I feel offended

[Adrian II]

Heh, it is time to turn the tables on the unwashed zealots. I saw a great piece today by the German journalist Sonia Mikich: What Next, Bearded One?

Her tv program Monitor by the way practises investigative journalism as it should be, and it is probably the best of its kind on German tv. Anyway, I think women sense the threat to our freedoms emanating from the bearded idiots more acutely than men. They stand even more to lose if we give in to the nonsense. Anyone else have ideas how we can take this fight to the idiots?


Human rights, women's rights and the right to liberty are the most exalted in the history of humanity; this is the tradition in which I was raised. Values that make the world better and more peaceful.

I demand that the governments of Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Indonesia and Egypt apologise to me. Otherwise I am unfortunately forced to threaten, beat up, kidnap or behead their citizens. Because I am somewhat sensitive about my cultural identity.

I feel offended.

Link (http://www.signandsight.com/features/597.html)

[Devastatin Dave]

I feel offended as well for my wife, mom, daughter, stranger with a vagina, etc sakes. I'm going to go riot!!!:laugh4:

[rory_20_uk]

It's a damn good point: take them all to the UN court of Human Rights Abuses. the Koran can be exhibit #1.

And as it is the root cause of the problem I pose that it should be banned as inciting deprivation of human rights...

~:smoking:

[Ser Clegane]

Nice find, AdrianII - I just read the German version on the taz-website


and it is probably the best of its kind on German tv

Indeed - also, I always liked the stern face of Klaus Bednarz... (but Sonia isn't bad either) ~:)

[Goofball]

She hits the nail right on the head. How can practitioners of a religion that condones the subjugation of just over 50% of the world's population expect any of us to have any sympathy for their "feelings?"

I'll tell you what Islam: I think I may be just on the verge of feeling sorry for you. You start holding your collective breath, and I'll let you know when I get there.

:juggle2:

[Azi Tohak]

Yup, I don't like what they do either. But I'm a racist cracker.

But what about multi-culturalism? Don't we have to accept and embrace their practices? What they believe is just as valid as what you believe isn't it? Who are you to judge them?

Azi

P.S. I think this is very interesting.

http://www.signandsight.com/features/590.html

And I still want to see those cartoons!

[Watchman]

:wall:
...bloody nonexistent moral high ground...

Shall we start reciting The White Man's Burden in chorus while we're at it ?

[Proletariat]

Sonia is my new hero. This crap has driven me up the wall ever since I found out how rape victims are treated over there.

[Azi Tohak]

Sonia is my new hero. This crap has driven me up the wall ever since I found out how rape victims are treated over there.

I'll bite. I don't know what happens to rape victims. Are they killed?

Azi

[Proletariat]

The following made me sick to read, so be warned.

http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2004/october/izadi_161004.shtml
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/19/wiran19.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/19/ixworld.html

[Goofball]

Finally some people are realising that just because the American right has been saying it, doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong.

Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day...

~;p

At any rate, while I agree that Islam as a whole has no right to take the moral high ground in this case, please don't take this agreement as my aquiescence to related cases that some on the right may now try to make, like "multiculturalism is bad," "the invasion of Iraq was good," or "GWB is smarter than a bowl of mushy-peas."

[Watchman]

The following made me sick to read, so be warned.

http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2004/october/izadi_161004.shtml
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/19/wiran19.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/19/ixworld.html
This is what you get in societies where the virginity of the bride is considered paramount. That is one piece of tradition that needs to go and take its odious spawn with it, period.

[Proletariat]

Hey, even a broken clock is right twice a day...

~;p

At any rate, while I agree that Islam as a whole has no right to take the moral high ground in this case, please don't take this agreement as my aquiescence to related cases that some on the right may now try to make, like "multiculturalism is bad," "the invasion of Iraq was good," or "GWB is smarter than a bowl of mushy-peas."

Heh. I had edited that out a few moments ago realizing I didn't even wanna go down this road, and just be happy for once that it seems other countries' citizens are waking up to it (besides Fraggony.)

:laugh4:

[Samurai Waki]

God, I hate the middle east. I admit it, I hate them, and I hate everything that their dictators and ultramoralistic governments do to innocent people. War is obviously not the answer, nor is bombing them into a sheet of glass... they just need a good punch in the nose.

[Watchman]

I wouldn't call what borders on mental regression of a century "waking up". But YMMV.

[rory_20_uk]

I think you're missing the big picture... a Westener drew a cartoon...

For acts of depravity like that there should be some protests in the West. It didn't even make the British papers, damnit!!! I nothing else a good riposte showing the rioters here how things are under these "utopias"

~:smoking:

[Watchman]

The West regularly ignores far worse and numerous human-rights violations. Get a grip and ditch the CNN Phenomenom.

[Dâriûsh]

The following made me sick to read, so be warned.
...the unimaginable horror those dogs call justice… :shame:

[rory_20_uk]

Yes, yes, babies get arms hcked off with machetes, women get raped etc etc. BUT they are NOT based upon a religion. I'd imagine in most other acts the perpotrators believe what they are doing is wrong - they just choose to do it. For that reason I feel that this is "special".

Also in few of the cases do the prosecutors of excess blame the west for something so trivial.

Bravo for dismissing so much suffering on the grounds that "there's worse in the world"

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller

~:smoking:

[Watchman]

People are dreadfully competent in explaining away the most horrific things to their own benefit.

AFAIK most of the misogynism Islam tends to get credit for isn't actually an article of the faith itself - or at least liberal and progressive Muslims generally seem quite capable of interpreting it that way, which suggests there's not too much explicitly stated on the topic in the texts. Not that explicit commandements from the scriptures hadn't been played fast and loose with before when deemed necessary either.

It's more a question of stuck-up old traditions and customs that get given the religious make-up for extra justification. Female circumscision has nothing to do with Islam for example, but I'm willing to bet a fat wad of cash African Muslim populaces that practice it will on the average happily try to tell you different.
It's not that long ago when the situation was only marginally better here - horrible discriminations were cheerfully justified with quotes from the Bible. Well, despite the best efforts of reactionaries we've been getting better although it's been a long and rocky road. The Muslims haven't been even trying for too long (for most of them the Middle Ages only stopped about a century or so ago, after all), and ...other issues... have gotten mixed up into the question to muddle it further.

[Adrian II]

:wall:
...bloody nonexistent moral high ground...

Shall we start reciting The White Man's Burden in chorus while we're at it ?By 'taking the fight to the idiots' I don't mean taking it to all Muslims. Moderate Arabs or Muslims (particularly the women) suffer just as much under their zealot brothers, if not more, than the white man. Just today there are encouraging reports from Denmark about Muslim organisations making a stand against the violence and hysteria and declaring themselves proud to be Danish. That puts paid to the Fragony's who always maintain that Muslims are all backward, and incorrigibly so.

Oh, and I do not share the notion that violence and oppression can be blamed on any particular book, in this case the Quran, and that it should serve as an exhibit in a court case against Islam. We have more important things to do than make ourselves look ridiculous in the eyes of future generations. We should leave that to the demonstrators and their paymasters.

[Watchman]

An absurd image of a court of law frantically trying to find a judge or a suitable translator to actually understand Exhibit A against Islam, the Qu'ran, written in gazillion-year-old Classic Arabic ("Accept No Substitutes!" quite literally, as it is my understanding translations simply don't count as the real thing *period*), just popped into my mind.
:dizzy2:
Either I have an overly graphic imagination, or I shouldn't keep hanging here after midnight...

[Proletariat]

This is what you get in societies where the virginity of the bride is considered paramount.

Huh? Sex before marriage is frowned upon in the Christian faith. One of the most holy figures in Catholicism is pretty famous for her virginity. This is what happens in societies rife with fundamentalism, it has nothing to do with virgin brides.

[Watchman]

Oh, yes it does. You see, most of European cultures were never terribly concerned with the issue; many actually had a rather laissez-faire approach to maritial fidelity and sex before marriage, and screw the clergy.

Well, until around the end of the Middle Ages but then women's social standing kind of took a nosedive around that point too. But what I've heard of the practices of Finnish peasantry all the way into the 19th century suggests pragmatism (and recognition of the natural urges of young folks) was even then often considered more important than lofty principles.

It's a culture thing. Crap along the lines mentioned here (such as underage marriages) is prevalent in all the ones that for one reason or another attach excessive special significance to bridal virginity. Female circumscision is among the more extreme manifestations of the theme.

[Samurai Waki]

I thought the even the Vikings were fairly well known for their (at the time) fairly equal standards towards women, I mean they couldn't go off and plunder england or anything (which really hasn't changed too much), but it wasn't considered an injustice for a woman to get a divorce based on the situation of the relationship.

[KafirChobee]

Christians were outraged about :
"What if there's no heaven" (the song)
"The Last temptation of Christ" (really soaked their linnens on this one - even if Christ won out in the long run).
"Dogma" (well, it was sacraligious - to the nits that don't grasp a joke, or comprehend a parallell). Much like the twits worshiping Mohamad (rather than Allah), alot like those worshiping Jesus rather than God.

Thing is, it took months for the nut cases that set this off to find this reason to set a buncha illiterates off. In the USA, the educated are set off daily to justify or demean .... anything for or against - .... anything they don't believe ("Im not a fan of facts. You see, facts can change, but my opinion never will change - no matter what the facts are. Stephen Colbert). It's the way it is in free societys and we are so use to it that it is meaningless.

Further, the cartoons are not the issue - it is: when a nation does not realise it is being played by another. It is a beautiful thing. Don't you think? The west, playing the west - to convince those most opposed to Bush's policies that they were wrong. It is like saying - "seeee , seeeee, we told you that we are right .... and we were (9/11/01 justifies everything - didn't you know?).

Bush maybe an idiot, but those leading him by his nose ring are not. Amazing how simple things become when you can put it in the perspective of "who has what to gain" and how do they gain it?

edit: for effect - er, spelling (never did get past the third row - you know?)

[Xiahou]

Christians were outraged about :
"What if there's no heaven" (the song)
"The Last temptation of Christ" (really soaked their linnens on this one - even if Christ won out in the long run).
"Dogma" (well, it was sacraligious - to the nits that don't grasp a joke, or comprehend a parallell). Much like the twits worshiping Mohamad (rather than Allah), alot like those worshiping Jesus rather than God.Jesus is God to Christians, professor. :rolleyes:

[Navaros]

Ser Clegane and I are asking that users who create threads try to use accurate or informative titles.

I feel offended that this thread title does not follow the above-quoted thread title rule.

[Adrian II]

I feel offended that this thread title does not follow the above-quoted thread title rule.Is that a death threat? Or are you just going to burn a Dutch embassy? :mellow:

[Franconicus]

I feel offended that you watch German TV. Dutch multi-culturalism really goes too far. I would accept it if you watch Fußball instead!:laugh4:

I agree that many in the middle east are just crazy as bats. But what can be done? Bombing does not help, occupation does not help, economic cooperation does not help. Maybe we should just get out there and leave them alone until the fever is gone; a couple of decades at least. But what about the oil?

[Adrian II]

I agree that many in the middle east are just crazy as bats. But what can be done? Bombing does not help, occupation does not help, economic cooperation does not help.We should support the ones who use their brains. Those in Europe most of all, because Europe is the breeding ground for a reformed Islam if ever there is to be one. Of course the frontline of this fight runs through all borders, languages, religions and political systems. It is encouraging these days to see initiatives like this:


The Palestinian Association in Norway calls upon all Palestinians in Norway to fly the Norwegian flag from their balcony this week. By doing so we wish to confirm our will to maintain the excellent Palestinian-Norwegian relations. On the other hand, we condemn the threats directed to some Norwegians and other Europeans in the occupied Palestinian districts and the burning of the Norwegian embassy and flag in some countries.On the other hand, there are the usual prevarications by European and American leaders. Chirac fell through yesterday, just like Bush and Blair before him. Then again, Rasmussen and Dutch PM Balkenende issued firm statements in defense of European free speech and against ever tighter restrictions on the press in the British manner.

I am particularly interested in the way all sorts of officials try to weasel out of this issue. The German paper Die Welt has an interview with Al-Jazeera tv director Wadah Khanfar, who manages to push all the wrong buttons. Which I think is indicative of the fact that Al-Jaseera, despite being an improvement over Arab state channels and a welcome correction to western channels, has a long way to go in its own philosophy.

Here is why Khanfar thinks the cartoons are -- yes, it's that word again -- 'inacceptable': 'We have a profound respect for the freedom to express your opinion. It is extremely important, especially in the Arab world. But these drawings contain no information, they express no opinion.'

Since when must cartoons necessarily contain information? And how can a cartoon be offensive if it expresses no opinion? Oh, and by the way, some of the Danish cartoons do express firm opinions, but Mr Khanfar's viewers wouldn't know that because they were never shown on Al-Jazeera. Monsieur Khanfar seems deeply khanfuzzled both about the concept of free speech and about the role of cartoons in papers and in public debate.

And there is more. Just last week Al-Jazeera organised a conference about ways in which media can strike bridges between cultures and civilisations. According to Khanfar, this is impossible if media 'question the consensus in the country or region' where they operate. Revealing, isn't it? Never rattle the windows or piss in someone's coffee if you know what's good for world peace and understanding!

And then it gets really interesting. When Die Welt asks how Al-Jazeera handles the Danish cartoon issue, Khanfar says: 'Our ethical code prohibits us from addressing themes that might hurt religious feelings. We report on these caricatures, but we do not show them.'

What Mr Khanfar is stating here, implicitly, is that all the islamist propaganda that Al-Jazeera has shown over the years -- the Osama tapes, the gory images of killings in the name of the Prophet, the countless calls for violence in the name of Allah, etcetera -- is not offensive to religious feelings. In other words, Islam forbids drawings of the Prophet, not massive, senseless crimes committed in his name. This is hypocrisy in full swing. As long as this is the consensus in the region, to use Al-Jazeera's term, Islam will have to be reformed on western soil and re-imported in the region. Which is a long way off, I fear.

[Navaros]

What Mr Khanfar is stating here, implicitly, is that all the islamist propaganda that Al-Jazeera has shown over the years -- the Osama tapes, the gory images of killings in the name of the Prophet, the countless calls for violence in the name of Allah, etcetera -- is not offensive to religious feelings. In other words, Islam forbids drawings of the Prophet, not massive, senseless crimes committed in his name. This is hypocrisy in full swing. As long as this is the consensus in the region, to use Al-Jazeera's term, Islam will have to be reformed on western soil and re-imported in the region. Which is a long way off, I fear.

The violence regarding those vile cartoons is not senseless. It gets their message noticed. The world knows loud and clear that if they try to dump on Islam the way they dump on Christianity, then Islam is going to bite back every time - and hard. Rightfully so, I say.

What is senseless are people such as yourself thinking your words of chastisement and wishful thinking of having Muslims conform to how you want them to be (instead of how God wants them to be) is going to in any way affect their will. In reality, it will not.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

[indent]The Palestinian Association in Norway calls upon all Palestinians in Norway to fly the Norwegian flag from their balcony this week. By doing so we wish to confirm our will to maintain the excellent Palestinian-Norwegian relations.

