more like, I'm pretty sure that the original meaning of the Arabic is sort of like how those words work in the Bible; that is, whatever "touch" is, probably means more like "making out" rather than mere casual contact. If it were true that muslim men cannot touch women AT ALL that they weren't related to/boinking, you'd see them not being doctors, not being dentists, and not being a lot of other things, as well. Except we DO have Muslim doctors and not one of them has ever complained that they're not allowed to touch women that they aren't related to or boinking. We'd see Muslim men with bubble zone personal space somehow. But we don't.
What I'm saying, is that if they truly believe that they're not allowed to touch women (except as per the stated exceptions), they're in an extremist branch of Islam. Such as the Taliban, which has such fucked up ideas as Women cannot be examined by male doctors (that aren't related to them), only women can examine and touch them, but then they say women can't be doctors. *headdesk* These are
( ... )
Just like there are a bunch of different sects of Christianity there are a bunch of different sects of Islam. Different groups interpret their religious texts differently. Kinda like like comparing Orthodox Judaism to Liberal Judaism.
There are a lot of Muslim women who won't go to a male doctor and that is why there is such a demand for female doctors in heavily populated Muslim countries. And most modern Muslim countries let women be doctors because they see the need. You really need to educate yourself before making blanket statements.
Oh I'm fully aware that most muslim countries let women be doctors. I'm talking about the Taliban, which is specific to Afghanistan. I'm talking about the extreme fundamentalists.
But in any case, no branch of any religion should be allowed to use their religion to practice unlawful discrimination.
If you are talking about a radical sect like the Taliban then you should say so and not lump every Muslim in with them. That is like calling every Muslim a terrorist or every Christian a member of the Westboro Baptist Church.
I agree that 'no branch of any religion should be allowed to use their religion to practice unlawful discrimination.' for things that are life or death. But her right to get a haircut at that barber shop isn't any more important than his right to not violate his religion's rule on not touching women he is not related to.
Well i wasn't trying to lump them in with regular muslims that aren't that way. In a previous comment I pretty clearly outlined that I think this is a minority extremist form.
While I think that on principle getting a haircut at a shop that doesn't want to do it is a bad idea, I do think the owners should be shamed that they hold such backwards beliefs, and that they learn that this is Canada and they're not supposed to be sexist here.
What I'm saying, is that if they truly believe that they're not allowed to touch women (except as per the stated exceptions), they're in an extremist branch of Islam. Such as the Taliban, which has such fucked up ideas as Women cannot be examined by male doctors (that aren't related to them), only women can examine and touch them, but then they say women can't be doctors.Way to jump off the deep end on that one. I guess the Muslims who remove their shoes before going into the mosque to worship are also extremists to be lumped in with the relatively small population of Muslim terrorists
( ... )
nope, just saying that the shop owners are closer to the more fundamentalist version of Islam than the more moderate varieties.
They can interpret the Koran however they like. Putting some of that into practice in Canada, when it results in discrimination based on sex, is another story.
Not close enough to be lumped in with the Taliban, IMO.
At what point does it start violating their freedom to practice the religion they choose? Why is one right greater than the other? There have been several valid reasons presented as to why she was unable to get her hair cut at that location. They offered her a very viable and convenient alternative. It sounds to me like she's making a massive deal out of this and she is perfectly willing to stomp all over someone else's (just as valid) right to practice their faith as they choose.
What I'm saying, is that if they truly believe that they're not allowed to touch women (except as per the stated exceptions), they're in an extremist branch of Islam. Such as the Taliban, which has such fucked up ideas as Women cannot be examined by male doctors (that aren't related to them), only women can examine and touch them, but then they say women can't be doctors. *headdesk* These are the kind of people for whom Muslim women's shops don't even exist.
You sound really ignorant about Islam, just FYI because that's not even remotely true in general or in this specific case. The man in question suggested that she got to a related salon half a block away that was unisex (and therefore took female clients).
There are branches of Christianity and Judaism that have the exact same rules in regard to non-related male-female touching. You're making blanket statements about a religion that already has a lot of bigotry directed towards it and you sound really bad.
(The comment has been removed)
What I'm saying, is that if they truly believe that they're not allowed to touch women (except as per the stated exceptions), they're in an extremist branch of Islam. Such as the Taliban, which has such fucked up ideas as Women cannot be examined by male doctors (that aren't related to them), only women can examine and touch them, but then they say women can't be doctors. *headdesk* These are ( ... )
Reply
There are a lot of Muslim women who won't go to a male doctor and that is why there is such a demand for female doctors in heavily populated Muslim countries. And most modern Muslim countries let women be doctors because they see the need. You really need to educate yourself before making blanket statements.
Reply
But in any case, no branch of any religion should be allowed to use their religion to practice unlawful discrimination.
Reply
I agree that 'no branch of any religion should be allowed to use their religion to practice unlawful discrimination.' for things that are life or death. But her right to get a haircut at that barber shop isn't any more important than his right to not violate his religion's rule on not touching women he is not related to.
Reply
While I think that on principle getting a haircut at a shop that doesn't want to do it is a bad idea, I do think the owners should be shamed that they hold such backwards beliefs, and that they learn that this is Canada and they're not supposed to be sexist here.
Reply
Please, tell me more about your plans to educate the ignorant savages.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
They can interpret the Koran however they like. Putting some of that into practice in Canada, when it results in discrimination based on sex, is another story.
Reply
At what point does it start violating their freedom to practice the religion they choose? Why is one right greater than the other? There have been several valid reasons presented as to why she was unable to get her hair cut at that location. They offered her a very viable and convenient alternative. It sounds to me like she's making a massive deal out of this and she is perfectly willing to stomp all over someone else's (just as valid) right to practice their faith as they choose.
Reply
You sound really ignorant about Islam, just FYI because that's not even remotely true in general or in this specific case. The man in question suggested that she got to a related salon half a block away that was unisex (and therefore took female clients).
There are branches of Christianity and Judaism that have the exact same rules in regard to non-related male-female touching. You're making blanket statements about a religion that already has a lot of bigotry directed towards it and you sound really bad.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment