Reading Current Events

I am so upset guys. I don't know how many of you are following the current events, but I got so shocked to read what those stupid Danish people have done lately. Let me recap everything here. First they start publishing idiotic strips insulting Mohammed and Islam (this was in September I think, and it was then followed by other countries such as Norway and France), then they repropose the strips just a few days ago, and the mess begins.

Of course this created lots of problems down in Muslimland, and they started burning Danish flags, being totally offended about how those people insulted their prophet (and they are even right in being upset!) I agree with saying that this is a little extremist, but definitely Danish journalists should have never published those strips. So lately they have been debating on what to do next. Their prime minister (another asshole) decided to defend the journalist, saying that they had the right to publish what they wanted (calling it right of free speech), and he refused to apologize for the misfact.

But today in the newspapers the worst possible thing: the Danish people started burning the Islam's sacred book, and said to all the Muslims that live there that if they don't like how things are done, they can just leave. I mean, how can you be more stupid?! That's really looking for trouble. And at a few days from the Olympic Games even, so that if possible Italy will be prey of terrorists because of Denmark.

What I am really praying for now is:
a) Denmark will be forbidden to participate to the Olympic Games (I think that our national security is at stake, and it is more important to defend our citizens than let those assholes participate to the games.)
b) Denmark will be obliged to apologize, or it will be kicked out of EU
c) Denmark will be obliged to apologize, or the rest of Europe will place an embargo on them, basically saying to fuck off and kicking it out of Euro.

I know that probably none of them will happen, even though I still pray for the point A. But I do think that Europe should dissociate totally from Denmark. It must be clear that they did that, not us, that they did not apologize, and that we do have nothing to do with them.

Here I will give you some link from CNN so that you can read this news for yourself. Really, I am totally pissed and disgusted. I have never thought that some European State could have done what they did, and I think that they should definitely apologize, because they are not worthy to be part of the European Union if they do not.

PS. I don't know if from there you'll also find a link to the most recent facts (the burning of the Koran), because it was on the Italian newspapers today, so I think it happened yesterday, and I don't know if CNN has already posted it.

Un bacio è un'apostrofo rosa scritto tra le parole "ti amo".

I do see both perspectives here, but i must say it does seem a bit of an over-reaction when you consider simpsons episodes with homer pretending to be Ganesh and so many cartoons depicting Jesus and God in many different ways...

people have the right to express themselves, but likewise people have a right to complain about disliking this expression. but abusing an entire nation or religion for the beliefs of a few just seems stupid to me.

my .02

Look at me! I'm a prostitute robot from the future!

I certainly agree with you, Mel, but I think that this is not really free speech. I mean, free speech would be giving your opinion (even an impopular one) about something, and not just merely producing stupid strips that offend a religion. I have certainly seen several strips on the Pope, and he's the first one to laugh about them, but I have never heard of strips being insulting towards Jesus or God. Let's say that their "free speech" thing could cover their butts, but that shouldn't really be the the correct way to exercitate their right in free speech.

Secondly, another good point was that it was totally stupid and irresponsible to bring up something like that with all the problems Europe already has with the Middle East. It was an irresponsible act, and they should apologize and make up for what they have done. They should know by now what the Muslims are like. They should know well enough that they are ready to go there and blow themselves up in the name of Allah. Their act was irresponsible towards their nation to begin with, and towards the whole Europe too. I am afraid we'll have to pay the expenses now, all of us, for something that only one or two states have done.

And doing so at a few days from the Olympic Games was even more stupid, because it just means to give a reason to the terrorists to come here and blow themselves up. And I am afraid they will, unless Denmark apologizes, or unless Italy manages to refuse the Danish athletes to the Olympic Games.

Un bacio è un'apostrofo rosa scritto tra le parole "ti amo".

But is The Simpsons broadcast for free (I'm talking rabbit ears here) in the Middle East?

Please contiune to vote AND post.

Europe as a whole is extremely secular. Reserach has shown that roughly 50% of its population is atheist, that many more are practical atheists, and that the number of theistic Europeans is declining steadily. I honestly don't believe the hostility towards Islam, or religion in general, is characteristically Danish. I believe it was in France (correct me if I'm wrong) that a cartoon was published of Jesus with an erect member wearing a condom. Other such instances are easy to find throughout the continent.

What makes the actions of the Danish media so utterly mindless is that their work inflames not just the radicals and extremists--the ones who will respond violently--but also the moderate Muslims, the more peacful; coincidentally, the one's living in and immigrating into Europe. This insults all of them, and not just in the deep Middle-East--it is considered blasphemy and idolatry by nearly any muslim to depict their prophet in physical form. Much less a physical charicature.

The Danish media is inflaming the muslims that are slowly and steadily moving into their continent. What is so backwards about that is that these musilms should be the ones from which they ought to be seeking the most help. It is from the non-extremists living in Europe that Europeans should seek the strongest activism against Islamic fundamentalism. Depicting sarcastically an important religious figure of the culture that most hates them is a form of political suicide, and only damages the western effort in the war on terror. Muslims hate us precisely because our cultures (I include America) profess values that are utterly opposite of their own. And, as we see here, our opposition accretes itself into forms of open hostility as well.

-ecthelion-

While I agree with you that the Danish papers made a less than intelligent decision in printing the cartoon, that does not mean that the leader of the country has any right/obligation to apologize on behalf of private citizens of his country. If the press were run by the state, that would be a different situation, though it would also nullify the free speech argument.

What I am really praying for now is:
a) Denmark will be forbidden to participate to the Olympic Games (I think that our national security is at stake, and it is more important to defend our citizens than let those assholes participate to the games.)
b) Denmark will be obliged to apologize, or it will be kicked out of EU
c) Denmark will be obliged to apologize, or the rest of Europe will place an embargo on them, basically saying to fuck off and kicking it out of Euro.

As for this, it would be punishing the Danish government as well as the majority of its people for the mistake of a small contingent. Much like people have done to followers of Islam, applying the feelings they should have toward fundamentalists to all of them, resulting in more turmoil between the cultures and breeding more fundamentalists by giving credence to the claims that the west is the enemy of Islam.

First they start publishing idiotic strips insulting Mohammed and Islam (this was in September I think, and it was then followed by other countries such as Norway and France)

It was probably not intentional to forego mentioning this, but I felt it prudent to add that Italian and German newspapers also reprinted the strip.

This post was edited by baexcell on Feb 06, 2006.

First they start publishing idiotic strips insulting Mohammed and Islam (this was in September I think, and it was then followed by other countries such as Norway and France)

It was probably not intentional to forego mentioning this, but I felt it prudent to add that Italian and German newspapers also reprinted the strip.

This is partially wrong actually. All the newspapers I have seen (Italian ones of course) with the strips were condemning them, and their authors. Italy has also expressed itself in favor of the Muslims through our President, our Prime Minister, our Internship (ahem spelling here?) Minister, and our Defense Minister. Everybody was condemning those who stood for the strips. (And in fact the Muslims want a fatva against the Danish and the Norwish journalists, surely not against the Italians who simply reported the strips as information against the two incriminated nations).

Right yesterday on La Stampa there were a few long articles describing the worse and worse situation in Denmark. Now it seems that their products are boicotted (and I can certainly understand that), and the workers say that they are not worried, because if the companies will have to fire somebody, it will be the "dirty Muslims".

On the TV, in the news, they reported an interview with some "normal" ladies drinking tea in one of those bars around there, and they were saying that the Muslims have to go if they don't like freedom of speech. So, I don't think that the Danish are so innocent as you are depicting them.

Also, I know that the press is not run by the state of course, but I do believe that if they make a mistake that can offend other nations, then they should be obliged to apologize by the government, or the government itself should apologize for them. Failing to do so just means blowing this even more out of proportion. Like I said, we all know the Muslims; it is blasphemy to do what the Danish have done, and it is just a reason more to aggravate the situation both in the Middle East, and in the European States with the highest numbers of Muslims (and in Denmark, on a population of 5 millions of inhabitants, 200.000 are Muslims).

Also, to reply to Echelion:

Muslims hate us precisely because our cultures (I include America) profess values that are utterly opposite of their own. And, as we see here, our opposition accretes itself into forms of open hostility as well.

I disagree with you on that. They do not hate us because of our culture. They hate us because of what we have done to them. Not only back then when we went to colonize and bring our religion in their territories. But now. America has had (like UK) an imperialistic and expansionistic policy towards the Middle East. Instead of leaving them alone, we (because Europe is partially responsible for this, for not having managed to keep America and United Kingdom to do so) have gone to their home, and we took away their lands.

For what? For Israel. The winners of WW2 had the brilliant idea of creating a strip of land for all the Jews who had been prosecuted by Hitler, and look where they choose it? Right there, where the Muslims had been living for centuries. Now, do you think they appreciated this? I think not. I think that if someone came to Italy and said "now this part of Italy is not Italy anymore, because there is the need of having some land for these people here", do you think I wouldn't fight for my country? Why didn't they cut off a piece of America or United Kingdom for the Jews to live, and make their own nation? You could tell me that it's because Jerusalem is in the Middle East, but I think that's an easy and naive answer.

The Americans helped Israel, they helped Sharon, the nazi. And the Jews raised a nice wall to divide them from the Muslims. Not only, they keep saying that the space they have is not enough, and they threaten the Muslims with their nukes. And where did they get the nukes from? America of course, Bush. Now, a Muslim living side to side with a Jew has about 10 dollars a day to live, a Jew has about 100 (if not more).

You know, I would too hate America if they started to do such a thing here in Italy. If for example they started giving money to France, so that France decided to enlarge its territory (it's utopic, because we are all part of a whole single nation now, but I hope you get my point). So, Echelion, they do not hate us because of our culture, but because of us going to war with them, and helping their enemies to fight and win the battles. And precisely, they do not hate Europe, but they do hate America, and Bush in particular. I can't say I disagree with them. Then of course, they do have a bad way to demonstrate their rage towards us, but this is what their culture dictates to them.

I cannot say I am not scared. I can't say I am not the least worried, but I know that as long as we respect them, they won't harm us. America did not respect them to begin with, and therefore they got what they "deserved" (not that they deserved that in my opinion, but to the eyes of a Muslim that was the right punishment).

So while I don't like them very much, and while I do think that those people are scary, and while I think that they do not treat their women well, and they don't grant the liberty that our constitutions grant, I cannot say I don't understand why they act like this. And Denmark is now digging up its hole.

Un bacio è un'apostrofo rosa scritto tra le parole "ti amo".

This post was edited by andromacha on Feb 06, 2006.

This is partially wrong actually. All the newspapers I have seen (Italian ones of course) with the strips were condemning them, and their authors. Italy has also expressed itself in favor of the Muslims through our President, our Prime Minister,

Libero and La Padania re-printed the cartoons last Friday. Funny enough, La Padania is the mouthpiece of the right-wing Lega Nord which is part of prime minister Berlusconi's government.

SCNR :-)

"*sigh* Some men are really hard to manipulate!" - Orchid

This is partially wrong actually. All the newspapers I have seen (Italian ones of course) with the strips were condemning them, and their authors. Italy has also expressed itself in favor of the Muslims through our President, our Prime Minister,

Libero and La Padania re-printed the cartoons last Friday. Funny enough, La Padania is the mouthpiece of the right-wing Lega Nord which is part of prime minister Berlusconi's government.

Well, first of all, I want to point out how those two "newspapers" are not real newspapers. I mean, not newspapers which have the right to be called that. In other words, take a few pot heads who don't even know exactly how to write in their mothertongue, put them in front of a computer (provided they can understand where to switch it on), and you'll have that kind of journalists.

Secondly, La Padania is not really the mouthpiece of Berlusconi. Actually, Lega is against several things made by Forza Italia and viceversa. I know you all are not very much into Italian politics, and me either for that matter. The only thing I know is that if the left wing of the Parliament (so Prodi, Rutelli and all those shit heads) it is a real tragedy :P

Also, Berlusconi didn't really need the votes of Lega Nord to win the past elections. But Lega alone wouldn't have had enough votes to have representatives in the Parliament. So they teamed together. It's true: this way Berlusconi had more votes and had a higher number of representatives on his side. However, Berlusconi and Bossi (and other "important" members of the Lega party) had their good fair share of dissense.

To those who think I am pro Berlusconi, I say: actually I am pro Fini :P He is less moderate than Berlusconi, yet his party is allied to Berlusconi's. Mainly I am happy with anybody who is not belonging to the left party. The communists (or those who like to call themselves that, but are not real communists) have already destroyed Italy more than once, and as long as my vote can help keeping them out from power, it will always be addressed to the right wing of the Parliament.

Turin is red unfortunately. The past elections we couldn't prevent it, and now we're paying the consequences of it, because our Mayor is someone who doesn't even know where he is turned. He made several mistakes with the Olympic Games, and we are likely to be laughed at by the other nations. I certainly hope that the next elections we'll be able to change things around.

Un bacio è un'apostrofo rosa scritto tra le parole "ti amo".

Hey! Stop beating up on potheads! *laughs* I'll smoke a one-hit for you, just after I blow my nose.

I'll have to come back and read this thread later. I feel like ass, and I am going to bed, but it looks quite interesting.

If mountain goats like living at high elevations, why do none live in high rise apartment buildings?

Also, I know that the press is not run by the state of course, but I do believe that if they make a mistake that can offend other nations, then they should be obliged to apologize by the government, or the government itself should apologize for them.

If the government were to force them to apologize or apologize on the behalf of them, it would be result in a form of government press control. I do not feel this is the responsibility or place of the government in a free society. Individuals/Organizations should be held responsible for their own actions, and the government should not have to tell the world that the entity apologizes for an action as it is quite likely not accurate. As for the government try to oblige them to apologize, this seems to me that you are saying the government should treaten with some sort of punishment if they do not act in a way that the government sees as acceptable. And that is a slippery slope to follow.

They do not hate us because of our culture. They hate us because of what we have done to them.

While the latter half of this statement is partially true, the former IMO is not. To my understanding, their have been many references over the years by Islamic clerics saying that westerners are trying to pollute Islamic culture with their ideologies which are in contradiction with the teachings of the Koran.

For what? For Israel. Why didn't they cut off a piece of America or United Kingdom for the Jews to live, and make their own nation?
...
You could tell me that it's because Jerusalem is in the Middle East, but I think that's an easy and naive answer.

The reason that Palestine was chosen for the site of the Jewish state had a multitude of reasons behind it. One of those reasons was that Jerusalem happened to be in Palestine, and according to Jewish beliefs, Jerusalem is a city given to them by God himself. Another reason is the Palestine was a British Colony in the area, not an independent arab nation, so it was not taking away land that the Arab nations had any right to.

So while I don't like them very much, and while I do think that those people are scary, and while I think that they do not treat their women well, and they don't grant the liberty that our constitutions grant, I cannot say I don't understand why they act like this. America did not respect them to begin with, and therefore they got what they "deserved" (not that they deserved that in my opinion, but to the eyes of a Muslim that was the right punishment).

This paragraph as well as other statements you have made throughout your posts do not sit well with me. The reason for this is that when I read them. it seems like you are referring to Muslims as a whole, and not just the extremists/fundamentalists who hold views that are dangerous. This could be a misunderstanding on my part, but that is how it sounds.

Well, I disagree. Let me just say, I didnt read any of the other replies, because well, frankly I dont have the time.

If you are musilm or easily offended I suggest stopping here!

It's about time that something is said about this radical religion of Islam which is turning the world upside down. I myself have not seem the cartoons, yet, I can only imagine the thruth which rings from within their humorosity.

Honestly, how can you defend a perverted/demented radical who saw hullicinations, drank camels piss and married a 9 year old?

Only this a religion such as this exepects to be tolerated by the whole world, all the while it is the most filthy, intolerant and destructive of them all. No other religion demands that everyone abides by its strictures and avoid words and deeds that one might find upsetting or offensive. Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Mormons: They don't lash out in violence when their religious sensibilities are offended. They certainly don't expect their beliefs to be immune from criticism, mockery, or dissent.

Every relgion except Islam, and frankly, I'm tired of its bullcrap.

Only with Islam could anything so mild trigger a reaction so isane (riots, death threats, kidnappings, flag-burnings). To me this just speaks volumes about the gap that separates the values of the civilized world from those in much of the Islamic world.

Freedom of the press, the marketplace of ideas, free trade, womens rights, animal rights, the ability to disagree with what you say while firmly defending your right to say it: Islam knows none of this. And if the jihadis get their way, such freedoms we take for granted will be discarded and replaced with the hate and intolerant propaganda of the Koran and Hadith.

Even if the cartoons were slander, which they werent, they still have the right to be said.

Muslims have suffered no wrong; Muslims have inflicted the wrong.

I'm sure everyone will disagree with me, especially my European counterparts, but dammit, I just had to say it. Having a already terrible day just made it that much easier.

Now are ye undeceived! Welcome, again, my children, to the communion of your race!

Honestly, how can you defend a perverted/demented radical who saw hullicinations, drank camels piss and married a 9 year old?

Well, i dont think you defend the radicals. You defend the innocent, rational people who happen to be of the same race/religion.

Look at me! I'm a prostitute robot from the future!

Honestly, how can you defend a perverted/demented radical who saw hullicinations, drank camels piss and married a 9 year old?

Well, i dont think you defend the radicals. You defend the innocent, rational people who happen to be of the same race/religion.

I believe that statement was not about current followers of the faith, but about a person of historical significance, perhaps the Prophet Mohammed himself, though I cannot verify this since I know little about his life.

I've been a part of Netalive for quite some time now and this is what I love about Netalive. I enjoy these types of discussions, I believe they represent the unique views we all share on this board. Some of us share different views, yet we as a whole still respect the opinions of others.

(GASP) Talking about religion. I remember being taught during years of continuous sales training that the three things to stay away from during conversation is religion, marriage, and politics. Those were three issues most people were sensitive about and could easily be insulted over. Well, since this post is lively, I am going to join this party, so let’s get the shin-dig started!!

For the past few years I've had a bone stuck in my throat for any extremist group, let alone Islamic/Muslims. I understand I may receive flak for my statements, oh well that is life. I cannot understand why peace eludes the human race. Wait, yes I can. Religious extremist groups ladies and gentlemen, religious extremist groups.

I will say this right now. I feel no pity for the Muslim/Islamic practice. Why? Simple, where are they when the Islamic or Muslim extremist groups hit? In my opinion and my opinion may very well be wrong, yet it is my opinion; the Muslim/Islamic groups are like soap opera stars or high school drama queens. They wait for something small(cartoon) and yes this is ridiculously small, and then all of a sudden the Muslim/Islamic extremist group come out of the woodwork with another excuse to blow themselves up and kill innocent human beings. Where are the average wholesome Muslims when these extremists use the Muslim or Islamic name to practice their terror? Where are the quality practicing Muslim LEADERS at when these extremists tarnish their religion with terror? Are they "terror-ified" to stand up and denounce these idiots?

Let me say this. If Christians, Catholics, Baptists, Protestants, Quakers, etc, etc, threw temper tantrums every time a journalist, cartoon, or comedian poked fun at their religion, we as a whole would have been annihilated a thousand times over already. This is non sense at its finest right here, ignorance at its bliss. "Oh someone poked fun at my religion so I am going to KILL someone else"! Well that is what they are doing right now. Ladies and gentlemen, that is what these Muslim extremist groups have been doing for quite some time. I'll ask this again. Why can’t we see any of these wholesome regular like you and I Muslims stand up and say anything? Well, I'll take that back, some of the Muslims in Denmark believe this isn’t something to get worked up about. Thank you, thank you for those few who see it that way. Shame on every other practicing Muslim/Islamic human being who will cry a river over a cartoon yet won't say a SINGLE WORD when Muslim/Islamic extremists kill hundreds or thousands of individuals around the world on a weekly basis. Shame on those who are silenced then.

This is what I hate about the public as a whole. We get "Pat Robertson" on someone. This is why we will fail. We fail because we form gangs, I mean RELIGIONS and as a result, those members push away anyone else who is not involved with their religion or who practices another religion. Having a belief joins people, having a religion pushes people away. Most religions share the same type of simple steps in being a better person, yet we still ignore those steps and proceed to ridicule, prosecute, mane, or even kill someone because they have a different religion. The word I’m looking for here is hum hum……over righteousness. These extremist groups walk around like mini gods judging who should live and who should die.

In the end, it’s funny how a cartoon involving Muhammad and a bomb can destroy everything and bring these individuals back to ignorant simpletons, running around on a path of destruction. Funny how the cartoonists were asked to draw Muhammad as they saw him and someone created what they felt Muhammad and the Muslims were all about. Instead of acting stupid like they are now, these Muslims should stand up and say we need to educate. Amazing how we as a whole have grown more and more sensitive about anything and everything. GROW UP. What's with some people and their damn religion thinking that if someone pokes fun at it, they as a result can justify killing people, let alone those who aren't even involved. GROW UP.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Feb 08, 2006.

I only have a moment...which is good, or you guys could once again be subjected to some of the longest posts in the history of the NAO. *wipes brow*

I haven't seen the cartoon...I should still go back and read this thread in it's entirety...and I am fast falling asleep. But I do think it worth briefly mentioning that from what little knowledge I have of the religion of Islam, it's prophet Mohammed, was actually a fairly open-minded sort of fellow. He, to my knowledge, was a proponent of women's rights, among other things. Although, I could be wrong.

So, if that knowledge of mine is correct, then I have two statements to follow this with:

1) Like my Dad, the minister, says about most Christians: "I like Christ, I just don't like his fan club." (This coming from a minister--> one of the few, IMHO who has his head in the right place...) You know how rumors get started, and if you go back to the source, the person will say: "That isn't what I said at all!?" "Lost in Translation"....and all that.

2) You know the Islamic faith has persecuted one of its own sects, the mystical branch of Islam: Sufism...for centuries upon centuries. Something about just not liking it when people find out they can go directly to the "Source" without all the mumbo-jumbo in the church pew, or on the prayer mat, with a supposedly all-knowing human source in the front of the room. Those poor Sufis. They are Muslim as well, but, to my knowledge, they are so lost in ecstasy that they don't have time to be running around having jihads. Just spinning and spinning and spinning...A good place to be, if you ask me...

And you know, as null pointed out, it's way more likely that the average Muslim could care less. The radical ones are always going to be more vocal. I'm not sure what that says about me.............*falls asleep*

If mountain goats like living at high elevations, why do none live in high rise apartment buildings?

This post was edited by rosyxxx on Feb 09, 2006.

I haven't seen the cartoon...

I had the peasure of doing so yesterday. If you really enjoy them (and dont mind taking chances with yourt life) I recomend getting a shirt ;-)

Take a Look- Funny!
Muhammad Shirts

was actually a fairly open-minded sort of fellow. He, to my knowledge, was a proponent of women's rights, among other things. Although, I could be wrong.

From my brief understanding of the man, that is contrary to what I know and to what their holy books blatantly state.

Muhammad, quite frankly, was an bad guy.

According to Muhammad- Hell is mostly inhabited by women.

Want to know some interesting facts:
Satan lives in the upper nostril at night
Playing chess is evil
non-muslims have seven intestines
You will loose your eyes if you pray looking upward
The sun sets in mucky water
Satan urinates in the ears of those who fall asleep during prayer
Yawning comes from Hell
Dogs are evil and should be slaughtered

>>>Courtousy of your local Islamic scriptures<<<

Here some facts from the 'holy' Koran:

• Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them. (2:191)

• Fight and slay the pagans (translation: that's us) seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem. (9:5)

• Slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers...(5:34)

• ...strike off the heads of the disbelievers...[make a] wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives [for ransom] (947:4)

[treatment of disbelievers]...garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods (22:19).

The Koran also instructs Muslims to slay or crucify or cut the hands and the feet of the unbelievers (5:34), fight unbelievers until no other religion except Islam remains. (3:85)

Given these basic teachings of Islam there is little reason to be surprised at what the Muslim world does.

Ohh yea...But its a religion of Peace!!!

Now are ye undeceived! Welcome, again, my children, to the communion of your race!

This post was edited by Hardballkid on Feb 09, 2006.

Hmmm. I don't know where it was that I read that Mohammed was open-minded about women...but I remember thinking, well there are a lot of 'Christians' who seem to be very confused about what Jesus really wanted them do, so I figured the same could have happened to Mohammed. Misunderstanding is rampant. Not that I am refuting what you put up here, because I'm not. I can't.........You see, I haven't read the Koran. Something tells me that I should, just so I can know for myself.

So, I am taking your words to heart, and will try to procure myself a copy of the Koran for my perusal.

As far as what I said about some Christians misunderstanding what Jesus wanted them to do....let me explain, so that I don't inadvertently get "crucified".

I am in a hurry, so all I could find was the passage in Luke. I know it exists as well in Matthew, and probably Mark and John. Since I am not a biblical scholar (my Pop is...and he has studied comparitive religions, so might be of assistance on the Koran...), and I don't personally profess to be a Christian (leaning more toward Hinduism or Buddhism), I am ONLY quoting. But here is what it says after Jesus tells the crowd the parable about sowing seeds that ends in: "If you have ears to hear, then hear." The rest of the passage is thus:
"His disciples asked him what this parable meant, and he said,

'It has been granted to you to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but the others have only parables, so that they may look but see nothing, hear but understand nothing.' - Luke 8: 9,10

*aside* I cannot believe that I just quoted a Bible passage. O_O.

Wow, there is a first for everything. :D Just don't plan on it happening again, because I'm really more drawn to Hinduism and Buddhism. ;p

At any rate, my point being that there are so many people who distort the Christian faith. They don't really follow what Jesus taught. They see what they 'think' they see in the Bible, and they hear, but they aren't hearing the 'seed'. They aren't hearing the word of God, which is the 'seed', which is 'Amen', or also 'Aum' and 'Om'. It is the "All", the thing that connects us to one another. If they aren't hearing that, it is much more likely that they are not hearing the true word, and are only hearing a "parable". And parables are fine, but they tend to do a little obscuration of the truth, simply because people don't always "get" the parable the way that it might truly have been intended. Which is pretty much what Jesus says in that passage.

And conversely, the core of what some people in the Islamic faith believe may have more to do with their own personal faith, than what the Koran tells them. I know quite a few Muslims who don't behave as if they have taken to heart what you quoted, and who likely would not be offended by the cartoons about Mohammed. They just don't think it is that important. But who knows. So many things get distorted and twisted "in the name of God".

I mean, I am guessing, so don't hold me to it, but I suspect that as far as Hinduism, there isn't anything in the Rig Veda, or any other text that specifically says that a woman should lie down and commit suttee (hope I am spelling that right) after her husband dies. I could be wrong.

It sounds to me as if your wonderfully worded diatribe, because you did make me laugh with the whole 'camel piss' thing, and just the general way you worded your post, has inadvertently become a motivating force for me to read not only the Koran, but the Rig Veda, the Bhagavad Gita, the Bible, and anything else that I have neither read at all (in the case of the Koran), nor read in its entirety (in the case of the latter three). Plus there is so much about Hinduism and Buddhism, which greatly interest me that I have not read. I just finished reading the article that Linda Johnsen, a student of the now deceased Swami Rama, wrote about the inherent ecumenical nature of Hinduism.

Wouldn't it be nice, Hardballkid (and darn it, I can't remember your name, I'm sorry, you did tell me...), if all of the major world religions were ecumenical? I just keep thinking of the acronym that ravers use: PLUR. Peace, love, understanding, respect. (And just because I don't want to use 'X', doesn't mean I can't hang out with ravers, but that is beside the point, and another digression on my part...*sighs*)

Thanks for the heads up, as well as for the quotes. And of course, your exasperated humor. It is refreshing to see someone blend just enough humor into their diatribes to make it palatable. Kind of like making bitter melon taste sweet. I found what you wrote quite interesting, and am inclined to do more research. And now I must absolutely go do my laundry. Wish me well, my head is a little stuffy.

P.S. I did find the T-shirts funny. "Mohammed Ali"....hahhahha!!! Everyone should be able to laugh at themselves, even Mohammed. Don't you think? Although I expect that my friend Joe's feelings would be deeply hurt if I were to wear that shirt. I don't think he'd shoot me though....he's not that kinda guy.

If mountain goats like living at high elevations, why do none live in high rise apartment buildings?

This post was edited by rosyxxx on Feb 10, 2006.

Wouldn't it be nice, Hardballkid (and darn it, I can't remember your name, I'm sorry, you did tell me...), if all of the major world religions were ecumenical? I just keep thinking of the acronym that ravers use: PLUR. Peace, love, understanding, respect.

In other words, we may not all be Catholics or Methodists, Muslim or Lutherans, etc., but we all worship the same God; but we do it in 'our own way'; so naturally, because we are sincere about our love & worship, we can be sure God DOES hear us because God is love & if we love each other, then certainly God must love us.

Sorry Rosy but thats an idealogy I cant go along with.

"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them." - Eph. 5:11

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” I Jn. 4:1

Unity is used throughout the Bible, though too. Two becoming one flesh (Matthew19:5), intimacy with God (John 17), in faith (Ephesians 4:13), in knowledge (Ephesians 4:13), of the Spirit (Ephesians 4:3), in mind andthought about Christ (1 Corinthians 1:10-12), one body (Ephesians4:3-6) and the list goes on. God values unity for a Godly cause. He wants His people to be on the same page. This does not mean God does not want differing opinions or viewpoints (Acts 15:39), but He does want us to agree on the core of a relationship with him. The scriptures point toward an agreement (from the Bible) of who God is and how to bein a relationship with Him.

Ecumenicalism, however, is less about finding the core of agreement as it is about compromising the core. Everything becomes negotiable. Opinions and convictions become interchangeable. The Bible becomes a nuisance. Unity at any price is not unity at all.

Throughout the Old Testament, the Israelites greatest threat was not necessarily converting to a new religion, but fusing another local belief system with Yahweh worship(Exodus 20:3). Jewish theology and conversion was muddled bysynthesized ideologies.

You see, to ride the ecumenical band wagon, one must throw Truth overboard. To agree with ecumenism is to agree to confusion. God is not the author of confusion. He is Truth. There is no error in Him, and He calls no one to preach a mixture, or to join with it.

The ecumenical movement wants nothing to do with the Christ of the Bible.

As a Christian...its not about being accepted by people...it is about being acceptable with God.

I understand the desire for peace on Earth, however, religious pluralism is not an option.

And now I must absolutely go do my laundry.

As well as I. I woke up with a stomach flu this morning (which caused me to miss my Jujitsu practice :-( so I must wash my bed-spread and sheets now.

Hardballkid (and darn it, I can't remember your name, I'm sorry, you did tell me...)

It's Elijah by the way. And yes, it's Biblical ;-)

Now are ye undeceived! Welcome, again, my children, to the communion of your race!

%u201CBeloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.%u201D I Jn. 4:1

Only one reflection about this. Let me state to begin with that I am a Catholic Christian, so in theory I should be the most conservative about Christianity and all the other things that people think about the Catholics (most things are sort of wrong however).

Well, while I might/might not believe in every sort of thing written in the Bible - so I am not saying that what you state is absolutely untrue, not proved or whatever else, at the same time I always wonder "Well how can we be so sure that there is only 1 God?". Wait, before accusing me of blasphemy, let me explain what I mean by that :P The Christians, and even moreso the Catholics, believe of course in only one God, who is one and three (sorry, I don't know how to call that "property" in English, but what I mean is that in the figure of God there are three figures: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost).

Anyway, so far so good, right? All the Christians believe in only one single God, and they believe that He will save them, and all the other things we all know. But there are different religions; there are different Gods according to the different religions, and I do not necessarily think that those who are not Christians will go to hell, or whatever else you might replace it with. Why? Because they definitely have other Gods - the Muslim have Allah - who preach basically the same thing: believe in me, and you'll be saved.

For this reason, I don't necessarily think that there is only one single God. I mean, there is only one God for the Christians, but this doesn't necessarily mean that other people will be condemned because they are not Christians. I understand that for some this could be at the verge of blasphemy, but it is definitely very rational: I mean, how can we just say that our God is the only God for every single human being? And what if we were wrong? What if the only God was Allah? No, I believe that whoever is Christian will be saved by the God he believes in, and whoever belongs to other religions will be saved by their own God.

With this said, while I might go to church every now and then, and while I'd like to believe that there is something else after life, at the same time I think that religions were born only to give answers to people. But once Darwin started to explain his evolution theory (accepted everywhere), religion started to lose its meaning. I don't necessarily believe that at the beginning it was Adam and Eve. I believe that we come from primates! The Church doesn't have a position about it, also because they have no way to explain the evolution theories taking into account God. Unless of course they said that God created the world, and that's about it... or maybe that he put some bacteria in the water or whatnot.

Also, religion was good to give a moral guidance to man. Christianity says to not have sex before marriage: how many people do you think respect that? I am the first one who admits to have not respected that. Why? Well, because morality values are changing, and we cannot accept something that could have been valid centuries ago. In 1800 girls had to be virgin until marriage, or nobody would have taken them; men did not necessarily have to wait until marriage.

Religion also says to never wish to have the woman/man of another person: how many people we know are or have always respected that? I have never cheated on Neil and never will, not only because I love him, but because it is immoral. If you don't love a person anymore, you break up with him/her before fucking someone else.

"Do not kill". Come on, do you really think that a religion has to impose that on you? Killing would be bad, wrong and immoral. People wouldn't do it even if religion didn't exist. Why? Because of course there are laws, and there would be consequences. And besides, those who kill are often the same people who go to church. An example? Take some states of the USA, or take some states of Africa (eg Ghana). They have death penalty over there. And they have killed several people. Now, in the Old Testament, there is that kind of law, but didn't the Lord say not to kill? This means that all those who kill other people are hypocrites. They go to church, but then if the law is to kill someone who has killed another person, they would do it.

Anyway, I am ranting here. But Hardball, I hope I have explained you why I believe that your position, so strong towards religion is wrong. Oh and on a side note, I wouldn't say that the Muslims (even the integralist) are so scarier than the Catholic/Christian integralist. Does everybody remember what they did during the Crusades? Or maybe should I refresh your memory explaining how they impaled and killed in horrid ways those who did not believe in Christ? Was that the famous love that Christ himself had preached? I think not.

Un bacio è un'apostrofo rosa scritto tra le parole "ti amo".

who is one and three (sorry, I don't know how to call that "property" in English, but what I mean is that in the figure of God there are three figures: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost).

That would be the equivalent to our Trinity (three-in-one Godhead).

I mean, how can we just say that our God is the only God for every single human being? And what if we were wrong? What if the only God was Allah? No, I believe that whoever is Christian will be saved by the God he believes in, and whoever belongs to other religions will be saved by their own God.

There is a popular analogy used to show that all religions are valid ways to describe God, which is what you seem to believe.
Religion professors especially love this philosophic analogy, because it equalizes all religions, making all religions equally "true" in their description of God.

If your not familiar with the Elephant analogy (John Hick)- The analogy is this: there are four blind men who discover an elephant. Since the men have never encountered an elephant, they grope about, seeking to understand and describe this new phenomenon. One grasps the trunk and concludes it is a snake. Another explores one of the elephant's legs and describes it as a tree. A third finds the elephant's tail and announces that it is a rope. And the fourth blind man, after discovering the elephant's side, concludes that it is, after all, a wall.

Each in his blindness is describing the same thing: an elephant. Yet each describes the same thing in a radically different way.

According to many, this is analogous to the different religions of the world- they are describing the same thing in radically different ways. Thus one should conclude that no individual religion has a corner on truth, but that all should be viewed as essentially equally valid.

Ironically, while the elephant analogy attempts to validate the truth of all religions, if taken to its logical conclusion the story really shows that all religions fail to identify God adequately.

According to laws of logic and the historical realities of Scripture, religious pluralism cannot be true.

Now are ye undeceived! Welcome, again, my children, to the communion of your race!

For this reason, I don't necessarily think that there is only one single God.

Let me state to begin with that I am a Catholic Christian, so in theory I should be the most conservative about Christianity and all the other things that people think about the Catholics (most things are sort of wrong however).

They just dont go. I suggest you question your religious beliefs if you dont believe in one of the most crucial creeds of the faith.

Looking at all the other religions and what they have to "offer" just doesnt attract me:

•Hindus believe in 300,000 gods.
•Buddhists say there is no deity.
•Muslims believe in a powerful but unknowable & unmerciful God.

•Christians believe in a God who is loving and approachable.

In Hinduism a person is on his or her own trying to gain release from karma. In Buddhism it is an individual quest at being free from desire. And in Islam, the individual follows religious laws for the sake of paradise after death.
In Jesus' teaching, you see a personal relationship with a personal God - a relationship that carries over into the next life.

Why Christianity? Look throughout the major world religions and you'll find that Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius and whoever else all identified themselves as teachers or prophets. None of them ever claimed to be equal to God. Surprisingly, Jesus did. That is what sets Jesus apart from all the others. He said God exists and you're looking at Him. Though He talked about His Father in heaven, it was not from the position of separation, but of very close union, unique to all humankind. Jesus said that anyone who had seen Him had seen the Father, anyone who believed in Him, believed in the Father.

He claimed attributes belonging only to God: to be able to forgive people of their sin, free them from habits of sin, give people a more abundant life and give them eternal life in heaven. Unlike other teachers who focused people on their words, Jesus pointed people to himself. He did not say, "follow my words and you will find truth." He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life, no one comes to the Father but through me."

Continuing with the Islam thread- Comparing the Bible & the Qu'ran, one can easily see the difference:

1) Bible- Salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:89)
Qu'ran- Salvation by sincerity and works (3:135; 7:8-9; 21:47; 49:14; 66:8-9)

2)Bible- Man is fallen, a sinner (Rom. 3:23) -Cleary evident.
Right?
Qu'ran- Man is basically good.

3)Bible- Miracles, numerous are witnessed & recorded.
Qu'ran- No Miracles recorded, except they claim the Qur'an is a miracle.

4)Bible- Makes numerous prophecies.
Qu'ran- Makes none.

Not to mention that Jesus has performed the greatest act of love
In John 15:13 Jesus said, “Greater love has no man than this, that he lay his life down for his friend.”

What did Allah ever do?

We can easily see the huge difference between the God of Islam and the God of the Bible. In Islam, God does not love all people. In the Bible, God does love all people. In Islam, Allah did not die for the sins of those who were not his. In the Bible, God did do that. In Islam, Allah has not performed the greatest act of love. In the Bible, God did exactly that.

My question to any Muslim is, "What makes you think that I want to give up my Lord who loves me so much that He would die for me, and did, for a god who has not and cannot perform the greatest act of love?"

Just a thought.

Now are ye undeceived! Welcome, again, my children, to the communion of your race!

This post was edited by Hardballkid on Feb 14, 2006.

Looking at all the other religions and what they have to "offer" just doesnt attract me:

Does that mean to say one should choose the religion that is the most convenient to him?

"*sigh* Some men are really hard to manipulate!" - Orchid

Looking at all the other religions and what they have to "offer" just doesnt attract me:

Does that mean to say one should choose the religion that is the most convenient to him?

Lol this was great null! Really, it got a kick out of me. And, like always, I stand by what you said 100% Lol, I love your sense of humor ;)

Un bacio è un'apostrofo rosa scritto tra le parole "ti amo".

It wasn't meant as a joke, but thanks :-)

"*sigh* Some men are really hard to manipulate!" - Orchid

Well, I know you didn't mean it as a joke. In fact, the correct way to describe it would be a sarcastic comment. And I just so happen to like your sarcastic comments a lot. But of course I can't deny the fact that it put a smile on my face, because it got me thinking that sometimes we really think alike. I would have written the same thing myself, if you hadn't beat me on time :)

Un bacio è un'apostrofo rosa scritto tra le parole "ti amo".

If your not familiar with the Elephant analogy (John Hick)- The analogy is this: there are four blind men who discover an elephant. Since the men have never encountered an elephant, they grope about, seeking to understand and describe this new phenomenon. One grasps the trunk and concludes it is a snake. Another explores one of the elephant's legs and describes it as a tree. A third finds the elephant's tail and announces that it is a rope. And the fourth blind man, after discovering the elephant's side, concludes that it is, after all, a wall.

Of course, then we could all be blind men groping an elephant in the dark while the real god is wondering what the hell we're doing.

"If I die of a heart attack eating bacon, I'll be a happy man." -My father

Looking at all the other religions and what they have to "offer" just doesnt attract me:
Does that mean to say one should choose the religion that is the most convenient to him?

Not at all. Intially thats why it put it in quotation marks, meaning to change it. Anyways, it was just piss poor wording on my part.

Thanks for the observation/correction.

Now are ye undeceived! Welcome, again, my children, to the communion of your race!

Sorry Rosy but that is an ideology I can't go along with.

Your choice. :)

Ecumenicalism, however, is less about finding the core of agreement as it is about compromising the core. Everything becomes negotiable. Opinions and convictions become interchangable. The Bible becomes a nuisance. Unity at any price is not unity at all.

Again, your opinion, and possibly that of many others, but there are also those who differ, myself included.

You see to ride the ecumenical bandwagon, one must throw Truth overboard. To agree to ecumenism is to agree to confusion. God is not the author of confusion. He is Truth, there is no error in Him, and He calls no one to preach a mixture, or to join with it.

... also your opinion; mine is different...that's pretty clear. Oh well, such is life. To hear him tell it though, God did "call" my Dad; but it could have been a miscommunication between him and God. ;p

The ecumenical movement wants nothing to do with the Christ of the Bible.

Again...your opinion, and probably that of everyone in your congregation. Everyone is different.

As a Christian...it is not about being accepted by people...it is about being acceptable with God.

Mm.

I understand the desire for peace on Earth, however, religious pluralism is not an option.

mmmmmm.

I have no desire to argue. You've stated your case, I've stated mine. I simply made a suggestion that maybe we could all learn to get along. I pretty much go along with Ecumenicalism and PLUR, but then...that is redundant. And saying that it is redundant is redundant. Which is even more redundant. :DDDD

Personally, I'm done with the conversation. Please pardon my humorous sarcasm. We won't agree. Period.

But, I like your name, and thanks for the suggested translation of the Koran from your other response to me. Nice to meet you again, Elijah, and to know your true name. :D

If mountain goats like living at high elevations, why do none live in high rise apartment buildings?

This post was edited by rosyxxx on Feb 13, 2006.

I found what you wrote quite interesting, and am inclined to do more research.

I was asked what translation of the Koran I would suggest to be read. I myself have not read all of the book(most of it though); however, I plan to finish it when I get more time to do so.

It has once been stated that "... The Qur'an cannot be translated. ...The book is here rendered almost literally and every effort has been made to choose befitting language… It can never take the place of the Qur'an in Arabic, nor is it meant to do so..."

With all that aside, here are two translations which I have heard to be the most accurate:

1986
Khatib, M.M., The bounteous Koran: A Translation of Meaning and Commentary (London, 1986). 1 edn.

+An authentic and faithful translation of the Qur'an in readable, fluent English. Contains a historically based 'Introduction' discussing Islam, the Qur'an and Sirah, and brief yet insightful notes on the circumstantial setting and the meaning of certain Qura'nic allusions and expressions.
=Suffers from a few inaccuracies in translation.

(& which I have)
"The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an," Text, Translation and Commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, 1934.

(*Both by Muslims)

It is necessary that one reads the Hadith (the actual spoken words of Muhammad). They go hand in hand in revealing the religions hypocrisy and contradictive nature of the religion.

Here are some facts one should know before picking up a copy of the Koran (thus understanding the nature of its interpretations):

*90% of the Muslim world does not know Arabic
(That is because most who have accepted the faith are of the European, African and American nationality)
*70% of the remaining 10% do not comprehend the classic Arabic of the Qu’ran.
(That is because Arabic is a living language- it has evolved and changed over the centuries)
*The Arabic of the original Koran might as well be a dead language because of the languages evolution.

Well, they you are. Mind you I am no Islamic scholar or Arabic professor, however, from my modest knowledge of the religion, above is my suggestions.

So, I do encourage you to pck up a copy- to read it & weep (either because of its dogmatic words or because you fear for your life).

Now are ye undeceived! Welcome, again, my children, to the communion of your race!

Given these basic teachings of Islam there is little reason to be surprised at what the Muslim world does.

You can find exactly the same kind of stuff in the Christian bible.

(I'm taking the King James version here, just because I dig the old-fashioned language)

Kill people who don't listen to priests:
"And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the LORD thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel." (Deuteronomy 17:12)

Kill the gays:
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)

Kill fortune tellers:
"A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:27)

Kill nonbelievers:
"He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed." (Exodus 22:20)

Kill more nonbelievers:
"That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman." (2 Chronicles 15:13)

If you find a priest of another religion, slaughter his whole town:
"If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, Certain men, [...] are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods [...] Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. 16 And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city" (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)

Kill people who work on Sundays:
"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 31:15)

For a more creative interpretation, check out Martin the Satanic Racoon explaining you God's most creative curses and other interesting Bible verses.

Now if uninformed Muslims judged all Westerners only by reading the Christian Bible, what kind of impression would they get from us?

"*sigh* Some men are really hard to manipulate!" - Orchid

Thanks null, for finding Bible passages that point out how contradictory the Bible can be...I have to confess, I rewrote a few of my sentences in that one post responding to the quotes from the Koran that Hardballkid drew up, because I went back and read them, and thought that I didn't want to come under fire from people for saying that the Bible contradicts itself. But it does, and alas *sighs*, it's just my fear of not being able to respond correctly to people's ire that made me carefully reword my writing.

So, the point is: Almost every religion likely has a lot of contradictory tenets and wording in their sacred texts. Yet you meet people from so many different religions who CAN 'coexist' and tolerate each other...it must mean that they "go behind the scenes" of their respective religions, so to speak, and try to get at the root of their faith, which generally speaking teaches them to care about other people.

Funny, that word COEXIST. There is a story behind it.

On the 4th of this month, around 6-7 p.m., I went to have dinner at a Thai restaurant with one of my friends who is Muslim, as well as Palestinian. We ended up talking about how it seems sometimes that the Universe has a method to it's madness when you get certain illnesses. He called the Universe: God, and then apologized. He said, "it's just a term." I said, "I know," and referred him to a book I was reading about Georg Cantor, who propounded "continuum theory", and was instrumental in delineating the set of Infinite numbers. (You're supposed to laugh here...;p) I pointed out how, by the time Cantor was in the nuthouse, he was meditating for hours on the Infinite, the same way those who studied the Kaballah do. Btw, Georg Cantor is Jewish.

My friend always gets a little strained when talking about anything that has to do with the Jewish faith, because he's watched his family have their vineland that they owned for 100 years taken from them to be given to Jewish settlers, with no compensation. His family, now here, has had to start from scratch. They had money, i.e., land, and now it is gone. He has supported them off and on, financially, since they have been living in the U.S. For him to only get a "pained look" when thinking about Israel, is really something. He doesn't hate Jewish people.

In fact, when I told him about Palestinian director Elia Suleiman's movie: "Divine Intervention", he wanted very much to see it. I told him about one of the last scenes in Suleiman's movie, where he is sitting at a stoplight in a car next to a car driven by a Jewish man wearing a yamuka, who has covered his car with bumper-stickers stating things like: "Free Israel". Sulieman, who acts in his own movie, puts a set of Blues Brothers shades on, pops a tape in the deck, rolls down his driver's-side window, and peers down the end of his nose from behind his shades at the Jewish guy in the car, while the stereo plays Screamin' Jay Hawkins version of : I Put a Spell on You. If you know the lyrics, it will make sense. It's about a woman telling her man to stop cheating on her.

This is funny. And the movie was meant to be funny, but in a painful sort of way...because the whole Middle East situation is funny in a painful sort of way. By the end of the film, Sulieman has watched his father die, in the midst of chaos, and sits in the kitchen with his mother, watching a pressure-cooker begin to whistle. The implication being: When is she gonna blow? When is Islam gonna blow? When is Judaism gonna blow? When is Christianity gonna blow? Or will "God" intervene? And will anyone listen?

On a certain level, if you look at the news all of the time, you just get numb. It may be Ramadan, but that doesn't mean that my rather consistent news-fasting has anything to do with the Muslim faith. I just don't want to either be numb, or be irrate.

I find that, personally, the way events have conspired to make me have to shy away from the NAO has been good for me. Now that I find myself with an unexpected month of time left on my DSL account, and also find myself sick and down for the count, unable to keep the hasty pace that I was keeping...it has made me sit up and take notice of this situation.

Anyway, by the time I left dinner on the 4th with my friend, and was driving home thinking about our conversation about different faiths, and how it is all "One", I looked up and saw a bumper-sticker on a car. And it reminded me, oddly, of the bumper-stickered car in Suleiman's movie. Only, it took my muddled and tired brain a bit to get what the letters on the bumper-sticker were spelling out:

C-O-E-X-I-S-T

The "C" was the moon-and-star symbol of Islam.
The "O" was a peace sign.
The "E" was, I believe, for 'ecumenical'?
The "X" was the Star of David.
The "i" looked almost like a pole with a waning moon on it, no idea....
The "S" was like a snake (assume the Goddess religions...)
And the "T", you guessed it: was a Christian cross.

That pretty much sums it up, doesn't it?

If mountain goats like living at high elevations, why do none live in high rise apartment buildings?

This post was edited by rosyxxx on Feb 10, 2006.