U.S. Shari'a watch

Everyone loves a healthy debate. Post an idea or comment about a current event or issue. Let others post their ideas also. This area is for those who love to explore other points of view.

Moderator: Nicole Marie

Postby jamiebk » Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:40 am

As I understand the ruling, there is no provision to protect the woman's health and safety. I doubt that most people would desire an abortion for the sake of abortion at 27 weeks. Neither my wife or I would. However, I do not feel that the a bunch of politicians and judges should be making medical decisions that should be left to doctors. If a situation arises where a woman's life and health are in joepardy due to a compromised fetus or some other medical oddity, this medical option needs to be available. It should not be up to someone with NO medical training whatsoever to dictate what medical procedure is appropriate


PS....and yeah....this thread needs to get moved to somewhere else...
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Postby Shapley » Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:52 am

Haggis,

I think Harry Reid's problem is that the Supreme Court decision takes away another hiding place for the pro-abortion politicians - they had been able to hide behind the 'fact' that unfettered access to abortion was the law of the land as decided by the courts. Now, they have to admit that the matter is far from settled, and that they may have to vote - and answer for their vote - on matters related to the law.

Jamie,

A number of doctors testified during hearings on the bill, stating that there was no medical necessity that would mandate that particular type of abortion. If the child can be 'partially delivered' through normal means, it is likely that it can be fully delivered. The only reason for the partial delivery was to prevent an actual 'birth', as legally defined, which would then prohibit the killing of the child. As long as part of the child remains inside the womb, the killing can be classified as an abortion. There are other means of aborting a child at that late stage that do not require partial delivery, as was attested to by physicians at the hearings. No convincing argument could be made that there was any medical necessity for that particular type of abortion.

This law is not about whether or not children can be killed late in the pregnancy cycle, it is about the banning of a cruel and inhuman method of doing so.

V/R
Shapley
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby Haggis@wk » Thu Apr 19, 2007 5:09 pm

A hint of this complexity comes across in an exchange Greenhouse describes between the majority and the dissent in yesterday's case:

In describing the federal law's justifications, Justice Kennedy said that banning the procedure was in fact good for women, protecting them against terminating their pregnancies by a method they might not fully understand in advance and would come to regret later.

"Respect for human life finds an ultimate expression in the bond of love the mother has for her child," he said, adding: "It is self-evident that a mother who comes to regret her choice to abort must struggle with grief more anguished and sorrow more profound when she learns, only after the event, what she once did not know: that she allowed a doctor to pierce the skull and vacuum the fast-developing brain of her unborn child, a child assuming the human form."

Justice Ginsburg objected vehemently that "this way of thinking reflects ancient notions of women's place in the family and under the Constitution--ideas that have long since been discredited."

To our mind Justice Kennedy's heartfelt imploration is more persuasive than Justice Ginsburg's sterile conception of womanhood. But this is a debate that should be going on among the American people and their elected representatives. It should not be the exclusive province of nine jurists.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Postby Shapley » Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:55 pm

It is interesting to me that Justice Ginsberg thinks we have outgrown and discredited ideas such as motherly compassion, bonding, grief, and regret. What an interesting world she thinks we live in...
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby barfle » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:54 pm

Haggis@wk wrote:To our mind Justice Kennedy's heartfelt imploration is more persuasive than Justice Ginsburg's sterile conception of womanhood.

I don't believe I would take the opinion of a man over that of a woman regarding what being a woman entails.
--I know what I like--
barfle
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Springfield, Vahjinyah, USA

Postby Haggis@wk » Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:49 pm

barfle wrote:
Haggis@wk wrote:To our mind Justice Kennedy's heartfelt imploration is more persuasive than Justice Ginsburg's sterile conception of womanhood.

I don't believe I would take the opinion of a man over that of a woman regarding what being a woman entails.


Why not? Hell, most of us have been told since Kindergarten what being a man entails by an unbroken string of women!

My scalp still prickle when I remember my grandmother's bony knuckle if I failed to open a door fast enough for another woman.

More seriously, I suspect that description by Justice Kennedy is the first time many readers here ever learned what a "late term abortion" entails.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Postby jamiebk » Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:45 pm

GUYS....It's a good discussion but can we PLEASE move this thread somewhere else. This is supposed to be about U.S. Shari'a watch

Let's end the hijack OK? I could not find a topic heading that worked exactly, but perhaps it is time to begin one. I would recommend something like: "Right to Life/Right to Choose Discussions". I am sure it will light up the board.
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Postby Haggis@wk » Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:56 pm

back on threat...er, "thread"


Today Star Tribune columnist Katherine Kersten concludes her series of columns on the the introduction of ritual washing facilities to facilitate "wudu" for Muslim prayer at Minneapolis Community and Technical College. Kathy's column is "'Accommodation' could open door to more demands." It's an alarming column that takes a look at the "accommodations" road we're headed down:

Canada, our neighbor to the north, is farther down the "accommodations" road. A glance north can shed light on whether prayer spaces and ritual washing facilities are likely to satisfy activists for long.

