We could learn a lot from Muslims.

[Tomdstone]

They are on the right track with eliminating sexually revealing clothing.

I agree. I notice that women at Catholic Masses could use a few hints about how to dress smartly and modestly.

 

[johnnyjones]

When the reference to reverence for the Qur’an was brought up I didn’t even think of rioting and killings. I thought of the way my father-in-law always washed his hands before handling the Qur’an and the way he would kiss it before putting it up. The current riots and killings in reaction to Qur’an burnings have nothing, IMO, to do with reverence for the Qur’an itself. It has to do with the anger and defensiveness Muslims feel in reaction to Western Imperialism.

And whose decision is it to make Qur’an burnings into a major headline? It is not the Muslims, I can assure you. Without the headlines, they wouldn’t even know about it.

Thats nice that you had a personal reference to draw from. Not all Muslims or Christians have that experience.

The reason given for recent uprisings and killings has been disrespect for the Quran. It appears what you are saying is that it’s just an excuse to riot. I don’t think so. Theres no doubt Western Imperialism plays into it, but if a Muslim was to destroy a Quran in his home country, are you saying it would be treated mildly? Come now, this is foolish talk.

Sure, westerners may print the negative news, but they are reporting an incident, as they should. That doesn’t excuse the actions of angry Muslims.

 

[smaneck]

Theres no doubt Western Imperialism plays into it, but if a Muslim was to destroy a Quran in his home country, are you saying it would be treated mildly?

Actually, according to the shariah if a Qur’an becomes too worn, it should be either buried or burned. So it is not really the burning of the book which is at issue, it is the way in which their religion is being attacked.

 

[johnnyjones]

Actually, according to the shariah if a Qur’an becomes too worn, it should be either buried or burned. So it is not really the burning of the book which is at issue, it is the way in which their religion is being attacked.

That’s not what i’m talking about and I suspect you know that. “Too worn” is not destruction of the book due to ideology or a pure disrespect for the book. If a person walked out into the street in an Islamic country and destroyed the Quran without cause, it would not be pleasant for him. So my point remains that reverence for the Quran is dangerous if you disagree with it. Nothing admirable there.

The myth is that Islam is being attack. If anything the anti -Christian bias in this country and elsewhere is incredibly high. No one is torturing everyday Muslims is foreign lands because of their faith, the opposite is true for christians.
I

 

[KendraDZ1902]

.They are on the right track with eliminating sexually revealing clothing.

So you are all for women being covered head to toe so they won’t tempt you?! I cover my body. I try really hard not to attract men. However, I am very shapely. It isn’t my fault that I have a very womenly figure. Men need to control their own sexual desires and not blame it on us women! I can wear sweat pants and an oversized shirt and you can still see my lady parts.
Saudi Arabia passed a law that women have to cover everything, even their eyes! Their reasoning? “Women’s eyes are too tempting.” I say, if men can’t control their thoughts, then they should stay at home! Pathetic.

 

[johnnyjones]

So you are all for women being covered head to toe so they won’t tempt you?! I cover my body. I try really hard not to attract men. However, I am very shapely. It isn’t my fault that I have a very womenly figure. Men need to control their own sexual desires and not blame it on us women! I can wear sweat pants and an oversized shirt and you can still see my lady parts.
Saudi Arabia passed a law that women have to cover everything, even their eyes! Their reasoning? “Women’s eyes are too tempting.” I say, if men can’t control their thoughts, then they should stay at home! Pathetic.

Oh here we go with this. Of course men should control themselves. But let me ask you something. Why are clothes that don’t cover as much of a womens body considered "sexy’? You may never have heard this before but do you think women have some responsibility for what they wear or is it ‘anything goes’? There is such a thing as causing a man to stumble. If you know certain clothes are provocative, why are you wearing them (not you personally-a woman)?

When I said “on the right track”, I meant that Islam recognizes that sexy clothes have no purpose out in the street. They are extreme though.

I think many women just want to wear sexy clothes and don’;t give a damn. They want attention, otherwise what is the purpose of wearing them?. Your pathetic jumping to conclusions that I support full body coverage.

 

[ephesians4]

When I said “on the right track”, I meant that Islam recognizes that sexy clothes have no purpose out in the street. They are extreme though.

