Can PC journalists report truthfully about Muslims?

[Arroyo_Doble]

Talk about declaring victory without having won anything. No, you weren't correct. What I have done is ask questions that you find uncomfortable and that you cannot answer, because they are the root of the problem. As I said before, unlike a yarmulke or cross (which are unobtrusive symbols, the Muslim equivalent of which would be a crescent or other icon), the hijab is meant to hide the entire body of a "modest" girl from the improper gaze of Muslim men. Are girls who don't wear the veil (Muslim or non-Muslim) immodest? Do immodest girls have anything to fear from the improper gaze of Muslim men? Should they veil up for their own safety? Well? Got an answer, wiseguy?

Sure.

Then the perps should be punished accordingly.

[Odysseus]

Sure.

That doesn't answer the other questions. Once again, for the terminally obtuse:

• The hijab is meant to veil a girl against "the improper gaze of men". It's allegedly a symbol of decency and modesty, but if girls who cover up are “decent” and “modest”, what are girls who don’t?
• If Muslim girls have to veil themselves against the improper gaze of Muslim men, does that mean non-Muslim girls should fear the gaze of Muslim men?
• Are girls who don't wear the veil (Muslim or non-Muslim) immodest?
• Do immodest girls have anything to fear from the improper gaze of Muslim men?
• Should they veil up for their own safety?

[Arroyo_Doble]

That doesn't answer the other questions.

Yes, it does. But I will play along with your rationalization while I eat my orange. By the way, this assumes what you say is true; something I will never do when it comes to what you say about Islam.

Once again, for the terminally obtuse:
[*]The hijab is meant to veil a girl against "the improper gaze of men". It's allegedly a symbol of decency and modesty, but if girls who cover up are “decent” and “modest”, what are girls who don’t?

Within that construct, indecent and immodest.

[*]If Muslim girls have to veil themselves against the improper gaze of Muslim men, does that mean non-Muslim girls should fear the gaze of Muslim men?

Within that construct, yes.

[*]Are girls who don't wear the veil (Muslim or non-Muslim) immodest?

Some are and some aren't. It is a big world full of different beliefs on modesty. Also, there is situational modesty. What is acceptable on the beach is not acceptable in the boardroom. Of course, that is my opinion on issues of modesty. And I tend to be very modest in my dress. Button my shirts all the way to the top and never wear shorts (with the exception of when I am swimming or running and then, they extend past my knees).

[*]Do immodest girls have anything to fear from the improper gaze of Muslim men?

No. A gaze is a gaze. It could be creepy, I guess. Or flattering. Depends on the girl.

[*]Should they veil up for their own safety?

No. They should arm themselves.

[txradioguy]

Just declare victory and move on. It is all you do when confronted with a different opinion (not to mention facts that conflict with your mirrored box).

You were looking in the mirror when you typed that right?

[noonwitch]

That doesn't answer the other questions. Once again, for the terminally obtuse:

• The hijab is meant to veil a girl against "the improper gaze of men". It's allegedly a symbol of decency and modesty, but if girls who cover up are “decent” and “modest”, what are girls who don’t?
• If Muslim girls have to veil themselves against the improper gaze of Muslim men, does that mean non-Muslim girls should fear the gaze of Muslim men?
• Are girls who don't wear the veil (Muslim or non-Muslim) immodest?
• Do immodest girls have anything to fear from the improper gaze of Muslim men?
• Should they veil up for their own safety?

Islam is a convenient religion for men, that's for sure. It's all a woman's fault when a man can't keep his zipper closed.

I don't get all worked up about the hijab, though, because there are many eastern european traditions in which women are expected to cover their hair-the elderly greek, polish and russian women around here still wear headscarves. The apostle Paul instructed women to cover their hair in church, and some churches only did away with that rule in the past century. But there is a tradition in eastern europe and the middle east of women covering their hair for modesty.


I know I defend muslims here, because there are so many in my community and they are people who I work with and have as neighbors. They are human beings and american citizens, and I respect them as such. That doesn't mean I would ever want to become a muslim myself.

At least in this country, a muslim woman has the same right to defend herself as anyone else does. Those poor women who were killed lived in Canada, where they didn't necessarily have that right and they definitely did not have access to guns.

[Arroyo_Doble]

Islam is a convenient religion for men, that's for sure. It's all a woman's fault when a man can't keep his zipper closed.

I don't get all worked up about the hijab, though, because there are many eastern european traditions in which women are expected to cover their hair-the elderly greek, polish and russian women around here still wear headscarves. The apostle Paul instructed women to cover their hair in church, and some churches only did away with that rule in the past century. But there is a tradition in eastern europe and the middle east of women covering their hair for modesty.


I know I defend muslims here, because there are so many in my community and they are people who I work with and have as neighbors. They are human beings and american citizens, and I respect them as such. That doesn't mean I would ever want to become a muslim myself.

At least in this country, a muslim woman has the same right to defend herself as anyone else does. Those poor women who were killed lived in Canada, where they didn't necessarily have that right and they definitely did not have access to guns.

My wife still abides by the rule. She will not go into church without her hair covered in some manner.

Personally, I think it is an excuse to buy hats.

[Odysseus]

Yes, it does. But I will play along with your rationalization while I eat my orange. By the way, this assumes what you say is true; something I will never do when it comes to what you say about Islam.

Or anyone else, apparently, unless it's CAIR.

Within that construct, indecent and immodest.

I.e., In accordance with Islamic law, since that's where the construct came from. From the Qur'an:
"O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters, and the believing women, to draw their cloaks (veils) over their bodies. That will be better that they should be known (as respectable woman) so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."God is forgiving and kind.[Quran 33:59 (Translated by Ahmed Ali)]

Within that construct, yes.

Ditto.
Again, don't take my word for it. According to the five schools of Islamic jurisprudence (http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter7/2.html), at a minimum, a woman must cover everything but her face and hands in the presence of strangers, because her entire body is considered Awrah (intimate parts):

3. Women and 'stranger': About the extent of the body to be covered by a woman in the presence of a 'stranger' (any male apart from the mahrim (relatives)), the schools concur that it is wajib for her to cover her whole body except the face and hands (up to the wrists) in accordance with the verse 31 of Surat al-Nur:

...And reveal not their adornment save such as is outward; and let them cast their veils over their bosoms (24:31)

considering that 'outward adornment' (al-zeenah) implies the face and hands. The word 'al-khimar' (whose plural 'khumur' occurs in the verse) means the veil which covers the head, not the face, and the word 'al-jayb' (whose plural 'juyub' occurs in the verse) means the chest. The women have been commanded to put a covering on their heads and to lower it over their chests. As to verse 59 of Surat 'Ahzab:

'0 Prophet, say to your wives and daughters and the believing women that they draw their veils close to them..., (33:59)

the word 'al-jilbab' (whose plural jalabib occurs in the verse) means a veil covering the head; rather it is a shirt or garment.

Some are and some aren't. It is a big world full of different beliefs on modesty. Also, there is situational modesty. What is acceptable on the beach is not acceptable in the boardroom. Of course, that is my opinion on issues of modesty. And I tend to be very modest in my dress. Button my shirts all the way to the top and never wear shorts (with the exception of when I am swimming or running and then, they extend past my knees).

Your modesty isn't the issue. According to Islamic law, a woman who fails to veil herself is considered immodest. See above. More importantly, by conducting herself immodestly, she is considered sexually available to any man who wants to take her.

No. A gaze is a gaze. It could be creepy, I guess. Or flattering. Depends on the girl.

Not according to Islam. You see, if a woman is not properly covered, then she is inviting improper attention. Australia's top Muslim cleric, Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali, has stated that rape is caused by women, and that this is the official Islamic interpretation:

In a Ramadan sermon to 500 worshippers in Sydney last month, Sheik Alhilali blamed women who "sway suggestively" and who wore makeup and no hijab (Islamic scarf) for sexual attacks, The Australian newspaper reported.

"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat," he said.
"The uncovered meat is the problem.
"If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."

No. They should arm themselves.

Works for me, but be both know that this isn't going to happen en masse, unless things get as bad as they already have in Europe.

You were looking in the mirror when you typed that right?

Did you hear glass breaking?

[Arroyo_Doble]

Not according to Islam.

And?

Seriously. Who gives a fuck? I don't care what Zoroastrians think about the issue either.

I told you I answered it already with your own words. Punish the perp. Done.

Now have the last word by mentioning some caliphate horseshit as justification for denying religious freedom to a religion you despise.

[txradioguy]

And?

Seriously. Who gives a fuck? I don't care what Zoroastrians think about the issue either.

I told you I answered it already with your own words. Punish the perp. Done.

Now have the last word by mentioning some caliphate horseshit as justification for denying religious freedom to a religion you despise.

Translated...I've been defeated and it's time for me to cut and run.

[Odysseus]

And?

Seriously. Who gives a fuck? I don't care what Zoroastrians think about the issue either.

I told you I answered it already with your own words. Punish the perp. Done.

Now have the last word by mentioning some caliphate horseshit as justification for denying religious freedom to a religion you despise.

Once again, how I feel about Islam isn't the point. The point is that Islam, as practiced, presents a clear and present danger to women who do not choose to wrap themselves in 7th century haute couture and marry their cousins on order. You are spinning like a dervish (another Islamic reference, BTW) in order to obscure that fact, just as AP avoids references to Muslims and Islam in a story in which the motive for the murder of several women was Islam. The OP asks if PC journalists can report honestly about Muslims. You have demonstrated that you can't even discuss them honestly here.

Translated...I've been defeated and it's time for me to cut and run.

He was defeated a while ago, but I don't want a decision on points. I'm going for the knockout. :D