You don't think that this may be them acting cynically to avoid getting in trouble?

I'm not saying that they are but I know that if I wanted to destroy a civilisation and replace it with my own then I'd definitely lie low (if my strength were increasing) until I had the strength to do so.

[Ser Clegane]

You don't think that this may be them acting cynically to avoid getting in trouble?

Or it could be that some muslims just genuinely like the country they are living in ... but usually people who are content don't parade around with "I love Norway" signs, unless a situation like the current requires them to make clear that not all (most likely not even the majority) muslims feels the urge to burn down embassies or to beat up non-muslims.

Just an idea...

EDIT: Funny - often people here are asking the moderate muslim majority to raise their voice in situation like these - and if some of them do they are "acting cynically"

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

Or it could be that some muslims just genuinely like the country they are living in ... but usually people who are content don't parade around with "I love Norway" signs, unless a situation like the current requires them to make clear that not all (most likely not even the majority) muslims feels the urge to burn down embassies or to beat up non-muslims.

Just an idea...

indeed and my idea was just an idea.

I didn't say mine was always true and yours isn't always true but I'd be shocked if there weren't Muslims in both camps. Well, actually I know there are.

Edit: reply to your edit, yeah, if they'd have shown their faces years ago then maybe there would be less suspicion.

[rory_20_uk]

I think its a laudable idea. I think that every person in the UK should be keen to fly the British flag - if not why the hell are they here?

If the moderate muslims clearly stated how they like western countries even with all their faults it paints a better (and IMO fairer) picture of Islam in the world. Flying the flag of their adopted homeland should be part of that.

~:smoking:

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

If the moderate muslims clearly stated how they like western countries even with all their faults it paints a better (and IMO fairer) picture of Islam in the world. Flying the flag of their adopted homeland should be part of that.

~:smoking:

yep.

flying a flag is part of that but flying a flag without anything else is somewhat superficial (or can be construed as such by bad people such as myself)

Edit: yeah, yeah, I admit it, the Palestinian Norwegian flag thing may be a genuinely nice gesture.

[Adrian II]

If the moderate muslims clearly stated how they like western countries even with all their faults it paints a better (and IMO fairer) picture of Islam in the world. Flying the flag of their adopted homeland should be part of that.Nah, flying the flag of freedom is more than enough if you ask me. You can hardly expect Muslims or anyone else to adopt a silly symbol in order to demonstrate their sanity, can you? In the Norwegian case it makes sense to fly the flag as a (emporary) protest against those who burn it. But if you look at the accompanying declarations it is clear that this Palestinian outfit is more concerned about the underlying values than the symbol. I think we may see more of this from now on. It is not just 'old' Europeans who are forced to make a stand for freedom of expression in this situation (and some of who fail miserably, like Jacques Chirac), it is also the Muslim community in Europe that is faced with some stark choices. Many of them pass the test with silent drums, by keeping a remarkable cool, going about their business, not joining in the hysteria.

Others take the lead with flying colours. The French newspaper Charlie Hebdo yesterday re-printed the Danish cartoons in its special issue devoted to the affair. The paper's initiative was supported and assisted by a host of French Arabs and Muslims who demand the right to think for themselves and resist bigotry. The day before Chirac had warned against such reprints, but the editor in chief of Hebdo told him to stick his views where the Enlightentment don't shine. 'It may be true that faith can move mountains,' says the lead article, 'but they are mainly mountains of corpses. How many books and newspapers do we have to burn before the thirst of the religious fanatics is quenched?' The paper also has a good article by Tewfik Allal, leader of a Muslim association that supports freedom of expression. Their existence and views literally belie the claims of their obscurantist counterparts in French Muslemistan that they represent 'all French Muslims'.

Go Tewfik! :2thumbsup:

[Watchman]

I always like it when the moderates get their act together and point out they tend to be the majority.