Extreme to a point I would find insulting as a man, to be honest.

I am all for modest clothing, but not taking it to a point that implies that as a man on the street I am a beast, not responsible for the uncontrollable lecherous behavior a flash of forehead or ankle would bring about in me.

Personally I am proud that in Christendom generally, there has been at least the occasional possibility of women having much more leeway than that, and of men being held entirely responsible for their own lechery, as it should be barring extremes.

The sad thing is that now I feel it has all gone too far in the other direction, to a point where not only will people sexualize themselves in the most inappropriate circumstances (Church, school, work etc.), they have actually lost the capacity to believe life without constant sexualization is possible, as if the idea of being modest and wholesome is some kind of unattainable Victorian myth and it’s not even worth bothering.

This is how it strikes me, anyway.

 

[johnnyjones]

Extreme to a point I would find insulting as a man, to be honest.

I am all for modest clothing, but not taking it to a point that implies that as a man on the street I am a beast, not responsible for the uncontrollable lecherous behavior a flash of forehead or ankle would bring about in me.

Personally I am proud that in Christendom generally, there has been at least the occasional possibility of women having much more leeway than that, and of men being held entirely responsible for their own lechery, as it should be barring extremes.

The sad thing is that now I feel it has all gone too far in the other direction, to a point where not only will people sexualize themselves in the most inappropriate circumstances (Church, school, work etc.), they have actually lost the capacity to believe life without constant sexualization is possible, as if the idea of being modest and wholesome is some kind of unattainable Victorian myth and it’s not even worth bothering.

This is how it strikes me, anyway.

“On the right track” is wording that may not have been the best on my part. Yes we are not beasts as men, and it is degrading that women should have to wear basically a tent on themselves. What I was trying to communicate was the conscious recognition factor of it all. The recognition that we live in an over-sexualized country/world. Islam has a distorted version as it tries to address the issue… It is unfortunate that excuses are made by Christians for all sorts of revealing apparel though…

 

[KendraDZ1902]

Oh here we go with this. Of course men should control themselves. But let me ask you something. Why are clothes that don’t cover as much of a womens body considered "sexy’? You may never have heard this before but do you think women have some responsibility for what they wear or is it ‘anything goes’? There is such a thing as causing a man to stumble. If you know certain clothes are provocative, why are you wearing them (not you personally-a woman)?

When I said “on the right track”, I meant that Islam recognizes that sexy clothes have no purpose out in the street. They are extreme though.

I think many women just want to wear sexy clothes and don’;t give a damn. They want attention, otherwise what is the purpose of wearing them? Your pathetic jumping to conclusions that I support full body coverage.

I have a very hard time trying to find modest clothing. Like I said earlier, I can wear sweatpants and an oversized shirt and you can still see my lady parts. I played softball in HS and I was told I “looked hot” in my softball uniform That definitely wasn’t my intention. You don’t know how many countless times I have sat in a changing room and cried because the outfit that looked cute and modest didn’t look that way on me. Take the way I look up with God. I already complained about my shape to him and it seems like the more I work out the more shapely I become. I’ve even tried bulimia to try and lose my boobs, butt, and thighs.
Some women DO try to be sexy. Some women think, “women dress for women. If they dressed for men, they would walk around nude.” Some women try very hard to be stylish and classy, yet still have a hard time becuase of their God given body.
I didn’t say, “you’re pathetic,” I think the subject is pathetic. Your opinion of me being pathetic is taken with a grain of salt. I don’t know you to care what you think of me.

 

[smaneck]

That’s not what i’m talking about and I suspect you know that. “Too worn” is not destruction of the book due to ideology or a pure disrespect for the book. If a person walked out into the street in an Islamic country and destroyed the Quran without cause, it would not be pleasant for him. So my point remains that reverence for the Quran is dangerous if you disagree with it. Nothing admirable there.

Yes, such an act would be inciting violence just as burning a flag here in Mississippi would incite violence. Of course, they have a long history of burning crosses.

The myth is that Islam is being attack. If anything the anti -Christian bias in this country and elsewhere is incredibly high.

Really? And when is the last time in this country that Christians were stopped from building a churches like Muslims have been prevented from building Mosques? How many Christians have been fired to wearing crucifixes whereas Muslim women are often fired for their head scarves? How many legislatures and states have tried to pass laws banning canon law, like they have tried to ban the Shariah?

No one is torturing everyday Muslims is foreign lands because of their faith, the opposite is true for christians.
I

I guess you never heard of water-boarding.

Nor have you heard about Myramar where Muslims are not only being routinely persecuted but officially denied their right to citizenship even though their ancestors have been living in that country for the last two hundred years. This past year alone, more than 166 Muslims were massacred there, 1200 are still missing and 80,000 were forced into exile. And yes, the Burmese police routinely torture Muslims.
Likewise you must know nothing about the treatment of Uighur Muslims in China.
globalvoicesonline.org/2009/07/03/the-uyghurs-persecuted-muslim-minority-in-northwest-china/
And yes, they torture Muslims there
Or maybe you forgot what happened in Kosovo?
Torturing Muslims in the Philippines is standard operating procedure.
asiancorrespondent.com/61585/torture-as-standard-operating-procedure-in-the-philippines/

 

[Tomdstone]

I think many women just want to wear sexy clothes and don’;t give a damn. They want attention, otherwise what is the purpose of wearing them?

Of course you are right. Some churches and restaurants enforce a dress code for both men and women.

 

[smaneck]

“On the right track” is wording that may not have been the best on my part. Yes we are not beasts as men, and it is degrading that women should have to wear basically a tent on themselves.

That is not really what the Qur’an or the shariah requires. Modest dress for a woman in Islam means she should cover her hair, her arms and legs.

Here is a website selling Islamic dress for women. I think the swimsuits are hilarious:

shop.alsharifa.com/

 

[Brendan_64]

You never said “ordinary Muslims” in your opening post which I responded to. Muslims in this country live by our governing rules. Put the US under Sharia law and find out how docile the “ordinary Muslims” are

Surely the word '‘ordinary’ refers to the norm and that when referring to the norm ut is not necessary to qualify it by also using the term ‘ordinary’?

You imply that the fact that I never qualified my opening statement by saying “ordinary” Muslims means that I must be referring to extremists? So the term ‘Muslim’ by itself means extremist Muslims? That would suggest that the norm for a Muslim is to be an extremist, and that ‘ordinary’ Muslims are indeed extremists.

My personal experience with Muslims, and I work in an area in the UK where Muslims make up over 30% of the local population, is that the vast majority of them are not extremists, just ordinary people like the rest of us. Some very devoted to their faith, some moderately devoted to it, others not so. My Muslim friends are typical of the local Muslim population in general, they pose no threat to us. They are certainly not calling for the imposition of Sharia law.

 

[Brendan_64]

There is such a thing as causing a man to stumble. If you know certain clothes are provocative, why are you wearing them (not you personally-a woman)?

I don’t accept that. Every man has free-will. If he ‘stumbles’ then it is he alone that is responsible for the stumble.

 

[johnnyjones]

I have a very hard time trying to find modest clothing. Like I said earlier, I can wear sweatpants and an oversized shirt and you can still see my lady parts. I played softball in HS and I was told I “looked hot” in my softball uniform That definitely wasn’t my intention. You don’t know how many countless times I have sat in a changing room and cried because the outfit that looked cute and modest didn’t look that way on me. Take the way I look up with God. I already complained about my shape to him and it seems like the more I work out the more shapely I become. I’ve even tried bulimia to try and lose my boobs, butt, and thighs.
Some women DO try to be sexy. Some women think, “women dress for women. If they dressed for men, they would walk around nude.” Some women try very hard to be stylish and classy, yet still have a hard time becuase of their God given body.
I didn’t say, “you’re pathetic,” I think the subject is pathetic. Your opinion of me being pathetic is taken with a grain of salt. I don’t know you to care what you think of me.

Well c’mon now. I was writing the subject and you said pathetic, who else would feel the “pathetic” comment but me? But lets get past this. I love women. I like stylish clothes on them. What I am tired of is mega tight short shorts, short skirts and the like being worn with a “oh I didn’t look in the mirror before I went out” attitude. Women know what is hot and what isn’t. They KNOW what they are doing. That is the point of wearing such clothes.