Last month, the Canadian Federation of Students issued a report, titled "Final Report of the Task Force on Needs of Muslim Students," that calls for sweeping changes at the country's institutions of higher education. The federation represents more than 500,000 students across Canada, about half of the nation's total. While the report focuses on Ontario, its conclusions are applicable across the country and internationally, said Jesse Greener, the Federation's Ontario chairperson.

Some recommended changes could affect all students. For example, the report criticizes Canada's loan-based system of financing higher education and calls for outright grants to students. "Education related government loans should not accumulate interest," it says, since Islam "opposes usury and involvement with interest-bearing loans." Other changes would be more focused. The report endorses "women-only" time at athletic facilities, and urges colleges to "provide curtains or screens over the observation windows" when women are using the pool.

The report calls not just for Muslim-only prayer space but for "multiple prayer spaces" with "easy access" from all over campus. All new building plans should include prayer space and ritual washing facilities if necessary, it adds.

Food service workers must learn to prepare halal food, which is ritually slaughtered and otherwise permissible under Sharia law. After preparing non-halal food, staff must "change sanitary gloves and wash cutlery and surfaces" to avoid contaminating halal food.

What if a campus fails to make these changes, and others like them? It is guilty, says the report, of "Islamophobia" -- an "emerging form of racism," according to the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

Islamophobia includes more than clearly inappropriate behavior such as violence against Muslims or unreasonable suspicion of them. It can be as "subtle" as a remark that includes a "stereotype" or betrays the speaker's "lack of understanding" of Islam (such as the notion that Sharia law treats women as second class citizens). Just "one comment" of this kind can create a "poisoned" learning environment for Muslim students, the report says.

"Islamophobic" comments will soon land Canadians in serious trouble, if the federation has its way. The report outlines a comprehensive system "to encourage and facilitate a culture of reporting Islamophobia on campus. Anti-discrimination officers should be notified whenever such a comment is made, it says.

But the report makes clear that systems like this will not eradicate Islamophobia from Canadian campuses. To remove stereotypes, faculty, staff, students and administrators must all learn "the tenets of Islam," it said. "Education modules" for professors should incorporate a focus on "Islam and Islamophobia," while student activities could range from more courses on themes of the Qur'an and the Islamic world today to "socials, programs and other initiatives" to teach about Islam. Everyone on campus should learn to recognize his or her "collective responsibility to identify and stop Islamophobia."

Throughout this process, however, Islam must not be taught from a "Western perspective." This qualifies as Islamophobia, because it "misrepresents Islam." At the same time, the report says, some Muslim students have called for integrating "Islamic perspectives" in disciplines such as marketing, nursing and finance," since Islam's view of these differs from those of the West.

The Muslim Students Association of the U.S. and Canada is heavily involved in the Canadian Federation of Students' new report and lobbying. Its president is a member of the task force, and has been a spokesman for its recommendations. The association is the organization that Minneapolis Community and Technical College has looked to for guidance on the ritual washing issue.

Its main goal, it says, is "Dawah": spreading Islam.


I HOPE that Canada is not lost yet, I suspect that most of Europe, including England is. I don't know where Ireland is at the moment but at the best it can only hope to be Christianity's Finland to Islam's Eurabia.

(No, Marye I'm NOT picking on Canada this time!!)
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Postby Haggis@wk » Sun Apr 29, 2007 4:45 pm

[url=http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55417] Airport adds foot basins for Muslim cabbies
[/url]

The Kansas City International Airport has added several foot-washing basins in restrooms to accommodate a growing number of Muslim taxicab drivers who requested the facilities to prepare for daily Islamic prayer, WND has learned.

The move concerns airport police who worry about Middle Eastern men loitering inside the building. After 9/11, the airport beefed up its police force to help prevent terrorist attacks.

"Why are we constructing places of worship for them inside our airports?" said an airport official who requested anonymity. "Why are we catering to their rituals? We don't do it for any other religion."

Other major airports also are dealing with increased demands from Muslim cabdrivers.


I’ve traveled extensively throughout the Middle East including airports where most westerners are excluded from such as Riyadh and Tabuk and don’t recall seeing any facilities for feet washing; they did that at the Mosque.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Postby piqaboo » Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:32 pm

That reeks of powerplay by some islamic lobby. Feet are washed near the place of prayer. Are the cabbies gonna kneel on the floors in the johns? Doubt it. Those that wanted clean feet in the past carried a basin and a bottle of water, I suspect, and should be allowed to continue to do so.
The airport is NUTS.
Altoid - curiously strong.
piqaboo
1st Chair
 
Posts: 7135
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Paradise (So. Cal.)

Postby Haggis@wk » Sat Jun 09, 2007 7:24 pm

College's foot bath plans spark backlash


And our next nominee for the “Tortured Reason For Not Getting Involved When the Real Reason is Fear Of Getting Stoned or Bombed Award” is the Michigan ACLU


“The Detroit chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union isn't getting involved, arguing the foot baths are secular since non-Muslims could use them, said spokeswoman Rana Elmir.”
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Postby bignaf » Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:31 pm

Muslims should learn to become more self-suficient. Jews can only eat kosher. they don't demand that the school provide kosher meals, they have an organization that provides it (for a price...). prayer spaces are typically not provided by the school but rather by Hillel
bignaf
1st Chair
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Judean Hills

Postby jamiebk » Fri Jun 22, 2007 3:35 pm

And so, now we have this in NorCal:

Muslim Girl: NorCal School Official Demanded She Remove Hajib

KNTV-TV
Updated: 19 minutes ago 6/22/07 - 1:36P

SANTA CLARA, Calif. - The principal at Seaside High School in Monterey has agreed to offer diversity training, but has not agreed to a public apology following an incident Tuesday in which a high school official demanded that a Muslim student remove her Islamic head scarf. The 13-year-old student said she broke down in tears after a school supervisor shouted at her in front of more than 100 students to remove her Islamic head scarf.

According to the Muslim student, on June 19, a supervisor in the lunchroom of Seaside High School in Seaside, Calif., demanded that she remove her hajib, despite being told that it was worn for religious reasons.

The student, who was visiting the school to take part in a summer algebra program, said she broke down in tears after the supervisor allegedly shouted, "You have to take it off now," in front of more than 100 other students in the lunchroom.

The San Francisco Bay Area chapter of the Council on American-Islamic called for a public apology and diversity training following the alleged incident.

Seaside Principal Sydney Renwick said the student received a personal apology the day of the incident, according to a report. But he has not said school officials would apologize publicly, according to Ahmed.

"The family is requesting a public apology since the student was humiliated in public," Ahmed said. "A public apology is important not just for this girl, it would offer closure to the family."

The girl said that despite the shouted demands of the school official, she refused to remove her scarf.

"It is a gross violation of authority to demand that a student violate his or her religious principles in order to receive an education," said CAIR-SFBA Executive Director Safaa Ibrahim. "Because the student was humiliated in public, it is only reasonable to make an apology or statement in public to mitigate the damage caused by the supervisor's unacceptable actions."

Council spokeswoman Abiya Ahmed said her group has offered to provide diversity training at the school to prevent what she called "ignorance" and "misunderstanding" within the community.

"The school has a responsibility to accept and respect people of all cultures and religions," she said. "The principal was open to the idea of diversity training. He also acknowledged that an apology was in order, but we have still yet to hear from him."

CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 33 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19373441/
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Postby bignaf » Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:05 pm

they should apologize. there's absolutely no reason the student should need to remove her hajib. it seems to be clear muslim-phobia. I could understand someone being offended/concerned by a niqab, but a hajib?
bignaf
1st Chair
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 12:01 am
Location: Judean Hills

Postby jamiebk » Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:37 pm

Out here in CA, the kids can't even wear red sweatshirts to school (gang colors, you know.....). Personally, I advocate school uniforms in order to avoid this very type of thing. If no such policy exists, then I would agree that asking the girl to remove her hajib was over the top. However, we weren't there and don't know the circumstances. There could have been disruption. How would someone else feel if a kid wore a tee shirt that had a big picture of Christ hanging on the cross with the words "Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior". Such blatant demonstrations are not appropriate in school and it surely would not fly in the workplace.

On the other hand, I've seen a lot of Yarmulkas outside of the temples and certainly everyone from the Amish/Mennonite (caps and dress) to the Orthodox Jews (hats/dress) have their dress requirements. I guess it can be argued either way. School uniforms solve the problem at least for the youth. She would be free to dress anyway she likes outside of the school environment.
Jamie

"Leave it better than you found it"
jamiebk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: SF Bay Area - Wine Country

Postby Haggis@wk » Sun Jun 24, 2007 1:41 pm

CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 33 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada



That’s a relief, if CAIR really is “America's largest Muslim civil liberties group” then there can’t be that many Muslims in the U.S. since its membership is less than 2,000
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Postby Haggis@wk » Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:52 pm

WASHINGTON POST, OTHER NEWSPAPERS WON'T RUN 'OPUS' CARTOON MOCKING RADICAL ISLAM


A popular comic strip that poked fun at the Rev. Jerry Falwell without incident one week ago was deemed too controversial to run over the weekend because this time it took a humorous swipe at Muslim fundamentalists.

The Washington Post and several other newspapers around the country did not run Sunday's installment of Berkeley Breathed's "Opus," in which the spiritual fad-seeking character Lola Granola appears in a headscarf and explains to her boyfriend, Steve, why she wants to become a radical Islamist….



…Sources told FOXNews.com that the strips were shown to Muslim staffers at The Washington Post to gauge their reaction, and they responded "emotionally" to the depiction of a woman dressed in traditional Muslim garb and espousing conservative Islamic views.


Of course all the suits are talking about being “sensitive” when what this is all about is stark, unmitigated fear. They have no problems attacking any other institution in America - indeed they proudly claim it is their mandate! – but the slightest chance they will be the target of Islamic ire is enough to send them to the men’s room.

So, you think the WaPo showed the Falwell strip to Christian staffers at the paper before they decided to publish that one?

Are we already at the same stage that Europe is? Afraid that anything critical we say will be met by burning cars and fatwas?
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Postby piqaboo » Wed Aug 29, 2007 11:38 am

Apparently so. :(
Altoid - curiously strong.
piqaboo
1st Chair
 
Posts: 7135
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Paradise (So. Cal.)

Re: U.S. Shari'a watch

Postby Haggis@wk » Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:00 pm

Muslim Brotherhood's papers detail plan to seize U.S.

Amid the mountain of evidence released in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism financing trial, the most provocative has turned out to be a handful of previously classified evidence detailing Islamist extremists’ ambitious plans for a U.S. takeover.

A knot of terrorism researchers say the memos and audiotapes, many translated from Arabic and containing detailed strategies by the international Islamist group the Muslim Brotherhood, are proof that extremists have long sought to replace the Constitution with Shariah, or Islamic law.

But some academics and Muslim leaders say that the ideals contained in the documents were written by disgruntled foreign dissidents representing a tiny radical fringe. The documents also pre-date the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and the 80-year-old Muslim Brotherhood is now either inactive or largely underground in America.


This is actually the first time the MSM has paid any attention to the trial going on here in Dallas. All sorts of revelations have been coming almost daily but have been virtually ignored except in the blogosphere.

What I find amusing is that "some academics and Muslim leaders " are automatically assumed to be impartial in refuting the accusation.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

Re: U.S. Shari'a watch

Postby Haggis@wk » Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:39 am

Blowing smoke [Mark Steyn]


Okay, Muslim foot-baths in Kansas City airport, gender-segregated swimming sessions at French municipal pools, banning pork from Aussie hospital menus, no eating donuts for Belgian cops during Ramadan, no seeing-eye dogs or alcohol in Minneapolis taxi cabs, fine, fine, fine. Must be sensitive and all that.

But this is an amazing victory. In Vancouver, infidels can't smoke but Muslims can:
Vancouver's hookah-parlour owners are celebrating after winning an exemption Thursday from a proposed new bylaw that will ban smoking on most sidewalks in commercial districts, in bus shelters and even in taxis passing through Vancouver.

In giving the bylaw unanimous approval-in-principle, Vancouver city council members bowed to arguments that hookah lounges provide an important cultural space for the city's Muslims and granted them a temporary exemption...

[Emad Yacoub] said hookah lounges are essential for immigrants from hookah-smoking cultures, because it helps them deal with the depression common for newcomers and gives them places like they have at home.

Where do the rest of us go to deal with depression? As Jay Currie asks, "What about my culture?"
By creating a special exemption for Muslims - who do seem to be the only immigrant group actively demanding these sorts of “cultural accommodations” we are basically declaring our Muslim citizens worthy of special treatment and, at the same time, unworthy of the health concerns which are purported to be the basis of general smoking bans.

The state, in other words, is prepared to treat Muslims as free-born adults who can weigh the "cultural value" (ie, the pleasures) of smoking against the health risks. But not the rest of us.
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.” Alexis De Tocqueville 1835
Haggis@wk
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6055
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:01 am
Location: Home office

PreviousNext

Return to The Debate Team

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron