How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Girl With Nose Cut Off On Time Mag Cover   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ]
 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Girl With Nose Cut Off On Time Mag Cover

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


75 posted 08-13-2010 06:58 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
Sooooo....those here who claim that Obama did the right thing in Kenya don't care to explain why they believe that? Interesting.

I already explained that Denise, or did you just ignore it?

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


76 posted 08-13-2010 08:11 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I see a big difference, Bob, between having the entire body of Canon Law elevated to co-equal status with the secular law of the land and trying to influence some changes in the secular law.

No, Grinch I didn't ignore what you said. I responded to what you said.

Nobody has yet explained why they think Obama did the right think regarding involving himself in the Kenya Sharia Law referendum. Just stating it was the right decision is not explaining why they believe so.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


77 posted 08-13-2010 10:01 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     The only people that I am aware of who suggest that sharia should be part of the law in the United States is the right wing, and even they are doing it by saying that they must pass laws to prevent it from happening.

     It's a basic racist position.

     It imputes motives to Muslims that I have heard no American Muslims espouse.  American Rightists, however, leap to espouse countermeasures where no threat is offered.  I have made prior references to statements by Dr. Gingrich and by others of his and I do so love this word ilk, as they rush to whip up religious hysteria in essential contravention of the first amendment, seeking to save the constitution by dismantling it.  

     The hypocrisy is approaches high hysteria.

    
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


78 posted 08-13-2010 10:16 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     If that is the case, Denise, perhaps you would care to recast you sweeping and apparently misstated assertion from the terms in which you put it into terms that might actually reflect what you meant.  I have a difficult time, and I think understandably so, trying to address statements you didn't make, and avoiding commenting on statements you did make but don't mean.  I don't need them to be absolutely exact, simply close enough to communicate your actual intention, and to allow me to offer a response to the actual proposition you're setting forth.

     My understanding is that in Nigeria, the sharia law is only supposed to be applicable in cases where both parties agree to its application and where its principles are not in conflict with the common Law there.

     This is the was Rabbinic law has been applied here, in the United States, according to my understanding.  In cases of conflict, United States Law is supposed to have jurisdiction.  It also seems to be the way that other systems have been useed in the United States as well, such as Arbitration.  In cases where undue power is given to the non statutory power, such as in the Halliburton attempts to sweep rape charges levied against its employees under the table by suggesting that their Arbitration procedures had already settled these cases,
the Arbitration procedures are supposed to take back seat to the actual Law.

     Do you have some different understanding here, Denise, or are we on the same page?
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


79 posted 08-13-2010 11:02 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

Well, Bob, those are certainly thoughts espoused by the World Socialist Website article.



     Is it possible that the thoughts being espoused by socialists has nothing to do with whether they are valid or not valid, Mike?  

     It is a logical fallacy to suggest that the truth of a thought can be determined by the person who expresses it.  You are aware of this because we have had the discussion before, and you've had the chance to have a look at the sites I presented on logical fallacies.

     Having been only an occasional reader of this thread anyway, I was interested to find out that I have others who agree with me.  The fact that the folks you quote are apparently socialist seems nothing more than coincidence, since they are reasonable enough.  Even well intentioned conservatives can have and do have such thoughts.  Apparently you think only those on the Left are capable of disagreeing with you, and I would suggest to you that there may actually be people who are conservative who might disagree with you on any one of any number of different grounds.  It is sad to think that you apparently believe that politics is the only reason for disagreement here.

     Personally,  I believe the World Socialist Web Site is probably in favor of regular dental hygiene as well as medical checkups and that many of their readers enjoy apple pie.

     I am not that fond of apple pie.

     However, your logic seems to have placed you in the anti-dental hygiene and anti medical checkup columns as well, if I am to take your implication correctly.  I can no doubt place you, since the world socialist site is clearly against child murder, gassing Jews and tormenting cats, on the opposing side of those fences as well.  

     Unless you might allow for the possibility that there might be other possible reasons than politics for differing or agreeing with the socialist agenda on those things as well.


    
quote:

Here you lose me. How does the right wing figure into this?



     The issue we are talking about, near as I can understand it from the title of the thread, is "Girl With Nose Cut Off On Time Mag Cover."  The debate here has been about sharia law and about what we should do about this sort of thing.

     You and I differ as to whether the President is Right Wing or not.  You say, "no."  I have held from before the election that the man is "Republican Lite."  Perhaps you have forgotten this or chose to ignore our disagreement about it.  Whatever he is, I am not particularly in favor of the war in Afghanistan, though I do understand the rational for it.  You may have me confused with somebody else, who thinks the way you seem to believe liberals are supposed to think but so frequently don't.  

     I am very much concerned with the anti-Muslim sentiment expressed in this country today, and I see this as very much a product of what I see as Right Wing Jingoism.  Such Right Wing efforts have supported a range of initiatives against minority communities in the United States.  These have included campaigns against ACORN, an essentially black run community organizing group, and against immigrant communities such as the hispanics, and now against Muslims.  This is what I see it has to do with the Right Wing.

     Talking back to this sort of Right Wing campaign of innuendo frequently gets innuendo tossed at me.  For example,

quote:

Well, Bob, those are certainly thoughts espoused by the World Socialist Website article.



     That may look familiar.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


80 posted 08-14-2010 12:39 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

" I am not that fond of apple pie."

Somehow the phrase "As American as apple pie" comes to mind and I can understand your saying that
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


81 posted 08-14-2010 04:31 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



   You may not have noticed that you just insulted my feelings for my country without actually commenting on any of the points I made in my discussion.  My impression is thatmoderators are supposed to be on the lookout for this sort of thing, though not for the chance to see if they can get away with them.

     Suggesting that because a posting in a socialist site meant that my comments were somehow less worthy than others was inappropriate.  This continues an inappropriate pattern.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


82 posted 08-14-2010 07:42 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Bob, I didn't comment on your other points because, frankly, I saw nothing new or worthy of comment from me. You were able to make them visible to the readers of the thread. That should satisfy you.

The apple pie comment just struck me because in this thread alone, not to bring up others, you have made numereous references to what's wrong with America, Americans and our way of life, from how we abuse our women to how police kill wives and then get off to religious whackos usinig snakes in worship....and the list goes on. I don't need to name them all. The comment about not liking apple pie sounded like a postscript. I don't doubt your love of America, but you say it like a father, spanking his child, saying "This hurts me more than it hurts you" or a husband telling his wife, "I only treat you badly because I love you". You do more than acknowledge American weaknesses - you offer them up.

Insulting?

"However, your logic seems to have placed you in the anti-dental hygiene and anti medical checkup columns as well, if I am to take your implication correctly.  I can no doubt place you, since the world socialist site is clearly against child murder, gassing Jews and tormenting cats, on the opposing side of those fences as well. "

Well, let's see. I am anti-dental hygiene, anti-medical checkup, pro child murder, pro gassing Jews and I torment cats (although my seven felines may disagree with that point). And you wish to speak of insulting one's feelings???

Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


83 posted 08-14-2010 08:10 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch

quote:
Nobody has yet explained why they think Obama did the right think regarding involving himself in the Kenya Sharia Law referendum. Just stating it was the right decision is not explaining why they believe so.


The Kenya Sharia Law referendum?

What Kenya Sharia Law referendum? There hasn't been a Kenya Sharia Law referendum. There's been a Kenyan referendum to introduce a new constitution and a small part of that constitution allows the recognition of Muslim courts within the Kenyan legal system. Is that the referendum you're talking about? It's hard to keep pace Denise when you flit around from one subject to the other. First there was outrage against a girl getting mutilated that was supposedly sanctioned by Sharia law yet no Sharia court passed down such a judgement. Then there's outrage that Sharia courts are being instigated in Kenya presumably to lop off the noses of the folks there and finally there's the outrage that US money might have been spent to ensure nose lopping becomes an international sport.

The girl had her nose cut off in a mountain pass by her husband and relatives as they were bringing her back from Kandahar. No Sharia court sanctioned the act or even heard the case, they acted independently and their actions should be judged accordingly. If you want a parallel to act as a comparison try this:

Some courts in the US sentence offenders found guilty of certain crimes to forfeit their lives, but that doesn't mean that US courts sanction the murder of anyone accused of a capital offence. A family from Texas aren't carrying out US law if they hang a woman accused of killing one of their relatives - you'd call me stupid if I suggested that Denise.

What was the next outrage? Oh yes, Sharia courts in Kenya.

I explained why nose lopping wasn't going to be part of the Sharia court system - the courts will act in a similar fashion to tribunals, passing judgements on matters of family, business and religious disagreements between consenting Muslims. Apparently you can't see the point of having them, you believe that there's no need for them. I've already said that you may be right and if no Muslims use the system that would be sufficient evidence prove your point but you seem to want an example of a case that the Sharia court would hear that couldn't be heard in a standard court - OK Denise here's an example:

Bob is a Muslim, part of his religion requires him to attend prayer meetings at the Mosque on a Friday and fast during the period of Ramadan unless there are valid reasons why he's unable to do so. Bob has put himself forward as the chairperson of the local community council, he's claiming that he's a good chap for the job. Bill is also a Muslim, he thinks Bob has been dodging prayers and breaking the fast during Ramadan, he's also running for the chair of the community council. The accusations have escalated into heated arguments whenever the two meet, several times almost coming to blows and the issue seems to be spreading tension throughout the community. In the end Bob decides that enough is enough and goes to the local Sharia court to clear his name, Bill is invited to attend the hearing and after both parties offer their testimony the court decides that there's no evidence that Bob has been anything but a good Muslim. Bill agrees to issue a public apology and as a measure of good faith offers to withdraw his nomination to the office of chairperson.
In the above example Bob had no recourse to a criminal court because no crime had taken place, he could seek redress in a civil court for defamation of character but that would be costly and without a specific understanding of Muslim religious tenants the claim that Bob missed prayers may not be seen as a clear case of defamation.

BTW The end of my little story, in case anyone was wondering,  was that Bob became the chairperson of the community council and invited Bill to head the finance committee and they all lived happily ever after.

What's next? The US money to publicise the Kenyan referendum on the proposed new constitution.

I'm not generally in favour of American involvement in the politics of other countries, especially when it's armed involvement  but given the history of Kenya and recognising that the old constitution is seriously flawed I'm willing to make an exception in this case.

Kenya has a constitutional system similar to the US system; the flaws in the old constitution however mean that it's possible that the President could, quite legally, hold more power over the judiciary than is comfortable. That wasn't a big issue previously because the last President was pretty good, although accusations of some abuse have been made, he managed to avoid going completely power crazy and destabilising the country. Not only that, he was actively working to introduce a new constitution which would, effectively, reduce his powers. Recently though all that changed, the incumbent fought, and lost, an election in which his opponent was accused by international observers of rigging the vote. The consensus was that the new president may not be as reluctant to use the holes in the old constitution.

Chaos ensued as people demonstrated against the legitimacy of the new regime, thousands died in armed clashes, 600,000 fled their homes and rumours abounded that both sides were arming for a fully fledged civil war.

Enter the UN.

They managed to broker a peace deal that led to the formation of a temporary coalition government; part of that deal was that the proposed referendum on the new constitution would be brought forward. The idea was that if the new constitution was in place the chances of any future president abusing his power would be diminished - if the bad guy won next time it wouldn't be so bad.

The US, along with other members of the UN thought that this was a good idea and pledged money to support the 'Yes" vote which was a damn fine idea if you ask me and a lot better, and cheaper, than shipping over a few thousand troops to calm a civil war.

Does that answer your questions Denise?

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Girl With Nose Cut Off On Time Mag Cover   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors