live and learn

Somehow Katharine Hepburn’s death can be blamed on Muslims. Again.
Link via Tacitus.

Share

18 Responses to “live and learn”

  1. Jonathan Edelstein Says:

    The analogy is a bit… strained, isn’t it?

  2. moorishgirl Says:

    What analogy?

  3. Jonathan Edelstein Says:

    Sorry, I meant “connection.” Sloppy typing (and possibly sloppy thinking).

  4. moorishgirl Says:

    Ah, strained connection? Of course. That’s the point, I suppose.

  5. 0xdeadbeef Says:

    As they say: “Let me up!” It’s always the fault of the commie/pinko/fag/lesbian/catholic/whomevers. Gad, that sticks in my craw. Narrow minded loser thinking! Same folks that think GW is telling the truth!

    :)

  6. Larry Lurex Says:

    What a crock! Independent women (from Sheherazade onwards) have always played a role in Muslim life. I don’t notice a female President in the US, but Pakistan has already had one. How much more independence do these people want?

    Katherine Hepburn was a fine actress. I’m sure she wouldn’t have wanted people to attack Muslims.

  7. erik Says:

    The site you linked to is one scary collection of prejudiced ignorance dressed up as paranoia. I wonder, how close are these oppinions to those of people currently in power in America?

  8. Tacitus Says:

    People like that tend to self-nullify, or else, like a glider pattern in the Game of Life, take off with a few like minds, never to affect the mainstream again. I think it’s safe to say that the maker of this connection, between the Ayn Rand affiliation and the pompous stridency, won’t be determining public policy any time soon.

    Has he said something reasonable, indicating a mind filled with something other than reflexive hatred, he’d have a case. A woman like Katherine Hepburn would face severe challenges — to say the least — in many majority-Muslim nations. But it’s a far cry from that to asserting that the “goddamned Muslim countries” want to destroy all independent women. I’ve known too many Muslim women to buy that.

  9. Chip Says:

    You people… Here’s my response:

    http://aboutthewar.com/2003_07_01_abouthewar_achive#105754474618157518

  10. dud Says:

    Here’s my response to Chip’s response.

    Chip writes :

    Independence is a rational, secular value

    ..and for the most part I’d concur with that. Chip then goes on to bluster :

    I am one hundred percent right on this topic.

    ..and I’d suggest that the impossibilty of doubt is not a rational, secular value but belongs to a different system of thought in which values are non-negotiable and the people that subscribe to those values do so from something closer to loyalty or instinct than from reason. The name of that system is fundamentalism.

    Which is interesting. Because Chip seems to be conflating the values of the Muslim world with the values of its fundamentalists. Whereas, if I were to ignore any distinction between right-wing American ideology and it’s fundamentalists, then I might lazily assume Chip to be in favour of the pipe-bombing of abortion clinics. As an advocate of women’s independence, I’m sure he’d get very offended by that presumption.

    Or perhaps he wouldn’t.

  11. Tacitus Says:

    Because Chip seems to be conflating the values of the Muslim world with the values of its fundamentalists.

    Conflation is the name of the game, here.

  12. Chip Says:

    I believe that a system of beliefs should be judged on its own merits. Islam *is* a fundamentalist system of beliefs. Bin Laden and his ilk are the real Muslims: they don’t water it down.

    The anti-abortion terrorists are the real Christians for the same reason.

    The fundamentalist Christians are in fact very similar to fundamentalist Muslims.

    I have NOTHING to do with those so-called “right-wing American ideology” of Christians. I advocate reason, independence, and individual rights. I am the antithesis of any religious values.

    (As for your rejection of certainty, I dismiss that Humean viewpoint. But that’s another topic.)

  13. dud Says:

    >I have NOTHING to do with those so-called “right->wing American ideology” of Christians. I >advocate reason, independence, and individual >rights. I am the antithesis of any religious >values.

    Well, I didn’t imagine that you did. I would have had you down as from the libertarian end of the conservative spectrum. But my point was that it would have been crass and irritating of me to have denied the very existence of such a spectrum – as your response demonstrated. You’re expecting nuance and degree to be acknowledged in my understanding of your worldview but you’re not keen on extending that courtesy to another culture.

    I’m not saying that there’s a moral equivalence, or anything like, between the US and eg Iran but it sometimes seems that there’s a thumb on the scales : OUR barbarities are incidental to our culture, THEIRS are intrinsic.

    As for me, I’d always take the most flawed and venal democracy over any kind of theocracy at all – wet secular liberal that I am.

    On the question of doubt :-

    I think that to be committed to reason as a bedrock for personal or social morality is to accept that beliefs and values are contextual – they may have to be modified in the light of changing circumstances or new evidence.

    Finally :-

    Is a punitive intolerance actually encoded within and inseparable from the belief system of Islam ?…

    …don’t know. I’d need to know much much more about it. But, since I’m prepared to tinker with my worldview in the light of fresh information, what’s everyone else got to say? Any Muslims out there, whether by belief or roots? What about you MG?

  14. Tacitus Says:

    Bin Laden and his ilk are the real Muslims: they don’t water it down.

    Cripes, man, you drink their Kool-Aid? I suppose sola scriptura Protestants are the only “real” Christians, too.

    Yes, the fanatics and killers are Muslims too — but if it’s dishonest to claim that they’re not “true” Muslims, it’s equally dishonest to claim that the decent, law-abiding folk (not to mention the famously independent women) are also not “true” Muslims. In both cases, it’s an effort in unilateral redefinition to support predetermined conclusions.

  15. moorishgirl Says:

    Hi Dud,

    Your question (Is a punitive intolerance actually encoded within and inseparable from the belief system of Islam?) is one I hear often. The quick answer is no, no more than for other religions. The long answer is that the very question contains the assumption that there is only one Islam. If anything, the history of the last 1,400 years shows that one can have an extremely flourishing culture (a golden age) as well as periods of instability and fringes of intolerance. Here’s an article by Edward Said which talks about this view of Islam as “One.”

    For those who are debating women in Islam, may I suggest Moroccan sociologist Fatima Mernissi’s book, The Forgotten Queens of Islam, which talks about the many female rulers that have presided over the destinies of their fellow co-religionists.

  16. Carlsbad Says:

    Here I am again. Y’all would pretend the fact of Benazir Bhutto’s existence would excuse the wretched existence of most of Islam’s women: the honor killings, the female genital mutilation, the being forced to marry against their will, being raised to think they’re 5th class compared to men, etc.

    Doesn’t. Never will. How hypocritical to live in freedom in America, trash America and defend a religion that bases its treatment of women on the 7th Century. Go on, tell me how the US hasn’t had a female president. We don’t have whacked off clitorises either–except in immigrant Muslim women.

    Instead of smarmily defending this horrible culture, how about rising up against it? No, fundamentalist Christians DON’T kill women who are raped–as happens in Jordan, Muslim Nigeria and even Turkey. Fundamentalist Christian women CAN live independently–try that in Yemen.

    I’m not a Southern Baptist and I don’t defend them, but sheesh, they’re still head and shoulders above 99% of the Muslims of the world.

    The point of the reference to Kate Hepburn was that, in a Muslim country her spirit would have been crushed (even those that once, centuries ago, had queens who ruled–while the rest of the women, as in Bhutto’s Pakistan, were slaves). For sure her family would have honorably offed her for that Spencer Tracey gig.

  17. carlsbad Says:

    Be afraid, be very afraid, non-hijab wearing Muslim woman:

    Europe Grows Hostage to Its Muslims

    Italian doctors report treating Muslim women who had evidently been lashed.

    In France about 70,000 young women, chiefly Muslim, are being subjected to forced marriages every year, according to the country’s High Council for Integration. Every year, too, 35,000 girls are either circumcised or under threat of circumcision, HCI related.

    Analysis by Uwe Siemon-Netto, UPI religion editor.

  18. moorishgirl Says:

    Man, I’m quaking in my hip huggers and tank top.

  • Twitter

  • Category Archives

  • Monthly Archives