Ever wonder?????
================
Amein,
Your post demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of the cultural differences that have manifested themselves in obscene violence against innocent civilians, and that have led us to the brink of war. I would not normally take the time to address a post as ignorant as the one that you have written, but I'm afraid you have profoundly insulted me and I'm a little embarrassed to say that I simply cannot resist pointing out the obvious errors in both your facts and your distorted logic.
Why a nun can be covered from head to toe and she's respected for devoting herself to God, but when a Muslimah does that, she's considered "oppressed"?
First, Roman Catholic nuns may choose whether or not to wear a habit. If they belong to an order that customarily wears habits they may choose to leave that order and enter another order. They may, in fact, choose to leave an order for any personal reason. In no case will they EVER be beaten. Why? Because it is barbaric to do so. Both my Great Aunt and my Grandmother's cousin are nuns and I have never seen them wear a habit. Nevertheless I still respect their dedication to God. While a habit or a veil may be an outward sign that someone has dedicated themselves to their religion, it is only that - a sign. True dedication to religion manifests itself in good works, caring for those less fortunate then ourselves, and thoughtful reflection on matters of both the flesh and the spirit. I must admit that this last statement is only my opinion.
Secondly, please cite any source that claims that Muslim women who CHOOSE to cover themselves are oppressed. Just as nuns may choose to cover themselves as an outward sign of their piety without it conveying oppression, a Muslim woman (or anyone for that matter) may certainly do the same. However, to oppress someone you crush or burden them by abuse of power or authority (Merriam Webster's Online Collegiate Dictionary). Therefore, if any women are FORCED to cover themselves out of fear of physical violence against them if they do not, is that or is that not an instance of oppression? Is it true, or is it not true, that - as has been reported in numerous media outlets - women in Afganistan are beaten by Taliban representatives if they are not deemed to be properly covered? Is it, or is it not true, that women are denied education, and are threatened with hanging if found to be educating girls? I could continue to ask you about reported abuses against women in Afghanistan and under fundamentalist Islamic control elsewhere, but these two examples should suffice - to any rational person - to demonstrate the oppression of women.
In summary, the outward appearance of a covering does NOT suggest by itself an instance of oppression. It is the ability to choose how one expresses their dedication to their religion that determines whether or not one is free or oppressed.
Why a Jew can grow a beard and he's just practising his faith, and when a Muslim does that, he's an extremist?
Please cite a source that states that when a Muslim grows a beard he is an extremist. Once again a personal CHOICE to grow a beard may be an outward sign of one's dedication to religion. Or it might just mean that he wanted to grow a beard. However, when someone believes that they can punish another person for not growing a beard or for not maintaining a long enough beard, THAT person is an extremist. Upon reflection, I can't believe that I actually need to explain this to you. You must truly be a simpleton.
By the way, I am neither Muslim nor Jew, and I sport a beard.
When a western woman stays at home to look after the house and kids she's sacrificing herself and doing good for the household, but when a Muslim woman does so, she "needs to be liberated"?
Please cite a source that states that Muslim women who CHOOSE to stay at home and care for their family need to be liberated. Do I need to continue to educate you about the difference between the exercise of free will and forced behavior under threat of violence? Even a child can understand the difference.
Why is it that when a child dedicates himself to a subject, he has potential, and when a child dedicates himself to Islam, he is hopeless?
Please cite a source that states that a child who CHOOSES to dedicate himself OR HERSELF to Islam is hopeless. If there is a part of humanity that is most in need of choices and freedom it is our children. They need the freedom to choose those activities and studies that stir their minds, energize their bodies, and move their spirits. If this is the study of religion (Islam, Judaism, Catholicism, or whatever) then they must be free to pursue it. If they are moved by art, or mathematics, or writing, or anything other than religion, we must encourage them along their paths with equal enthusiasm.
When a Christian kills someone, religion is not mentioned, (i.e., Ireland and the IRA) but when a Muslim is charged with a crime, it's Islam that goes to trial?
I don't what papers you read, but I challenge you to find and post here a single article on the violence in Northern Ireland that DOESN'T discuss the fact that the violence is between Catholics and Protestants. Anyone who kills in the name of their religion - any religion - has defiled that religion (in my opinion). As a Catholic, I reject the violence of Catholics in Northern Ireland, and I do not now nor will I ever suggest that you or anyone else needs to "understand the underlying motivation for their discontent". They need to stop the violence. Period. End of conversation.
But then again, why is it after all that, Islam is still the fastest growing religion in the world ?
Just because gonorrhea spreads quickly doesn't make it desirable. And yes you read correctly, I am comparing the fundamentalist Islamic body of thought that encourages violent actions such as those that killed thousands on September 11 to a Venereal Disease. We have examples of such disease in the U.S. as well. I'll give just the example of the disturbed Catholics who think it acceptable to kill doctors because they perform abortions. We have managed to keep this disease largely in check with a specific type of anti-biotic - it is called The Rule of Law. The Taliban has shown that it is not capable of keeping its own disease from harming others so we are forced to eradicate it ourselves. |