The fact that you have a nice body is not wrong. Don’t be sad about it. I’m sure you look attractive in simple clothing like sweat pants as you said. Your INTENT is not to stick yourself out there and say look what I’ve got, that’s respectable. Nothing wrong with a "hot’ body. There is a difference between trying to emphasize it, and not. Islam is way over the top and my wording may have been poor. I just wanted to point out that they recognize certain factors but take it to a ridiculous extreme. Not that you need me to tell you but do not be ashamed of your “lady parts”, they are beautiful.

 

[johnnyjones]

I don’t accept that. Every man has free-will. If he ‘stumbles’ then it is he alone that is responsible for the stumble.

You don’t have to accept it but it’s a fact. If a women is conscious that what she is wearing has the purpose of making a man lust for her, she has accountability as well.

It goes to INTENT. Having a nice body in itself is not making a man stumble. It’s what you do with it that matters, and that applies to many things that become sin.

If I purposely serve a person who is trying to lose weight his favorite fattening food, I have no accountability? C’mon now.
The word enticement was created for a reason .

 

[johnnyjones]

Surely the word '‘ordinary’ refers to the norm and that when referring to the norm ut is not necessary to qualify it by also using the term ‘ordinary’?

You imply that the fact that I never qualified my opening statement by saying “ordinary” Muslims means that I must be referring to extremists? So the term ‘Muslim’ by itself means extremist Muslims? That would suggest that the norm for a Muslim is to be an extremist, and that ‘ordinary’ Muslims are indeed extremists.

My personal experience with Muslims, and I work in an area in the UK where Muslims make up over 30% of the local population, is that the vast majority of them are not extremists, just ordinary people like the rest of us. Some very devoted to their faith, some moderately devoted to it, others not so. My Muslim friends are typical of the local Muslim population in general, they pose no threat to us. They are certainly not calling for the imposition of Sharia law.

YOU said **“again ** I am talking about ordinary Muslims”, that is what brought the word “ordinary” to the discussion.

I worked close to Muslims too, many are nice religious people. There were nice religious Catholics and Protestants in Ireland too and they bombed each other to death. Of course there are good, decent people in many faiths but don’t tell me that generally speaking a Muslim does not have a different reaction to religious “persecution”. In some cases actual persecution goes on but if you don’t want major uprisings, don’t burn a Quran, even in this country.

I pointed out some positive traits of Islam (even taking heat for it) and you steamrolled over that like I some militant hater. Embrace facts, even if they hurt. You can learn more that way.

 

[InJesusItrust]

Their zeal for God is awesome. They aren’t afraid to put God above all things.

 

[colmywaykurtz]

Their zeal for God is awesome. They aren’t afraid to put God above all things.

Just keep in mind, as Christians, we have to recognize that, even possessing SOME of the truth, they don’t possess ALL of it, and much of what they believe is just downright wrong. As Christians, we have to disagree with them when they deny Jesus was ever crucified, for instance…

 

[Brendan_64]

There were nice religious Catholics and Protestants in Ireland too and they bombed each other to death.

That is a naive simplification of what happened in Northern Ireland. So naive and simplistic as to make in a complete inaccuracy.

I grew up in Northern Ireland and it was NOT a religious conflict.

It was a political conflict, pure and simple. It was not about each side fighting for their religion. That is a remark regularly made by people who clearly know nothing whatsoever about the conflict there (or about Irish history) other than reading headlines in the newspapers. No paramilitary organisation claimed that what they were doing was on behalf of any religious faith. It was purely a political war with the IRA waging war against the British Army in order to try achieve a United Ireland as a first step to the IRA/Sinn Fein trying to gain control over all of Ireland in order to set up an Irish Socialist Republic. The Loyalists then reacted to this in order to try to prevent the IRA from achieving their aims. The people were then divided along ‘tribal’ lines (whether they wanted to be or not) and drawn into the mess. It was NOT about religion.

And with regards to the IRA there was/is a large Marxist/Atheist tradition within their ranks. The IRA was not remotely interested in defending any aspect of Roman Catholicism whatsoever. There is not one mention anything to do with Roman Catholicism in the constitution of the IRA, and the aim of the IRA is to establish an Irish Socialist Republic. How well do you think Catholicism (or any other religion) would fare in a Socialist Republic set up by an organisation with a sizeable Marxist/Atheist contingent within their ranks?