was the leader of Germany before and during WWII, he was "representitive" of the "average" German.

We are not talking about population. We are talking about a culture/civilization. The West is a culture and most of the West listens to American music, watches American movies and watches American television. America is very much a representation of the West.

BS it is, I find the very notion that American culture represents the 'West' as entirely offensive, go take your bigmac elsewhere thanks...

We don't judge Americans or Christianity only by looking at Mormons.

So please do not judge Islam and Muslims only by looking at radical and extremist practices of some people.

He is still the leader of the country. Hitler was the leader of Germany before and during WWII, he was "representitive" of the "average" German.
If you really believe that, then I feel sorry for you
We are not talking about population. We are talking about a culture/civilization. The West is a culture and most of the West listens to American music, watches American movies and watches American television. America is very much a representation of the West.
So the fact that a majority of the 'west' disagrees with Dubya has no bearing whatsoever on this?

Oh, I see. And that's why Saudi Arabia doesn't have a national soccer team? Oh, wait, they DO! And they wear those shorts like any other player!

But they don't have a woman's national soccer team. :( At least not one that wears shorts. :rolleyes:

Plan on responding, Zilam?

He's offline, give him some time

He's offline, give him some time

He was online when I posted it, didn't know if he was still on though.

Aren't they supposed to wash before putting on the gloves?

of course but i think that that can be arranged to be at least single sex. the problem is not washing up but leaving the arms bare which is not modest in most moslem societies.

He is still the leader of the country. Hitler was the leader of Germany before and during WWII, he was "representitive" of the "average" German.

We are not talking about population. We are talking about a culture/civilization. The West is a culture and most of the West listens to American music, watches American movies and watches American television. America is very much a representation of the West.

No. We may be responsible for Bush (since he's our fault), but he certainly doesn't "represent us" by any stretch of the imagination. And until I see evidence that large numbers of German citizens contributed to electing Bush, your claim that all the West is some how summed up in this single man holds no water. Just because Europe watches the movies we made doesn't mean that Bush represents them. That's utter bullshit.

Seriously, religions in general have groups who are obnoxious and they all expect the rest of society to conform to what they view as "right".

They also want you to believe what they think the scripture says not necessarily what the scripture says. Exactly why I'm not a member of any established religion.

Don't pretend that a true christian theocracy would be any better.

Reminds me of the Puritans who fled Europe to avoid persecution and came to America, founded colonies, and persecuted those who did not believe as they did.:(

He was online when I posted it, didn't know if he was still on though.

Maybe you scared him away?




*runs up to Zayun2 and yells 'Boo!"*

Maybe you scared him away?




*runs up to Zayun2 and yells 'Boo!"*

Nah, I know from experience that he's pretty damn persistent.

BS it is, I find the very notion that American culture represents the 'West' as entirely offensive, go take your bigmac elsewhere thanks...

It represents part of the west, not the whole of it! Where would the west be without composers such as Mozart or Beethoven? Where would the west be without european architecture? Where would the west be if it didnt have great philosiphers and painters (almost entirely european I add)? NOWHERE! The "west" would not exist.

No. We may be responsible for Bush (since he's our fault), but he certainly doesn't "represent us" by any stretch of the imagination. And until I see evidence that large numbers of German citizens contributed to electing Bush, your claim that all the West is some how summed up in this single man holds no water. Just because Europe watches the movies we made doesn't mean that Bush represents them. That's utter bullshit.

I was using Bush as a way to play the devil's advocate. I didnt mean that he is the representitive of 'western' culture. Cause hes not.

If you really believe that, then I feel sorry for you

No I dont believe that, I'm qouting my history text book.

So the fact that a majority of the 'west' disagrees with Dubya has no bearing whatsoever on this?

Edit: I get it, nevermind. Ok, yeah, the world hates him. the Europeans hate him, the Democrats hate him and now his own party hates him. I hate him to. That was not one of my better uses of an example.

Amen. There are extremists in every religion and they expect the Government to cater to their every whim, whether they be Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or any other Religion.

...Buddhist?

Okay, so I've seen some pretty extreme stuff going on over the Tibet issue but it's all like "Free Tibet or we'll.. slice our own bellies open!" Not very nice, but hardly the same as blowing a bunch of soldiers up at a checkpoint.

I can just imagine the protests now. "Life is an illusion, there is no such thing as death, and we are all the imagination of ourselves, motherfucker."

...Buddhist?

Okay, so I've seen some pretty extreme stuff going on over the Tibet issue but it's all like "Free Tibet or we'll.. slice our own bellies open!" Not very nice, but hardly the same as blowing a bunch of soldiers up at a checkpoint.

I can just imagine the protests now. "Life is an illusion, there is no such thing as death, and we are all the imagination of ourselves, motherfucker."

Samurais and Kamikaze Pilots were often Zen Buddhists.

...Buddhist?

Okay, so I’ve seen some pretty extreme stuff going on over the Tibet issue but it’s all like “Free Tibet or we’ll.. slice our own bellies open!” Not very nice, but hardly the same as blowing a bunch of soldiers up at a checkpoint.
Buddhism has had it’s fair share of militants, still does today.

From a BBC website (http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/buddhism/buddhistethics/war.shtml), the first source I could find:

But Buddhism, like the other great faiths, has not always lived up to its principles–there are numerous examples of Buddhists engaging in violence and even war. In the 14th century Buddhist fighters led the uprising that evicted the Mongols from China. In Japan, Buddhist monks trained Samurai warriors in meditation that made them better fighters.

In the twentieth century Japanese Zen masters wrote in support of Japan’s wars of aggression. For example, Sawaki Kodo (1880–1965) wrote this in 1942:

”It is just to punish those who disturb the public order. Whether one kills or does not kill, the precept forbidding killing [is preserved]. It is the precept forbidding killing that wields the sword. It is the precept that throws the bomb.“
Sawaki Kodo

In Sri Lanka the 20th century civil war between the mostly Buddhist Sinhalese majority and the Hindu Tamil minority has cost 50,000 lives.

Samurais and Kamikaze Pilots were often Zen Buddhists.

Yaknow that's surprisingly true.

HOWEVER.

http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?=&p=153608

Seems the main motivation behind the kamikaze was more emperor worship than the belief that the universe is an illusion and that hurting someone else is only hurting yourself. ;)

No I dont believe that, I'm qouting my history text book.



Unfortunitally, History Textbooks are not good sources of information.


Anyone whos read "Lies My Teacher Told Me" knows what Im saying.

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

Actually, given what the IMA said, it seems like they offered a very practical compromise -- sterile gloves over the sleeves to the elbow.

I'm not a big supporter of the religious (Christian) right either....My main problem with the Republican party is that they have to cater to the religious right....so that the capitalists, the militaristics/nationalists and the religious all have to lay in bed together...I hate it.

I wish we had a multi-party system.

Problem is...the extremes of Islam are alot worse and alot more common than of Christianity. I live in Florida which is 110% a Christian/conservative state...and life is 100% normal..and I'm Jewish. Couldn't say the same living in a Muslims/conservative state...

Florida and normal in the same breath?

Actually, given what the IMA said, it seems like they offered a very practical compromise -- sterile gloves over the sleeves to the elbow.

One problem...SOP is to wash the hands underneath the gloves. Gloves are there more to protect you than the patient

One problem...SOP is to wash the hands underneath the gloves. Gloves are there more to protect you than the patient

Hmm, so.... maybe there could be a women's wash-up room (not the bathroom) in which they could scrub up, THEN put the gloves on?

Hmm, so.... maybe there could be a women's wash-up room (not the bathroom) in which they could scrub up, THEN put the gloves on?

That would work. In my experience, they have very few doors and the like, but I'm sure there could be a curtain or something.
Strange as it is, in the hundreds of years of modern sanitation, we've yet to find anything as effective as good ol' soap and water (those instant hand sanitizers fail to go under rings and fingernails)

Muslim Women should not be doctors for the same reason women should not be doctors. Women are far too emotionally...deranged.. to be trusted with scalpels and soap under high-pressure situations. Honestly, we should stop with all the rampant 'ebil moslem' accusations and focus on the real problem. You all know what I'm talkin' 'bout.
Potatoe sales in Idaho.

That would work. In my experience, they have very few doors and the like, but I'm sure there could be a curtain or something.
Strange as it is, in the hundreds of years of modern sanitation, we've yet to find anything as effective as good ol' soap and water (those instant hand sanitizers fail to go under rings and fingernails)

The "Good ol soap and water" they use is as modern as any "instant hand sanitizers" they just have the advantage of not having to evaporate with minimal residue so the range of chemicals and viscosity can have a much wider range as it will be washed off.

Its really not all that strange when you really think about it

we've yet to find anything as effective as good ol' soap and water
It is not just soap and water that does the trick. It is the combination along with scrubbing(15 seconds is the rule). If you do not scrub, plain ol' soap and water will not be as effective.

-snip-
I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

what about christains, or jews, or hindus or buddists? dont be so EBILLLLL MOSLEMMMMMMMMSSSSSSSS

No, I think it very much so IS Islam. Speaking of dumb...What about the fact that Mohammad said it was okay to drink camel piss? Or how about the time a fly flew into his soup, and he ate it, and told the people that one wing had poison, but the other had the cure? Or how about the winged mule that took Mohammad to Paradise(this was before he died). Yeah, it sounds rather idiotic to me. :)

I'd actually like to see some sources on that, never heard any of that stuff before. And that winged mule you refer to is Buraq, which is actually more in line with Pegasus, a flying horse. If I remember correctly, Al-Isra, the journey, wasn't to Paradise but to the farthest mosque (Temple Mount in Jerusalem) in the land. Regardless, most Muslim scholars believe that it was some sort of dream rather than an actual journey.

Personally, I don't care whether you're Muslim or a damn Scientologist, when you choose to work in a medical field, you are putting your patients' health at risk by not following standard hygiene procedures. But, I suppose that elbow-length gloves are a decent compromise

MEh this is what i do concerning religion:
never read from holy books, they'll just confuse the crap out of you
if you do believe in god, pray that he will show you the way *bows head*

The entire war on "terror" has been labelled a "crusade" by Bush, which certainly has major religious connotations. Heck, one of the presidential candidates for the Republicans right now wants to put the constitution into the world of God!

when arabs hear crusades this is what they hear "oh fuck their coming back for another 100 years of orgies, backstabbing and regular destruction"

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

No, because I only hear these reports from Islamophobes such as yourself, crying (yet again) that the sky is falling, zomg Muslims oppressing us, zomg Muslims are barbarians, zomg Muslims are terrorists!

And really, the near-daily Islamophobic alarmist bigotry is what makes me fed up.

Dunno. Why shouldn't crotchety Vietnam vets get Ph. D.s?

Hey, I'm not that old.... But I would firmly discourage anyone my age from doing the same thing.

Oh, I see. And that's why Saudi Arabia doesn't have a national soccer team? Oh, wait, they DO! And they wear those shorts like any other player!

But, and already anticipating the fact that we would point out the OBVIOUS broad-brush flaw in your lack-of-an-argument, you go and say "that there are a few is bad enough" as an attempt to deny the ENTIRE group of Muslim women the right to practice medicine? On the basis that "there are a few"? Fine, but let me give you a taste of that logic. As, by that logic...

...the US soldiers shouldn't be allowed to run prisons. That there are a few torturers is bad enough...

...whites shouldn't be allowed to hold public office. That there are a few white corrupt politicians is bad enough...

...Christians shouldn't be allowed to become doctors. That there are a few who refuse flood transfusions is bad enough...

...and so on.

Speaking of doctors, your argument needs one to perform an autopsy on it, as it was killed right here.
The answer is, of course, obvious. Anyone that refuses to, or is incapable of performing actions required of their job should find another job.

One only wishes that Muslims were as tolerant of non-Muslims when we turn back the calendar and visit their lands.

I remember a Debating Society motion proposing that Christians (though I assume it would apply to other religions) GPs should not have to gove women advice on abortion if they saw it as against their faith. It got shot down fairly easily. Islam is not the first and will by no means the last religion to have a few members who demand their faith be given special treatment. And I'm fed up with that - whoever it be - as much as I'm fed up with people pouncing on the whole of Islam when one Muslim does something out of the ordinary. To put this in perspective, there are thousands of practicing Muslim doctors in the NHS - which recruits from dominantly Islamic countries - who do a good damn job.

Why shouldn't Christians be:
Bartenders
Lawyers
OB/GYN
Pharmacists
Law makers


Same reasoning. Guess it's different when it's your asshole religion wanting special treatment eh? Our entire society has been ordered around bending over backwards and doing Christians favors. Your god forbid someone else expect some of it eh? We've got the FCC to make sure we don't see or hear anything that might offend the poor delicate Christians, we've got the blue laws to keep people from being "immoral" we've got liquor laws that say I can't even buy a fucking bottle of wine on a Sunday. Your religion likes to dictate the lives of everyone. Who I can marry, what I learn in school, what I can watch on broadcast TV.

Fuck your god, keep him the hell out of my government, my schools, my airwaves. You're not that damned special, just because someone else wants special treatment gives Christians no right to complain, ya'll have been getting it for millenia. Guess that's the rub ain't it? Someone else has the gall to want the same perks you've been enjoying.

Want to know why liberals defend Muslims? We see the hypocrisy of one religious cult whining about another cult's practices.

The answer is, of course, obvious. Anyone that refuses to, or is incapable of performing actions required of their job should find another job.

This much I agree with.

I don't see anything wrong with Muslim doctors wearing longer gloves which cover more of their arms, as long as they observe all the required sanitary protocols.

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?


Meh, I frequently deal with medical students from all backgrounds. So it isn't surprising

Though perhaps I should start some hysterical headlines of my own.
"White Male Medical Students Cannot open Doors" (If only I were joking)

Anyway. It seems Dr Majid Katme and the "Islamic Medical Association" seem as fringe as can be. They don't seem to even have their own website! You may as well go the whole hog and use "Class War" as the voice of the average Londoner. Infact, I just did a quick google search and most of the results that came up seem to reference this story, so I am doubtful that either of them are representative of their profession.

EDIT: Also, Long gloves are perfectly fine. Though I'm not where you come from if you think doctors bringing their gloves from home is good infection control

Needless to say, I feel I have to side with Zilam here. I am left-wing, but I'm getting tired over the absurd demands of the fundementalists from the Muslim Council of Britain and similar.

Eh, they'll just make long gloves available. Works for everyone - and quite possibly more hygenic than bare arms.

The answer is, of course, obvious. Anyone that refuses to, or is incapable of performing actions required of their job should find another job.

One only wishes that Muslims were as tolerant of non-Muslims when we turn back the calendar and visit their lands.

Ah, good, so you agree with me that some Christians shouldn't work at pharmacies.

Because, you see, they refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control. And, worse, to give them back to the woman that wants or needs it. They effectively violate, and, yes, I will use this word, RAPE women by doing so. They are RAPISTS. And yet you do not complain even when some conservatives wish to sign laws allowing this violation, this rape.

So, and don't let your entire post story of Muslim-bashing be an impediment here, again, what the fuck is your point?

Ah, good, so you agree with me that some Christians shouldn't work at pharmacies.

Not sure about Myrmidonisia, but I agree with you.

I don't think Muslim women should be doctors. It could be anyone under the peep-scarf. They could be too busy playing golf or getting honour killed to do the operation and could sent their unruly children to fill in for them, and you would be non the wiser until you were in heaven with Jehovah.

Well, SOMEone had to bring out the crazies.

Oh, I see. And that's why Saudi Arabia doesn't have a national soccer team? Oh, wait, they DO! And they wear those shorts like any other player!.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/17/AR2005121700012.html
Fatwa Football

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1605266,00.html
In the name of God the merciful and benevolent:

1. International terminology that heretics use, such as "foul," "penalty", "corner," "goal", "out" and others, should be abandoned and not said. Whoever says them should be punished and ejected from the game.

2. Do not call "foul" and stop the game if someone falls and sprains a hand or foot or the ball touches his hand, and do not give a yellow or red card to whoever was responsible for the injury or tackle. Instead, it should be adjudicated according to Sharia rulings concerning broken bones and injuries.

3. Do not follow the heretics, the Jews, the Christians and especially evil America regarding the number of players. Do not play with 11 people. Add to this number or decrease it.

4. Play in your regular clothes or your pyjamas or something like that, but not coloured shorts and numbered T-shirts, because shorts and T-shirts are not Muslim clothing. Rather, they are heretical and western clothing, so beware of imitating their fashion.

5. If you have fulfilled these conditions and intend to play soccer, play to strengthen the body in order better to struggle in the way of God on high and to prepare the body for when it is called to jihad. Soccer is not for passing time or the thrill of so-called victory.

6. Do not play in two halves. Rather, play in one half or three halves in order to completely differentiate yourselves from the heretics, the corrupted and the disobedient.

7. If neither of you beats the other, or "wins", as it is called, and neither puts the leather between the posts, do not add extra time or penalties. Instead leave the field, because winning with extra time and penalty kicks is the pinnacle of imitating heretics and international rules.

8. Young crowds should not gather to watch when you play because if you are there for the sake of sports and strengthening your bodies as you claimed, why would people watch you? You should make them join your physical fitness and jihad preparation, or you should say: "Go proselytise and seek out morally reprehensible acts in the markets and the press and leave us to our physical fitness."

9. You should spit in the face of whoever puts the ball between the posts or uprights and then runs in order to get his friends to follow him and hug him like players in America or France do, and you should punish him, for what is the relationship between celebrating, hugging and kissing and the sports that you are practising?

10. You should use two posts instead of three pieces of wood or steel that you erect in order to put the ball between them, meaning that you should remove the crossbar in order not to imitate the heretics and in order to be entirely distinct from the soccer system's despotic international rules.

11. Do not do what is called "substitution," that is, taking the place of someone who has fallen, because this is a practice of the heretics in America and elsewhere.

Did I just miss his posts, or did Myrmi post and run?


EDIT: Ignore me, I'm an idiot.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

I'm more fed up with these daily reports of intolerance and douchebaggery. Long gloves. Oh no. Clearly that solution is impractical.

So, I just finished reading the thread and this is what I gleaned from it:

There was one report in one newspaper about a small group of female Muslim medical students pitching a fit because the school wasn't already geared up to fit their fundamentalist religious beliefs.

Because of this, one NSG bigot decided to denounce ALL Muslim women and, by extension, all Muslims, as physically dirty people who refuse to wash themselves but still demand some kind of right to root around with their filthy, filthy hands inside good, clean, pure Western bodies.

Naturally, this crap had nowhere to go, so the thread immediately collapsed into shouts of "Terrorist!" and "Their extremists are worse than our extremists!" and "Christians are more civilized than Muslims!" and cherry-picked quotes from various books that no one has read fully.

And what I have learned from it all is that Aryavartha seems not to be a big fan of fundamentalist Islamic soccer guidelines.

:rolleyes:

That's disturbing, but I seriously doubt that those were respected Imams


Oh, they are respectable indeed. They are neither ashamed or embarrassed by Aisha's age. The reasoning flows from "Allah is God and Muhammed is His true prophet -> ergo he is masoom/infallible -> ergo he can't do anything wrong -> ergo why should we be embarrassed about Muhammed (PBUH and all) marrying a nine year old Aisha ?

Individual sects may differ in the age a little bit (9 or 13), and when it was 'consummated' and what Aisha's physical and mental maturity was at that time...yes, I have heard theories that "those were harsh times then when girls 'developed' early..so it was acceptable to marry at that age blah blah".

Iran, after the Islamic revolution, brought down the age of marriage for girls to 9 and has now increased that to 13 due to pressure from rights activists. Ayotullah Ruhollah Khomeini is still a most respected Imam.

And what I have learned from it all is that Aryavartha seems not to be a big fan of fundamentalist Islamic soccer guidelines.

:rolleyes:

:p

I was just wondering where the Mutawwa’in are when it comes to male soccer teams.

Oh, they are respectable indeed. They are neither ashamed or embarrassed by Aisha's age. The reasoning flows from "Allah is God and Muhammed is His true prophet -> ergo he is masoom/infallible -> ergo he can't do anything wrong -> ergo why should we be embarrassed about Muhammed (PBUH and all) marrying a nine year old Aisha ?

Individual sects may differ in the age a little bit (9 or 13), and when it was 'consummated' and what Aisha's physical and mental maturity was at that time...yes, I have heard theories that "those were harsh times then when girls 'developed' early..so it was acceptable to marry at that age blah blah".


People also neglect the fact that this was several hundred years ago in a different culture entirely. Hell, if she was 13 (as you say some translations have it) that would have been a normal age to marry in Europe.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/17/AR2005121700012.html
Fatwa Football

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1605266,00.html

So you're saying that the guys that played the match between Saudi Arabia and Tunisia in the World Cup are heretics?

After reading all what was written i came to one conclusion STAY away from any religion it will not help you or heal you or do anything for you than confuse you and abuse you.

Further no western politician represents me even i live in the so called west!

After reading all what was written i came to one conclusion STAY away from any religion it will not help you or heal you or do anything for you than confuse you and abuse you.

Further no western politician represents me even i live in the so called west!

For a first post, remarkably absent of smileys, but still extremely uninteresting.

Me...and most people..they just arn't represented on the over-leftwing NSG...

Quite.

I don't think Muslim women should be doctors. It could be anyone under the peep-scarf. They could be too busy playing golf or getting honour killed to do the operation and could sent their unruly children to fill in for them, and you would be non the wiser until you were in heaven with Jehovah.
*slow clap*

*slow clap*

For one of the stupidest posts made in this thread so far, outside of the OP?

That gets a golf clap.

For one of the stupidest posts made in this thread so far, outside of the OP?

That gets a golf clap.
They're the same to a philistine like me.;)

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

If they cannot do there job effectively then they should not be employed.

I am. And as such they should have their heads all sawed off.

Shush.

Ah, good, so you agree with me that some Christians shouldn't work at pharmacies.

[deleted tripe]

So, and don't let your entire post story of Muslim-bashing be an impediment here, again, what the fuck is your point?
Of course. Pharmacists have a code of ethics and I would expect nothing less than for a practicing pharmacist to stand by that code. If they can't then they shouldn't practice.

My point, as always, is that Muslims need to adapt to western ways in western countries. They certainly expect the same from us when we visit Islamic countries. That's it. No double standard.

My point, as always, is that Muslims need to adapt to western ways in western countries. They certainly expect the same from us when we visit Islamic countries. That's it. No double standard.

Sorry, it's not quid pro quo in exactly that manner. The West prides itself on its dedication to human rights, its tolerance and its democratic principles. These three things are not hallmarks of most Islamic countries. That means we do not simply say, 'this is our culture, assimilate or get out' just because other nations do indeed have this sort of policy. We do not pride ourselves on behaving 'just like the rest of them', and rightfully so. That is a pathetic goal not worth setting.

Does the Telegraph have a history of anti-Muslim bias?

I am trying to determine why this is the only paper reporting on the story.

Sorry, it's not quid pro quo in exactly that manner. The West prides itself on its dedication to human rights, its tolerance and its democratic principles. These three things are not hallmarks of most Islamic countries. That means we do not simply say, 'this is our culture, assimilate or get out' just because other nations do indeed have this sort of policy. We do not pride ourselves on behaving 'just like the rest of them', and rightfully so. That is a pathetic goal not worth setting.

You do know that was just a disingenuous pretense for Myrmi to harp on his current love affair with Islamic Exceptionalism and The Brown Peril, right?

Of course. Pharmacists have a code of ethics and I would expect nothing less than for a practicing pharmacist to stand by that code. If they can't then they shouldn't practice.

My point, as always, is that Muslims need to adapt to western ways in western countries. They certainly expect the same from us when we visit Islamic countries. That's it. No double standard.

This has nothing to do with 'western ways'. Unless you are claiming that hygiene is a 'western way'.

Of course. Pharmacists have a code of ethics and I would expect nothing less than for a practicing pharmacist to stand by that code. If they can't then they shouldn't practice.

My point, as always, is that Muslims need to adapt to western ways in western countries. They certainly expect the same from us when we visit Islamic countries. That's it. No double standard.

In that case, why is it that you don't point out that these pharmacists, which YOU AND I KNOW that are more numerous than the women your article tells about, are engaging in unacceptable behavior? Why don't you point out that there are many republicans FAVORING it? My guess is: because, if you do, you'll have to admit that, for these women to be representative of all Muslims, these pharmacists, that do much worse and are SUPPORTED BY POLITICIANS in doing so, are representatives of all Christians.

Christians ALSO need to adapt to western ways in western countries, by YOUR OWN notion. Because the proportion of Christians that do not and of Muslims that do not is, and that's something it PAINS you to know, the same one.

I'm more concerned about the Muslim medical students a while ago who refused to learn about contraception or abortion and yet still expected to pass their exams. Hell, I'm worried about any doctor who refuses to learn about contraception and abortion.

You do know that was just a disingenuous pretense for Myrmi to harp on his current love affair with Islamic Exceptionalism and The Brown Peril, right?

I wouldn't have put the effort into my post had I not wanted him to read it. Were I to just dismiss him, I certainly couldn't expect him to pay attention to me. His prejudices are clear...I'd like him to examine them openly. I don't think that is ever a waste of time. His basic premise 'dirty Muslims' is shallow, and not worth examining.

In that case, why is it that you don't point out that these pharmacists, which YOU AND I KNOW that are more numerous than the women your article tells about, are engaging in unacceptable behavior? Why don't you point out that there are many republicans FAVORING it? My guess is: because, if you do, you'll have to admit that, for these women to be representative of all Muslims, these pharmacists, that do much worse and are SUPPORTED BY POLITICIANS in doing so, are representatives of all Christians.

Christians ALSO need to adapt to western ways in western countries, by YOUR OWN notion. Because the proportion of Christians that do not and of Muslims that do not is, and that's something it PAINS you to know, the same one.

But remember, when a Christian abuses his or her medical position, it's just a fringe lunatic exception who doesn't represent Christianity a whole while one instance of a Muslim picking his or her nose means every single Muslim in the world is a disgusting booger-eater.

Oh, and of course don't forget, "The United States was founded as a Christian Nation."

:D

Does the Telegraph have a history of anti-Muslim bias?

I am trying to determine why this is the only paper reporting on the story.
The Sun also reported it, although they have pretty similar editorial stances. The Sun's slant wasn't too off from Myrmi's.

Oh, and of course don't forget, "The United States was founded as a Christian Nation."

:D

I know your joking, but Im still sick of hearing it, as nothing could be further from the truth.


Im just nipping that in the butt right now before some idiot comes on here and talks about how true it is.

Oh, they are respectable indeed. They are neither ashamed or embarrassed by Aisha's age. The reasoning flows from "Allah is God and Muhammed is His true prophet -> ergo he is masoom/infallible -> ergo he can't do anything wrong -> ergo why should we be embarrassed about Muhammed (PBUH and all) marrying a nine year old Aisha ?

Individual sects may differ in the age a little bit (9 or 13), and when it was 'consummated' and what Aisha's physical and mental maturity was at that time...yes, I have heard theories that "those were harsh times then when girls 'developed' early..so it was acceptable to marry at that age blah blah".

Iran, after the Islamic revolution, brought down the age of marriage for girls to 9 and has now increased that to 13 due to pressure from rights activists. Ayotullah Ruhollah Khomeini is still a most respected Imam.

If they were stating that there is no problem with Muhammed (sp?) marrying a 9-13 year a millenia ago, that does not necessarily mean that they are/were condoning sexual activity with a 9-13 year old today.

And I stand by my assessment that they weren't respected Imams.

So you're saying that the guys that played the match between Saudi Arabia and Tunisia in the World Cup are heretics?

Not me. Certain cleric/s in KSA.

I am not a muslim. Hence I am in no position to declare anybody as heretic/apostate/blasphemer/ etc etc concerning Islam.

All I know is that per Islam traditions, his fatwas stand unless annulled by another fatwa from a higher authority withing his school. You should probably take it up with that school and stop trying to bait me.

If they were stating that there is no problem with Muhammed (sp?) marrying a 9-13 year a millenia ago, that does not necessarily mean that they are/were condoning sexual activity with a 9-13 year old today.

Of course it does. Muhammed is much venerated by muslims and is to followed. Even to the point of idolising him which ironically would be against Islam....but thats another debate and I digress. Narrations of his life forms the hadiths which along with Quranic injunctions define a muslim way of life.

Those muslims (educated, exposed to 'modern' thinking, living in non-muslim societies etc) who have a problem with Aisha's age, try to reconcile their 'modern' values by theorizing that "well she was actually 19 yo and Bukari and Aisha lied about their ages" or "well she was fully developed at that age itself due to blah blah" or "well it was only a political marriage for alliance of Abu Bakr and it was not consummated" etc.

Those muslims who live in traditional muslim countries or closed communities have no problem with her age. They follow the reasoning I outlined earlier.

Precisely why, when Islamic revolution took over Iran, their slogan was in "going back to the glory days of Islam" and what did they do? Reduce girl child marriage age to 9.

In parts of Pakistan there is such a thing called "vani marriages" where girl childs are given away in marriages as 'compensation'. Child marriage is an accepted norm in many muslim countries.

And I stand by my assessment that they weren't respected Imams.

Pl clarify if they aren't respectable according to you or to general muslim society in particular.

I personally have scant respect for any organized religion and its figure heads and clergy. But muslims have to be respectful to their Imams. The muslim clergy is a very powerful institution to be feared and respected. Else they face ostracisation.

People also neglect the fact that this was several hundred years ago in a different culture entirely. Hell, if she was 13 (as you say some translations have it) that would have been a normal age to marry in Europe.

Is it so today?

I am not saying that only muslims do blah blah. Every society did certain things then...and still do certain things to a lesser degree now. Heck, Gandhi was a child marriage case. Does it mean that he should not be respected for some other policies of his? No. These are beside the point.

Those muslims (educated, exposed to 'modern' thinking, living in non-muslim societies etc) who have a problem with Aisha's age, try to reconcile their 'modern' values by theorizing that "well she was actually 19 yo and Bukari and Aisha lied about their ages" or "well she was fully developed at that age itself due to blah blah" or "well it was only a political marriage for alliance of Abu Bakr and it was not consummated" etc.

Or they recognize the fact that what was culturally acceptable a thousand years ago isn't necessarily acceptable now. During that time period (and for quite a while afterwards) 13 year old girls were getting married and having kids in Europe. The muslims who are in favor of being allowed to marry/have sex with 9 year olds are pedophiles, and are simply looking for a way to justify their desires.

But muslims have to be respectful to their Imams. The muslim clergy is a very powerful institution to be feared and respected. Else they face ostracisation.


You mean like how Christians are supposed to be respectful to their clergy for the same reason?


Muslims are christians are both the same species, just a different color.


Its like a black dog and a brown dog. You can have a prefernece, but its still a dog.

In that case, why is it that you don't point out that these pharmacists, which YOU AND I KNOW that are more numerous than the women your article tells about, are engaging in unacceptable behavior? Why don't you point out that there are many republicans FAVORING it? My guess is: because, if you do, you'll have to admit that, for these women to be representative of all Muslims, these pharmacists, that do much worse and are SUPPORTED BY POLITICIANS in doing so, are representatives of all Christians.

Christians ALSO need to adapt to western ways in western countries, by YOUR OWN notion. Because the proportion of Christians that do not and of Muslims that do not is, and that's something it PAINS you to know, the same one.
Because the point of this isn't to point out errant pharmacists, anymore than it is to demand that the Saudi soccer team covers themselves... It's called scope. The point is to continue exposing examples of where Muslims fail to integrate with a Western society in which they have freely chosen to live...

If you want to start on a diatribe about anti-abortion pharmacists, do it with my blessing.

Isn't that also a brand of hand soap? Tell me that wasn't intentional. Hehe...
It's mouthwash. I couldn't figure out how to work Zest, Safeguard, or Dial into normal conversation.

Because the point of this isn't to point out errant pharmacists, anymore than it is to demand that the Saudi soccer team covers themselves... It's called scope. The point is to continue exposing examples of where Muslims fail to integrate with a Western society in which they have freely chosen to live...

If you want to start on a diatribe about anti-abortion pharmacists, do it with my blessing.

Isn't that also a brand of hand soap? Tell me that wasn't intentional. Hehe...

Because the point of this isn't to point out errant pharmacists, anymore than it is to demand that the Saudi soccer team covers themselves... It's called scope. The point is to continue exposing examples of where Muslims fail to integrate with a Western society in which they have freely chosen to live...

If you want to start on a diatribe about anti-abortion pharmacists, do it with my blessing.


And our point is that we are exposing you for a xenophobic bigot who is doing nothing but fueling the "ebil moslam" lunacy that has engulfed the US and other parts of the west. If you wanted to point out groups that arent conforming to western norms, fine, but dont hold one religion to one standard and another to a totally different standard just because one religion is much easier to pick on in our society.

To sum up, Pot, stop calling the kettle black.

It's mouthwash. I couldn't figure out how to work Zest, Safeguard, or Dial into normal conversation.

It's possible, but it's deep magic. Still, close enough to warrant a chuckle.

Because the point of this isn't to point out errant pharmacists, anymore than it is to demand that the Saudi soccer team covers themselves... It's called scope. The point is to continue exposing examples of where Muslims fail to integrate with a Western society in which they have freely chosen to live...

If you want to start on a diatribe about anti-abortion pharmacists, do it with my blessing.

You see, the thing is, your ONLY scope throughout all these YEARS has been looking around for pieces of news about fringe groups within the Muslim religion and trying to extrapolate from them that "moslems are evil".

Indeed, the only way you'd have NOT to be a hypocrite right now would be by making the same claim about Christians based on this fringe group of pharmacists/rapists.

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

Takes time for people to adjust to new cultures. Besides, followers of Islam perfected medicine and surgery while Europe was in the Dark Ages.

Takes time for people to adjust to new cultures. Besides, followers of Islam perfected medicine and surgery while Europe was in the Dark Ages.

Besides, if these women were the norm, the Muslim countries would have a life expectancy of about... 12.

And our point is that we are exposing you for a xenophobic bigot who is doing nothing but fueling the "ebil moslam" lunacy that has engulfed the US and other parts of the west. If you wanted to point out groups that arent conforming to western norms, fine, but dont hold one religion to one standard and another to a totally different standard just because one religion is much easier to pick on in our society.

To sum up, Pot, stop calling the kettle black.
Pal, it's all about how I want to spend my time. And all about how you want to spend yours. There is absolutely no reason why I should give equal time and treatment to anyone.

Now, if these people would just suck it up and conform, I would have to start picking on another group... Maybe Democrats. Maybe Yankees. But it would always be my choice of how I want to spend my time.

You see, the thing is, your ONLY scope throughout all these YEARS has been looking around for pieces of news about fringe groups within the Muslim religion and trying to extrapolate from them that "moslems are evil".

Indeed, the only way you'd have NOT to be a hypocrite right now would be by making the same claim about Christians based on this fringe group of pharmacists/rapists.
And those fringe pieces aren't hard to find. I've never laid into the cab drivers that won't transport dogs, nor the drivers license applicants that want to keep their faces hidden... There are just too many fringe pieces to keep up with... But maybe that means they aren't such fringe pieces, huh?

Pal, it's all about how I want to spend my time. And all about how you want to spend yours. There is absolutely no reason why I should give equal time and treatment to anyone.


You reserve that right. And we reserve the right to tell you your a bigot or a fucking idiot when you do these things.


"Choosing" to be a bigot who is prejudice against non-Christians still makes you a bigot and deserving of scorn.

Pal, it's all about how I want to spend my time. And all about how you want to spend yours. There is absolutely no reason why I should give equal time and treatment to anyone.

Now, if these people would just suck it up and conform, I would have to start picking on another group... Maybe Democrats. Maybe Yankees. But it would always be my choice of how I want to spend my time.

BY ALL THE GODS THAT INFLUENCE THIS UNIVERSE!

Okay, folks, here we have Myrmi finally admitting that he will stop at NOTHING to force other people to, yes, CONFORM! Worse, he calls it a pastime!

You know, I can list several people that act just like you. None of them are worthy of any respect.

And those fringe pieces aren't hard to find. I've never laid into the cab drivers that won't transport dogs, nor the drivers license applicants that want to keep their faces hidden... There are just too many fringe pieces to keep up with... But maybe that means they aren't such fringe pieces, huh?

Of COURSE they aren't hard to find. You DO keep looking at the same rags for them after all. And you really want to convince us that the same person who SAID HE HARASSES A GROUP FOR A PASTIME does not spend a good amount of his time looking for excuses?

Also, yes, they are fringe. Because, you see, there are also PLENTY of Christians, more of a percentage than these women or the cab driver (driver. SINGULAR. ONE PERSON.) that refused the mutt, that would, for instance, deny women birth control. And yes, I also call them fringe. Now you have two choices: Either YOU call neither fringe or you call BOTH fringe. Or else you will have forfeited this debate due to bumbling incoherency.

Which will it be?

Of COURSE they aren't hard to find. You DO keep looking at the same rags for them after all. And you really want to convince us that the same person who SAID HE HARASSES A GROUP FOR A PASTIME does not spend a good amount of his time looking for excuses?

Also, yes, they are fringe. Because, you see, there are also PLENTY of Christians, more of a percentage than these women or the cab driver (driver. SINGULAR. ONE PERSON.) that refused the mutt, that would, for instance, deny women birth control. And yes, I also call them fringe. Now you have two choices: Either YOU call neither fringe or you call BOTH fringe. Or else you will have forfeited this debate due to bumbling incoherency.

Which will it be?
What part of this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13424468&postcount=125) did you have trouble with?

What part of this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13424468&postcount=125) did you have trouble with?

Ah, so you're saying that these pharmacists ARE representative of ALL Christians? Or not?

What part of this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13424468&postcount=125) did you have trouble with?

This (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13424474&postcount=126) was the problem I had with it.

Ah, so you're saying that these pharmacists ARE representative of ALL Christians? Or not?
I tend to say exactly what I mean. My statement stands without further explanation needed.

I tend to say exactly what I mean. My statement stands without further explanation needed.

Very well. Do you, then, or do you not believe that those pharmacists are representative for all (or the majority of) Christians?

Very well. Do you, then, or do you not believe that those pharmacists are representative for all (or the majority of) Christians?

He wont answer, because that means he holds a double standard and a bigot.

He wont answer, because that means he holds a double standard and a bigot.

I'm well aware of that. However, this is the last movement of my requiem for him in this argument, and I will not stop until he is revealed for it.

I tend to say exactly what I mean. My statement stands without further explanation needed.
Precisely. As your statement stands, it reveals you to be a xenophobic bigot who enjoys harassing and picking on select groups of people, delineated by religion and ethnicity. No further explanation needed.

My point, as always, is that Muslims need to adapt to western ways in western countries. They certainly expect the same from us when we visit Islamic countries. That's it. No double standard.

I see what you're doing wrong. Do you see it? No? I thought not.

You see, you're treating muslims as a single entity again, some sort of hive mind. "They expect the same"... You're suddenly no longer talking about the british muslim medical students - because as far as I can see they haven't said anything about what they expect "us" to do.

So basically, your request is kinda odd.

So you're saying that the guys that played the match between Saudi Arabia and Tunisia in the World Cup are heretics?

I hope not, because that would be incorrect. From the same Washington Post link:

Other Muslim religious leaders quickly announced that it was fine for Muslims to play soccer by international rules. The mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abd al-Aziz ibn Abdallah Aal-Sheikh, called on the appropriate authorities to "prosecute those involved in the publishing of these fatwas in a sharia court for the crime they have committed."

He also called on the Saudi religious police to "track down those involved and prosecute them, in view of the dangers and the venom with which they are trying to influence society."

So it didn't get much support, that anti-soccer fatwa.

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/03/nislam403.xml
Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough. If they can't understand the basic tenets of cleanliness, then they shouldn't practice.
But, there's some hope... In an effort to reconcile Islam with the twenty first century, the IMA had this to say.

I think the requirement should be to bring your own gloves.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

In COnnecticut, it's still illegal for liquor stores to sell beer alchohol on Sundays.

Carry on. :)

Because they don't want to follow the established procedures for good hygiene.

Okay, so it isn't every Muslim woman, but that there are a few is bad enough.
Well done. THIS deserves the golf clap. Muslim women shouldn't be doctors because a few won't conform to western standards of hygiene.

Aaah... In a weir way I've missed the biggoted "Evil muslims are taking over and making impossible demands" threads. NSG is just not NSG without them :)

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?
I'm more fed up with these daily reports of intolerance and douchebaggery. Long gloves. Oh no. Clearly that solution is impractical.
...though I also agree with Neesika here.

In COnnecticut, it's still illegal for liquor stores to sell beer alchohol on Sundays.

Carry on. :)

Hell, there are several counties here in Jersey where non-essential shops are required to be completely closed on Sundays

Pal, it's all about how I want to spend my time. And all about how you want to spend yours. There is absolutely no reason why I should give equal time and treatment to anyone.
Right, 'cause being a bigot is a good thing :headbang:
Now, if these people would just suck it up and conform, I would have to start picking on another group... Maybe Democrats. Maybe Yankees. But it would always be my choice of how I want to spend my time.
Yeah, how dare those muslims not act according to your beliefs? :rolleyes:

In COnnecticut, it's still illegal for liquor stores to sell beer alchohol on Sundays.

Carry on. :)

Hell, there are several counties here in Jersey where non-essential shops are required to be completely closed on Sundays

And then there are entire states that are dry on Sunday. It's not as much a blue law, as it is a desire by the liquor distributors to have a day off. The more I find out about local politics, the less faith I have that the local politicians really have any idea how to govern.

I'm well aware of that. However, this is the last movement of my requiem for him in this argument, and I will not stop until he is revealed for it.

Very well. Do you, then, or do you not believe that those pharmacists are representative for all (or the majority of) Christians?

Play on pal... Neither.

I don't care what their religion is. I only care that they are not living up to their code of ethics.

Now that brings us back to the beginning. These women should quit medicine because they cannot grasp the basic tenet of hygiene. The fact that they use their religion as a shield to protect them from this ignorance needs to be flagged as the nonsense that it is.

And then there are entire states that are dry on Sunday. It's not as much a blue law, as it is a desire by the liquor distributors to have a day off. The more I find out about local politics, the less faith I have that the local politicians really have any idea how to govern.

Fail

Very well. Do you, then, or do you not believe that those pharmacists are representative for all (or the majority of) Christians?



Why havent you answered this yet Myrmidonisia?

And then there are entire states that are dry on Sunday. It's not as much a blue law, as it is a desire by the liquor distributors to have a day off. The more I find out about local politics, the less faith I have that the local politicians really have any idea how to govern.



Thats a load of crap and if you believe that...oh wait.

Long gloves. Oh no. Clearly that solution is impractical.

Is it a practical solution?

Why do doctors still do a major wash on their hands before wearing gloves?

Mind you infectious disease is not one of my strong points.

Where's that Fass?


Side note: I wonder how many people here were defending the Christina Pharmis who wouldn't give out the pill?

And then there are entire states that are dry on Sunday. It's not as much a blue law, as it is a desire by the liquor distributors to have a day off. The more I find out about local politics, the less faith I have that the local politicians really have any idea how to govern.

Wait? liquor distributors asked for a law to have a day off?

Is it a practical solution?

Why do doctors still do a major wash on their hands before wearing gloves?

Mind you infectious disease is not one of my strong points.

Where's that Fass?


Side note: I wonder how many people here were defending the Christina Pharmis who wouldn't give out the pill?
If the long gloves indeed provide the sanitary requirements (there is no reason they can not wash under those gloves) then the impact on the patient will be null ... unlike those of the Christian Pharmacists

You mean like how Christians are supposed to be respectful to their clergy for the same reason?


Muslims are christians are both the same species, just a different color.


Its like a black dog and a brown dog. You can have a prefernece, but its still a dog.

My observation is that the hold of christian clergy (in these days, not talking about medieval times) is less compared to the hold of muslim clergy. Again, that is my observation. Maybe the Pope and the catholics can be compared to the hold Ayotullahs have over their flocks. The catholics are not the majority christians (correct me if I am wrong) but other than sufis, almost all muslim sects have clergy.

There is a bulldog and theres a chihuahua. Both are dogs, but the bite is different.

I do not have a preference of one over another. I have different worries on different matters regarding different types of fundamentalists. Jihadi agenda from islamists, conversions with christians, reactionary violence from hindus etc.

The answer is, of course, obvious. Anyone that refuses to, or is incapable of performing actions required of their job should find another job.

One only wishes that Muslims were as tolerant of non-Muslims when we turn back the calendar and visit their lands.

If you want to talk about relative tolerance, I've heard a lot of shit thrown at Muslims for wearing more traditional dress here in the US. Whether it be the hijaab or a burkha, people have a tendency to be rather rude, and sometimes hurtful. The same applies to those that grow their hair out, I've heard a lot of stereotypes thrown around. You cannot claim that westerners are totally tolerant of Muslim customs, in fact, from what I have seen (though admittedly I have not met everyone in the "West") people tend not to be tolerant.

In the same way, one could, in many Muslim countries, wear "Western" dress, however people would have a rather adverse reaction to it.

Oh, they are respectable indeed. They are neither ashamed or embarrassed by Aisha's age. The reasoning flows from "Allah is God and Muhammed is His true prophet -> ergo he is masoom/infallible -> ergo he can't do anything wrong -> ergo why should we be embarrassed about Muhammed (PBUH and all) marrying a nine year old Aisha ?

Individual sects may differ in the age a little bit (9 or 13), and when it was 'consummated' and what Aisha's physical and mental maturity was at that time...yes, I have heard theories that "those were harsh times then when girls 'developed' early..so it was acceptable to marry at that age blah blah".

Iran, after the Islamic revolution, brought down the age of marriage for girls to 9 and has now increased that to 13 due to pressure from rights activists. Ayotullah Ruhollah Khomeini is still a most respected Imam.

What I oppose is the stroking Islam into the whole mess, it is fair to say that the Hadith aren't really necessity in Islam. One can totally disregard them and still be a (good) Muslim.

Pal, it's all about how I want to spend my time. And all about how you want to spend yours. There is absolutely no reason why I should give equal time and treatment to anyone.

Now, if these people would just suck it up and conform, I would have to start picking on another group... Maybe Democrats. Maybe Yankees. But it would always be my choice of how I want to spend my time.

Here is the problem, you expect people to conform, you do not actually respect/understand differences.

Ultimately, I will agree that these doctors must meet hygiene standards, however, there is no reason why they cannot meet these standards and stay true to their beliefs. Your reaction that they should be fired for simply standing up for their beliefs is simply bullshit. There's clearly no reason why a compromise can't be struck, and you are yet to prove otherwise. So long as they meet the standard, then they should be allowed to work. It's that simple. And denying all Muslim women the ability to be doctors based on the actions of a few is nothing short of insane.

Or they recognize the fact that what was culturally acceptable a thousand years ago isn't necessarily acceptable now. During that time period (and for quite a while afterwards) 13 year old girls were getting married and having kids in Europe. The muslims who are in favor of being allowed to marry/have sex with 9 year olds are pedophiles, and are simply looking for a way to justify their desires.

You are looking at this from your own prism...trying to come to terms with the fact that people who think there is nothing wrong with marrying a girl 9/13/puberty exist. You may consider them as "pedophiles, and are simply looking for a way to justify their desires". The society where they live, does not.

I have had both experiences. The muslims I went to school with, those who I grew up with do not think that child marriage is acceptable norm now. They explain Aisha as either "it was a lie, she was older"/"she was developed"/"it was an alliance marriage" etc...because...let's face it...they cannot possibly call Muhammed a pedophile. That Muhammed is an infallible prophet is drilled into them and as long as they are muslim, they cannot call the marriage as wrong.

You cannot possibly be a muslim and say what Muhammed did was wrong. He did that after his 'revelation' after which he became infallible...one who cannot do any wrong. The only ones who can think that it was wrong are apostates.

Hence you have a dichotomy here. I know many friends who would be horrified at the thought of somebody have sex with a 9 yo, but they would be equally horrified if somebody calls Muhammed a pedophile.

These only apply to those muslims who are exposed to us kaffirs. That would mean, probably all muslims you know. You must have not met muslims who have grown up in cloistered/closed communities. They have no problem in saying "well if Muhammed did it, it must be right".

That's why, whenever there is an 'Islamic' revolution, the country slides back on these rules. Iran with Khomeini. Zia with Pakistan - it was under him the hudood ordinances were passed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudood_ordinance

Wait? liquor distributors asked for a law to have a day off?
Not actually, but they didn't want to let grocery stores sell beer and wine, while they couldn't sell spirits. It is an odd coalition of archaic Christians and liquor distributors that have been keeping Georgia puritanically dry on Sunday.

What I oppose is the stroking Islam into the whole mess, it is fair to say that the Hadith aren't really necessity in Islam. One can totally disregard them and still be a (good) Muslim.

Very very few muslims do that.

Vast majority belong to ahle sunna sects. I don't have to tell you what a sunna is.

Even the ahlul bayt don't reject the hadiths altogether. They only reject those who they don't agree with (Bukhari, Aisha..).

Between them, I figure there must be 95% of muslims.

Very very few muslims do that.

Vast majority belong to ahle sunna sects. I don't have to tell you what a sunna is.

Even the ahlul bayt don't reject the hadiths altogether. They only reject those who they don't agree with.

Between them, I figure there must be 95% of muslims.

Source?

Religion is a facade for some of the most retarded arguments and views in history.

"Ummm....yeah, I'm a doctor and I believe that performing operations drunk and on amphetamines is part of my religion."

Maybe the Pope and the catholics can be compared to the hold Ayotullahs have over their flocks. The catholics are not the majority christians (correct me if I am wrong) but other than sufis, almost all muslim sects have clergy.


there are about a billion catholics in the world. they are by far the largest christian denomination.

the hierarchy of pretty much every christian denomination holds great sway over their membership.

Source?

Oh please. These are very basic things. I am sorry if I come across as facetious or patronising. But these are really very basic things...that can be easily looked up. >80% are sunnis of different types...sunna - means the "trodden path" meaning "way of the prophet".

Hadiths - narrations about prophet.

By definition - sunnis follow hadiths.

Very very few muslims do that.

Vast majority belong to ahle sunna sects. I don't have to tell you what a sunna is.

Even the ahlul bayt don't reject the hadiths altogether. They only reject those who they don't agree with (Bukhari, Aisha..).

Between them, I figure there must be 95% of muslims.

What I am saying is that one can be a good Muslim without basing anything on Hadith. From what I have seen, few have actually read them, and simply follow old traditions.

The Hadith are a way at looking at the past, but whose stories do we trust? People tend to use the one's that support their desires, which, has nothing to do with Islam. I prefer to look forward rather than backwards, and thus, do away with the Hadith. We can never truly know what Muhammed really said, or the exact details of his life, so my opinion is that we (Muslims) should not bother with them. Focusing on the past in such a way could almost be considered worshipping an idol, placing history on a pedastal where it is revered. And I think most, if not all Muslims agree that idolatry is not Islamic.

So while I recognize that I may be in the minority, can we truly view a religion based on its followers? I think a religion should be assessed based on its principles.

Women who find it objectionable to bare their arms should either order elbow long surgical gloves... or not become doctors.

People's health > religious beliefs, whatever faith they may be.

What I am saying is that one can be a good Muslim without basing anything on Hadith. From what I have seen, few have actually read them, and simply follow old traditions.

The Hadith are a way at looking at the past, but whose stories do we trust? People tend to use the one's that support their desires, which, has nothing to do with Islam. I prefer to look forward rather than backwards, and thus, do away with the Hadith. We can never truly know what Muhammed really said, or the exact details of his life, so my opinion is that we (Muslims) should not bother with them. Focusing on the past in such a way could almost be considered worshipping an idol, placing history on a pedastal where it is revered. And I think most, if not all Muslims agree that idolatry is not Islamic.



Interesting. You have a problem there.

If you are unsure of the authenticity of hadiths because you are saying "well how can we be sure....maybe that person lied/ misled/ misinterpreted/ whatever" then you have to apply the same logic to the Qur'an. How can you be sure that Muhammed conveyed flawlessly everything to his companions and how can you be sure that his companions retained and put down that into the Qur'an you read today. And what about Uthmanic recension?

Part of the reason why I don't follow any organized religion. They all insist that I suspend disbelief and take the whole thing as the holy truth. It is much better to not be part of any religion and not get trapped into labels of muslim, christian, hindu etc.

So while I recognize that I may be in the minority, can we truly view a religion based on its followers? I think a religion should be assessed based on its principles.

That is subjective. Do you assess other religions on their principles or by their followers? All religions have their good principles if you go really basic on it.

Oh please. These are very basic things. I am sorry if I come across as facetious or patronising. But these are really very basic things...that can be easily looked up. >80% are sunnis of different types...sunna - means the "trodden path" meaning "way of the prophet".

Hadiths - narrations about prophet.

By definition - sunnis follow hadiths.

So you can't provide one?

BY ALL THE GODS THAT INFLUENCE THIS UNIVERSE!

Okay, folks, here we have Myrmi finally admitting that he will stop at NOTHING to force other people to, yes, CONFORM! Worse, he calls it a pastime!

You know, I can list several people that act just like you. None of them are worthy of any respect.

It also exposes the inherent hypocrisy of Myrmi's latest ebil moslem rant. It's not just hypocrisy, it's projection. He's intolerant of other views and insist they conform to his own... but then he goes on to project that onto Muslims as a whole using this small article to leap to a faulty conclusion.

Blah blah blah Muslims are evil blah blah.
Myrmidonisia dances around the questions he doesn't like and spouts more of the above.
Spattering of Muslim bashing and the Muslims bashers looking quite foolish.
Blah blah blah, Muslims are evil for making me look foolish!

And so the cycle continues, on and forever!

Blah blah blah Muslims are evil blah blah.
Myrmidonisia dances around the questions he doesn't like and spouts more of the above.
Spattering of Muslim bashing and the Muslims bashers looking quite foolish.
Blah blah blah, Muslims are evil for making me look foolish!

And so the cycle continues, on and forever!

Until Space Aliens or Cavemen appear, thus taking the place of Muslims as the Brand Spanking New Evil Other Everyone Can Demonize and Kill Guilt-Free.

Seeing as Christians are the majority in the country by a lot, if they wanted to turn the country into a theocracy, they could do so with little difficulty. The fact that they haven't done so (unlike Iran, Afghanistan, Libya and the likes) just proves what TAI says, that Christians over here, however much their rhetoric scares you, tend not to be as rowdy. At least not for now.

Which Christian sect would take the power if they wanted to, do you figure?

Which Christian sect would take the power if they wanted to, do you figure?


Any of them.


Evangelicals are already trying.
Baptists would enjoy the power.
The WTBC...well...
And Catholics would be thinking "Yes we're a relevent political force again!!!"


Just because most sane Christians dont want a theocracy doesnt mean there still arent a lot who dont.

Any of them.


Evangelicals are already trying.
Baptists would enjoy the power.
The WTBC...well...
And Catholics would be thinking "Yes we're a relevent political force again!!!"


Just because most sane Christians dont want a theocracy doesnt mean there still arent a lot who dont.
So if the catholics established a theocracy, would every other sect accept that and be happy?

So if the catholics established a theocracy, would every other sect accept that and be happy?



At first, theyd be so pumped that the US was returning to its (fictional) Christian roots they wouldnt care. But eventually they would.

And if Evangelicals did it, theyd start hunting down Catholics.

Im just showing who might have potential.

At first, theyd be so pumped that the US was returning to its (fictional) Christian roots they wouldnt care. But eventually they would.

And if Evangelicals did it, theyd start hunting down Catholics.

Im just showing who might have potential.

And I'm just saying that "the fact that they haven't done so" (turned the US into a theocracy) is because the other sects keep them in check. No one sect would have the power to do so today.

And I'm just saying that "the fact that they haven't done so" (turned the US into a theocracy) is because the other sects keep them in check. No one sect would have the power to do so today.

Oh ok. I didnt even see that arguement. I just saw you asking which sect would try and make it a theocracy. The answer is all of em ;)

Oh ok. I didnt even see that arguement. I just saw you asking which sect would try and make it a theocracy. The answer is all of em ;)

Try, yes. Succeed, no. :p



"Do or do not, there is no try..." :gundge:

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

Provision of long gloves by the NHS to accomodate religious beliefs is impractical?

Then perhaps Jehovahs witnesses shouldn't have any special measures in place to deal with the whole 'no blood transfusion' thing either?

Provision of long gloves by the NHS to accomodate religious beliefs is impractical?

I dunno. I wonder what Infection Control would say, given all the hysteria about superbugs.


Philosophically though, I can't see a problem.

Interesting. You have a problem there.

If you are unsure of the authenticity of hadiths because you are saying "well how can we be sure....maybe that person lied/ misled/ misinterpreted/ whatever" then you have to apply the same logic to the Qur'an. How can you be sure that Muhammed conveyed flawlessly everything to his companions and how can you be sure that his companions retained and put down that into the Qur'an you read today. And what about Uthmanic recension?

Part of the reason why I don't follow any organized religion. They all insist that I suspend disbelief and take the whole thing as the holy truth. It is much better to not be part of any religion and not get trapped into labels of muslim, christian, hindu etc.


That is subjective. Do you assess other religions on their principles or by their followers? All religions have their good principles if you go really basic on it.

Well, if one is going to be a Muslim (with the conventional meaning of the word) then one must be willing to accept the Quran. It is a central tenet of the religion itself, and as far as I know, there are no disputes as to the source of the Quran (Muhammed said its verses, whether divinely inspired or not). So the case is different, but I will admit there is room for something to happen. And that is why religion is based on faith.

I tend to see things more fluidly, the biggest (and hardest to solve) problem with organized religion is dogma, but I (or at least I think I) do not subscribe to it. I would agree however that powerful entities controlling beliefs/faith is not good.

That is my very reasoning.

Rather then argue if long gloves are right shouldn't we get a ruling as to the practicality of them?

I honestly don't care what religion you are, but when you do things just because your religion tells you to do something that you wouldn't normally do based on your own ethics, then you shouldn't do it.

"So did you watch Glory in history class today?"

"No."

"Why not?"

"Because I'm Mormon."

"So?"

"The Prophet says we shouldn't watch R-rated movies."

"What if he told you to hate black people?"

"..."

I honestly don't care what religion you are, but when you do things just because your religion tells you to do something that you wouldn't normally do based on your own ethics, then you shouldn't do it.

"So did you watch Glory in history class today?"

"No."

"Why not?"

"Because I'm Mormon."

"So?"

"The Prophet says we shouldn't watch R-rated movies."

"What if he told you to hate black people?"

"..."
That's just it, though:

Religion is a really, really handy excuse for doing shit that you know other people will (rightfully) yell at you for.

Example: If you just hate gay people because you think they're yucky, people generally tell you to shut up and get over yourself. But if you start telling people that you hate gays because your religion tells you to, suddenly you'll find a magical well-spring of people insisting that your "religious beliefs" be respected and that it would be discrimination for anybody to tell you to shut up and get over yourself.

People who claim that they hate gays, or blacks, or uppity womenz because Gawd Sez So are full of it. They hate because they hate, and they picked a God who would back them up on hating what they want to hate.

This applies also to laziness, too. Don't feel like doing your science homework? Pick a religion that provides a simple, idiotic Creation myth, and insist that this myth should be regarded as equal to science. Ta-da! You don't have to learn all those yucky facts and study up on tough concepts. You just sit quietly during Story Time at Sunday school. Why bother to do all the work of research and peer review and all that boring stuff? You can get your "theory" placed on equal footing with real theories just by invoking God!

That's just it, though:

Religion is a really, really handy excuse for doing shit that you know other people will (rightfully) yell at you for.

Example: If you just hate gay people because you think they're yucky, people generally tell you to shut up and get over yourself. But if you start telling people that you hate gays because your religion tells you to, suddenly you'll find a magical well-spring of people insisting that your "religious beliefs" be respected and that it would be discrimination for anybody to tell you to shut up and get over yourself.

People who claim that they hate gays, or blacks, or uppity womenz because Gawd Sez So are full of it. They hate because they hate, and they picked a God who would back them up on hating what they want to hate.

This applies also to laziness, too. Don't feel like doing your science homework? Pick a religion that provides a simple, idiotic Creation myth, and insist that this myth should be regarded as equal to science. Ta-da! You don't have to learn all those yucky facts and study up on tough concepts. You just sit quietly during Story Time at Sunday school. Why bother to do all the work of research and peer review and all that boring stuff? You can get your "theory" placed on equal footing with real theories just by invoking God!
I think this is quite a relavent quote from Douglas Adams:

Now, the invention of the scientific method and science is, I'm sure we'll all agree, the most powerful intellectual idea, the most powerful framework for thinking and investigating and understanding and challenging the world around us that there is, and that it rests on the premise that any idea is there to be attacked and if it withstands the attack then it lives to fight another day and if it doesn't withstand the attack then down it goes. Religion doesn't seem to work like that; it has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. That's an idea we're so familiar with, whether we subscribe to it or not, that it's kind of odd to think what it actually means, because really what it means is 'Here is an idea or a notion that you're not allowed to say anything bad about; you're just not. Why not? — because you're not!' If somebody votes for a party that you don't agree with, you're free to argue about it as much as you like; everybody will have an argument but nobody feels aggrieved by it. If somebody thinks taxes should go up or down you are free to have an argument about it, but on the other hand if somebody says 'I mustn't move a light switch on a Saturday', you say, 'Fine, I respect that'.

The odd thing is, even as I am saying that I am thinking 'Is there an Orthodox Jew here who is going to be offended by the fact that I just said that?' but I wouldn't have thought 'Maybe there's somebody from the left wing or somebody from the right wing or somebody who subscribes to this view or the other in economics' when I was making the other points. I just think 'Fine, we have different opinions'. But, the moment I say something that has something to do with somebody's (I'm going to stick my neck out here and say irrational) beliefs, then we all become terribly protective and terribly defensive and say 'No, we don't attack that; that's an irrational belief but no, we respect it'.

It's rather like, if you think back in terms of animal evolution, an animal that's grown an incredible carapace around it, such as a tortoise—that's a great survival strategy because nothing can get through it; or maybe like a poisonous fish that nothing will come close to, which therefore thrives by keeping away any challenges to what it is it is. In the case of an idea, if we think 'Here is an idea that is protected by holiness or sanctity', what does it mean? Why should it be that it's perfectly legitimate to support the Labour party or the Conservative party, Republicans or Democrats, this model of economics versus that, Macintosh instead of Windows, but to have an opinion about how the Universe began, about who created the Universe, no, that's holy? What does that mean? Why do we ring-fence that for any other reason other than that we've just got used to doing so? There's no other reason at all, it's just one of those things that crept into being and once that loop gets going it's very, very powerful. So, we are used to not challenging religious ideas but it's very interesting how much of a furore Richard creates when he does it! Everybody gets absolutely frantic about it because you're not allowed to say these things. Yet when you look at it rationally there is no reason why those ideas shouldn't be as open to debate as any other, except that we have agreed somehow between us that they shouldn't be.
http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2007/03/douglas-adams-speaks-about-religion.html

Feel free to tl;dr, if you like.

tl;dr :p But you'll get a free cookie. *passes chunky choco-chip cookie*

Here it doesn't seem to be a problem, in a country whose population is 10% Muslim. I know of two female Muslim medical students and there is no problem... at least here...

That's just it, though:

Religion is a really, really handy excuse for doing shit that you know other people will (rightfully) yell at you for.

Example: If you just hate gay people because you think they're yucky, people generally tell you to shut up and get over yourself. But if you start telling people that you hate gays because your religion tells you to, suddenly you'll find a magical well-spring of people insisting that your "religious beliefs" be respected and that it would be discrimination for anybody to tell you to shut up and get over yourself.

People who claim that they hate gays, or blacks, or uppity womenz because Gawd Sez So are full of it. They hate because they hate, and they picked a God who would back them up on hating what they want to hate.

Then they need a better excuse, because the religious homophobes get made fun of more, not less, than the their secular counterparts. At least that is definitely the trend here at Purdue, and this is a conservative campus by most people's standards. At least with a secular bigot, you have the foothold of rational thinking and reasoned principles to debate over and find what went wrong in reasoning, a religious zealot doesn't need reason or intellect or any of those other handy evolutionary advantages that happen to make us more than the latest model short-haired ape, they'd rather pull a tea cozy called faith over their head.

Anyway, on to this. I don't see the big deal with extra long medical gloves. But I also don't have a problem with medical establishments refusing to change from their normal glove length since it'd cost a billionth of a cent more, I suppose. Obviously, though, whichever option ensures the training of more qualified doctors is preferable.

tl;dr :p But you'll get a free cookie. *passes chunky choco-chip cookie*

Here it doesn't seem to be a problem, in a country whose population is 10% Muslim. I know of two female Muslim medical students and there is no problem... at least here...
The way I see it is that most people DO want to get along and not be singled out. Then there are the 'professional victims' who live for just that. Whether it's racism, religion, global warming, you name it... They need to find some obscure cause and make a giant cause out of it. I'm sure that's just what the subjects of my original post are trying to do -- just pressing the envelope because they are able to.

Kind of like trolling in real life, huh?

But I still get tired of reading about the special treatments that these professional victims want and I intend to continue making an issue of it.

The way I see it is that most people DO want to get along and not be singled out. Then there are the 'professional victims' who live for just that. Whether it's racism, religion, global warming, you name it... They need to find some obscure cause and make a giant cause out of it. I'm sure that's just what the subjects of my original post are trying to do -- just pressing the envelope because they are able to.

Kind of like trolling in real life, huh?

But I still get tired of reading about the special treatments that these professional victims want and I intend to continue making an issue of it.
So THAT is why you constantly and continuously engage in your own victim act of complaining about the horrible effects on your life and society of "professional victims," Muslims, and the poor (in various threads). Just trying to show them how it's supposed to be done by a real "victim," eh?

That's just it, though:

Religion is a really, really handy excuse for doing shit that you know other people will (rightfully) yell at you for.

Example: If you just hate gay people because you think they're yucky, people generally tell you to shut up and get over yourself. But if you start telling people that you hate gays because your religion tells you to, suddenly you'll find a magical well-spring of people insisting that your "religious beliefs" be respected and that it would be discrimination for anybody to tell you to shut up and get over yourself.

People who claim that they hate gays, or blacks, or uppity womenz because Gawd Sez So are full of it. They hate because they hate, and they picked a God who would back them up on hating what they want to hate.
Bolded for truth.

This applies also to laziness, too. Don't feel like doing your science homework? Pick a religion that provides a simple, idiotic Creation myth, and insist that this myth should be regarded as equal to science. Ta-da! You don't have to learn all those yucky facts and study up on tough concepts. You just sit quietly during Story Time at Sunday school. Why bother to do all the work of research and peer review and all that boring stuff? You can get your "theory" placed on equal footing with real theories just by invoking God!
Don't forget the privilege aspect of it, too. I mean, any old geek or nerd can study science, but you have to be right with God to be saved, and so sitting around, thinking about lunch while stories get read to you, makes you better than other people, without actually having to do anything or prove anything about yourself. And who is going to knock you off your pedestal when you can just point out (looking down your lofty sanctified nose) that God put you there?

The way I see it is that most people DO want to get along and not be singled out. Then there are the 'professional victims' who live for just that. Whether it's racism, religion, global warming, you name it... They need to find some obscure cause and make a giant cause out of it. I'm sure that's just what the subjects of my original post are trying to do -- just pressing the envelope because they are able to.

Kind of like trolling in real life, huh?

But I still get tired of reading about the special treatments that these professional victims want and I intend to continue making an issue of it.

Kind of like what you're doing, huh?

So THAT is why you constantly and continuously engage in your own victim act of complaining about the horrible effects on your life and society of "professional victims," Muslims, and the poor (in various threads). Just trying to show them how it's supposed to be done by a real "victim," eh?

Kind of like what you're doing, huh?

How cute! You're both trying to be clever. Keep trying.

:mp5::sniper:we need to kill all the muslims before they kill us!:sniper::mp5:

How cute! You're both trying to be clever. Keep trying.
How cute! You can't prove us wrong, so you just lash out with a nasty but lame little wisecrack. So I'll just conclude that we were right, then, shall I? OK.

Bolded for truth.


Don't forget the privilege aspect of it, too. I mean, any old geek or nerd can study science, but you have to be right with God to be saved, and so sitting around, thinking about lunch while stories get read to you, makes you better than other people, without actually having to do anything or prove anything about yourself. And who is going to knock you off your pedestal when you can just point out (looking down your lofty sanctified nose) that God put you there?

Once. Just once, I'd like to meet someone like you and Bottle in real life.

I think it would make me happy beyond my most reasonable expectation for happiness. You and Bottle are the best.

Once. Just once, I'd like to meet someone like you and Bottle in real life.

I think it would make me happy beyond my most reasonable expectation for happiness. You and Bottle are the best.
Congratulations then, because this IS real life. Or, as real as it gets for some of us. ;)

:mp5::sniper:we need to kill all the muslims before they kill us!:sniper::mp5:

Ladies and gentlemen, Sweeney Todd!

There's a place in the Net like an arguing pit,
And it has some folks in it who are full of it,
And they use stupid smileys like the sniper bit,
And it goes by the name of NS.

We should all thank the gods that these folks are few,
For they'd be better placed in a goddamn zoo,
Bleating and tossing their shit, it's true

I've roamed the Net and seen its wonders,
For the porn that you can find is as wondrous as the games,
But there's no place like NS!

*Snip BS* Then there are the 'professional victims' who live for just that. (Snip) global warming *Snip BS*

So... Global warming is a fabrication by the big tree lobby?

That's just it, though:

Religion is a really, really handy excuse for doing shit that you know other people will (rightfully) yell at you for.

Example: If you just hate gay people because you think they're yucky, people generally tell you to shut up and get over yourself. But if you start telling people that you hate gays because your religion tells you to, suddenly you'll find a magical well-spring of people insisting that your "religious beliefs" be respected and that it would be discrimination for anybody to tell you to shut up and get over yourself.

People who claim that they hate gays, or blacks, or uppity womenz because Gawd Sez So are full of it. They hate because they hate, and they picked a God who would back them up on hating what they want to hate.

This applies also to laziness, too. Don't feel like doing your science homework? Pick a religion that provides a simple, idiotic Creation myth, and insist that this myth should be regarded as equal to science. Ta-da! You don't have to learn all those yucky facts and study up on tough concepts. You just sit quietly during Story Time at Sunday school. Why bother to do all the work of research and peer review and all that boring stuff? You can get your "theory" placed on equal footing with real theories just by invoking God!



I....I think I love you:p


No seriously...that was awesome. Especially the bolded part.

Doesn't anyone else get fed up with these near daily reports of Muslims expecting us to conform to their impractical beliefs?

That's just a bit xenophobically overstated.


They're not trying to force us to conform to their beliefs, they're just trying to integrate their beliefs into our system, and as you would expect there are some problems in doing that as the two people's have, of course, different beliefs and ways of going about things.


Compromise is not impossible, and it's not un-patriotic.


Britain is and always has been an island of immigrants.

And at the moment they drive most of our economy.

That's just it, though:

Religion is a really, really handy excuse for doing shit that you know other people will (rightfully) yell at you for.

Example: If you just hate gay people because you think they're yucky, people generally tell you to shut up and get over yourself. But if you start telling people that you hate gays because your religion tells you to, suddenly you'll find a magical well-spring of people insisting that your "religious beliefs" be respected and that it would be discrimination for anybody to tell you to shut up and get over yourself.

People who claim that they hate gays, or blacks, or uppity womenz because Gawd Sez So are full of it. They hate because they hate, and they picked a God who would back them up on hating what they want to hate.

This applies also to laziness, too. Don't feel like doing your science homework? Pick a religion that provides a simple, idiotic Creation myth, and insist that this myth should be regarded as equal to science. Ta-da! You don't have to learn all those yucky facts and study up on tough concepts. You just sit quietly during Story Time at Sunday school. Why bother to do all the work of research and peer review and all that boring stuff? You can get your "theory" placed on equal footing with real theories just by invoking God!

Yes there are some people who are like that, but to be fair I doubt that's the way religion started and by fae not all spiritualists are like that. Some people are genuinely in it because they believe there's something greater and not because they want an excuse to discriminate.

I oppose bigoted right wing extremist religious fanatics, including extremist fanatic Christians as much as anyone else but I'd hate to see the rest of the Christian congregation and, for that matter, all those religious to be lumped in the same category.

Ladies and gentlemen, Sweeney Todd!

There's a place in the Net like an arguing pit,
And it has some folks in it who are full of it,
And they use stupid smileys like the sniper bit,
And it goes by the name of NS.

We should all thank the gods that these folks are few,
For they'd be better placed in a goddamn zoo,
Bleating and tossing their shit, it's true

I've roamed the Net and seen its wonders,
For the porn that you can find is as wondrous as the games,
But there's no place like NS!
http://www.tonyawards.com/images/misc/LG_TONYs2007_poster.jpg

http://www.tonyawards.com/images/misc/LG_TONYs2007_poster.jpg

:D