Opinion on humanity: +1.

[Taffy_is_a_Taff]

In the Norwegian case it makes sense to fly the flag as a (emporary) protest against those who burn it. But if you look at the accompanying declarations it is clear that this Palestinian outfit is more concerned about the underlying values than the symbol.

thanks for clearing that up, the original description made it sound like it may just be gesture politics.

[Redleg]

The violence regarding those vile cartoons is not senseless. It gets their message noticed. The world knows loud and clear that if they try to dump on Islam the way they dump on Christianity, then Islam is going to bite back every time - and hard. Rightfully so, I say.

The violence being done in protest of a Free Spech issue is wrong. To criticize the expression of Free Speech is acceptable. Burning the Flag of Denmark, boycotting their goods, demanding an apology and a retraction of the print are all forms of expression that get the same message across and are ones of a responsible person. Violence only fuels the fire for more violence. It seems you have a problem understanding Freedom of Speech. So are you advocating violence because you disagree with the expression of Free Speech that was done by the Dane's? If so are you willing to accept the responsiblity and the consequence of such a statement?



What is senseless are people such as yourself thinking your words of chastisement and wishful thinking of having Muslims conform to how you want them to be (instead of how God wants them to be) is going to in any way affect their will. In reality, it will not.

Then why are they so upset about a few drawing?

Just for Adrian Freedom of Speech is indeed a double edge sword is it not?

[Goofball]

The violence being done in protest of a Free Spech issue is wrong. To criticize the expression of Free Speech is acceptable. Burning the Flag of Denmark, boycotting their goods, demanding an apology and a retraction of the print are all forms of expression that get the same message across and are ones of a responsible person. Violence only fuels the fire for more violence. It seems you have a problem understanding Freedom of Speech.

I'll save you a little trouble here, Red. It's not that Nav misunderstands the concept of freedom of speech, it's that Nav is against the concept of freedom of speech, at least when it comes to what he would deem to be "blasphemy." And those of you who have read some of Nav's opinions in the past, you will know I am not being insulting by saying this, just telling it like it is.

I wouldn't waste a whole lot of time discussing this one with him Red.

[Redleg]

I'll save you a little trouble here, Red. It's not that Nav misunderstands the concept of freedom of speech, it's that Nav is against the concept of freedom of speech, at least when it comes to what he would deem to be "blasphemy." And those of you who have read some of Nav's opinions in the past, you will know I am not being insulting by saying this, just telling it like it is.

I wouldn't waste a whole lot of time discussing this one with him Red.

I wasn't planning to - I was just commenting about the nature of the post. Free Speech is indeed a dangerous weapon to those with closed minds.

[Divinus Arma]

It's a damn good point: take them all to the UN court of Human Rights Abuses. the Koran can be exhibit #1.

And as it is the root cause of the problem I pose that it should be banned as inciting deprivation of human rights...

~:smoking:

And the Bible can be exhibit #2 because it demonizes women and considers them subordinate to men (where is the female pope, hmmmh?).


It is not the religion that is the problem. It is the intolerance of religion that is the problem. Muslims rant and rave because they are intolerant of everyone else, not because Islam is "bad".

Same thing with fundy Christians. I don't like fundy Christians any more than I like fundy Muslims. They are one in the same in my eyes.

When people are intolerant of others' rights and demand that everyone else adhere to their personal vision for humanity, the whole shithouse goes down in flames.

[Proletariat]

Excellently put.

[Spino]

Don't mean to pull this off topic but...

With regard to human history some of you guys need to exchange your telephoto lens for a wide angle model... Throughout human history the value of virgin brides has always been high, if not extremely high. It's the norm, not the exception. Don't take a paltry 100 years of women's suffrage and feminism and its cultural and social side effects and mistake it for the norm.

Furthermore don't use this as an excuse to go blaming Christianity & Islam for something which has been around for as long as we've been living in hunter/gatherer groups. Religion in itself is not a spontaneous, self sustaining entity; it is an embodiment of those morals and ethics which human beings seem to value more highly than others. Religion is generally altered to suit the culture that invented or adopted it, not the other way around. Religion in itself is harmless, it's the driving psychological forces behind a particular interpretation that are the culprit. Fear and ignorance seem to be the driving force behind these honor killings and other horrendous practices. You also need to take into account the diversity of ideas, cultures and beliefs throughout human history. Once you look at the travails of our species as a whole then you'll realize these kinds of practices are to be expected.

In the evolutionary sense a virgin bride implies greater selectivity on the part of the female even if they themselves are not participants in the selection process (traditionally it is the parents who decide who marries who, especially in civilized cultures). But when you get to the heart of the matter the marital tradition of a virgin bride is a relatively surefire method of guaranteeing males and their bloodline (i.e. family) that the prospective bride isn't already carrying the offspring of a competitor, thus ensuring that the groom isn't unknowingly wasting his time and resources raising said offspring and ensuring that the groom's parents didn't waste their time raising a genetic 'dead end'. As to the bride the status of her virginity generally signifies she'll receive the full benefit of the groom's devotion and efforts and that of his family as well. Regarding the parents of the bride having a daughter of questionable virginity and/or morals seriously harms their chances of having their daughter's future secured. It also invites the scenario where the burden of raising an illegitimate child would fall (in part or entirely) on their shoulders.

There's plenty of evidence to back this up, you don't even need to invoke an academic text or study. Just look around you. Virgin brides may be rare in western societies nowadays but take note that even in these liberated, progressive times males generally and consistently avoid situations where they are expected to take care of another man's children. Just ask any single woman with kids how tough it is to attract a man, any man, let alone one who might be inclined to enter into a serious relationship.

/slooooooowww day at work...

[rory_20_uk]

On the subject of religion, I would argue that in the same way that organisms evolve with some surviving, so do religions. True, religions do add to themselves aspects of the culture that they find themselves (gaelic crosses as one small example) but they also fight other aspects that are are against them (witches = evil, as do druids). Brainwashing kids is a good thing, as is having loads of 'em (condoms = bad). Those that have less virulence factors die off - they are slaughtered by those of a more hostile religion, for example the branch of peaceful Christians in South France / North Spain were killed off to a man, woman and child by the more violent Roman Catholics.

To say that the culture is not altered by religion is to ignore masses of contrary evidence: from gladiatorial games dying out when Christianity hit the Romans, to the importance of religion throughout the Middle Ages.

Having one's own sprog is of course important, but often the ideals of the women being a virgin were second place to reality. Children quietly disappeared onto some other member of the family who is "allowed" to have children. Women have always slept around, just as men have. Only in the last 100 years were they allowed to admit to doing so!

As an aside, some African cultures have different rules, where all can have the women, they only have to leave their spear outside the hut of the woman. One could argue that in a communal society it will ensure that the best possible are created.

BTW: there was a female pope. She gave birth, then they burnt her at the stake... That's why someone checks the new pope's balls these days.

Yes, the Bible is just as bad. In fact there is much content that is the same as in the Koran (I've been reading). Both bitter books filled with venom and soaked in blood.

~:smoking:

[Divinus Arma]

Female Pope? Huh? Balls? Stake?

[Adrian II]

Female Pope?Probably not. Pope Joan is a legend, no more..

[rory_20_uk]

Mea culpa. A simple Google search would have saved my blushes :embarassed:

~:smoking:

[Adrian II]

Mea culpa. A simple Google search would have saved my blushes :embarassed:

~:smoking:At least you have the balls to admit. Unless they too are a legend...:dizzy2:

[master of the puppets]

At least you have the balls to admit. Unless they too are a legend...:dizzy2:

the legendary blue balls of Antioch, sitting right beside the holy hand grenade and behind harry potters wand:idea2: