Job Discussion Forums

[arioch36]

International Herald Tribune article that i personally enjoyed, from an angle I appreciated, in giving me, maybe, some understanding of the Islam perspective. Or at least his.



http://www.iht.com/articles/122346.html

I would welcome the input of others, with more noble minds then mine.

Actually the feelings he invoked reminds me somewhat of the feelings I get sometimes at Dave's ESL cafe, when people who have never met me try to paint me into a little box because I dare mention once or twice I believe in Christ (Not that I claim to be a Christian, because my heart has much sin). They don't believe in what i believe in, but then they try to tell me what i should or should not do. Who is the intolerant one? I

Such posters speak of tolerance, and that us "born again bigots (quote from ShengYangGerry-china forum) want to force everyone to believe what we believe. But like this article mentions, what they really mean by tolerance, is that a person can speak his views as long as the views don't mention anything about God. Or that, as another poster who openly doesn't worship God said, paraphrase, if you are not a christian the way I think you should be a Christian, you are a bad Christian and bad person

I think Secularism at the risk of religious tolerance is a sure fire way to breed people of "religion" who are intolerant.

Yes, and Religion that seeks to force what to think, does the same. jesus never forced anyone to folow him

[arioch36]

Now, my first reaction to france's new law, was that it was good, because i read of Muslim women whose job was to welcome tourists would refuse to shake hands, or even talk ? to men

[DAN SEBOLD]

Well, gee. If Christians are such loving and tolerant people, then why did the family priest make a pass at me when I was twelve? Why did the nuns slap my fingers for no reason? Why did my mother beat me for masturbation? Why do Christians preach Seventh Heaven feminism and sexual equality, then turn around and tell their little boys that they can't wear short shorts, bikini speedoes, etc, like their sisters can?

Why do Christian feminists protest against Hustler's pornography of female mutilation, then turn around and send their sons into combat to be really mutilated? Why did the Christians drop the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagassaki? Why did they fire bomb Tokyo?

Why do Christians talk about valuing diversity, then turn around and invest in slave labor in China and child slave labor in Pakistan, or enforce economic sanctions that have killed over a half million children in Iraq in the last ten years? Why did good Christians like Ronald Reagan and George Bush sell chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein to be used to kill 5,000 Kurbs at Halbja and 50,000 more Kurds in the Anfal Campaign back in the 1980's. Why don't the Christians in America care about this? Too busy making money, too busy with their investments.

If the US government is so secular, then why do they have military chaplains who preach about "our religion?" Why did they pass out Desert Storm Camy Bibles during the Gulf War and no camy Korans or Baghavad Gitas? Why after the first Gulf War was children's art posted in the military hospital at Fort Meade with depictions of B 52's dropping bombs on Iraq and proclaiming that God was on our side?

Why is it when I go to a beach in Muslim Turkey I can wear my Speedoes with no problem, but if I go to a beach in Minneapolis, the Christians harass me and call me a faggot? Why are the Muslims in countries like Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Malaysia, and Indonesia more sexually tolerant than Christians in Minnesota?

Why is it when I go interview for a job in the TEFL field I am constantly being screaned for my religious beliefs? Is it because Christians believe that the TEFL profession is a way of preparing the world for globalized Christian capitalsim? Is that what they want? My advice to the Muslims is to keep resisting, keep rejecting Christianity. It's a dangerous relgion.
Allah akbar.

[DAN SEBOLD]

Why was the word for sexual self stimulation edited out of my last post?
Because Dave's ESL Cafe is an organization of prudish Christians-- doing its job to use the TEFL profession to spread right wing globalized Christian capitalism and sexist intolerance around the world. Ask Dave. Dave believes in Jesus. Doesn't he?

[Glenski]

[Canuck2112]

The other night, I was very pleased to locate Guinness Stout in Japan. I'm aware it is readily available in the larger, metropolitan areas, but living in a small city I was pleasantly surprised to find it in cans AND on tap!! The draught Guinness is somewhat more expensive, almost prohibitively so, so I decided to go with the can. Due to the addition of the "floating widget", which maintains Guinness' proper nitrogenation, the can is a worthy tribute to the Guinness name, and at a reasonable cost! My next search will be for Beamish Irish Stout, a tasty beer with a little more "bite" than Guinness, although sharing a similar alcohol content.

[basiltherat]

i hear the taliban are recruiting again.
rgrds
basil

[arioch36]

That's interesting I don't know if Canuck was responding from another thread, where I admitted i can not handle Irish Stout?

I have no idea what post Dan Sebold is responding to, because the thread is about France's secular law, which prohibits the religious items of all religions, Muslim, Jew, Christianity (Wonder if hindu's wiil be allow to wear the thing on their forehead?) But I guess his response makes my point.

uh, Dan, Earth to Dan Dan...The article is written by a Muslim, not a Christian

Yes Dan, other people are to blame for everything.

[dyak]

[johnslat]

Even though I've been off the sauce for two and a half years now, I still have to agree with Housman:

"Say, for what were hop-yards meant,
Or why was Burton built on Trent?
Oh many a peer of England brews
Livelier liquor than the Muse,

And malt does more than Milton can
To justify God's ways to man.
Ale, man, ale's the stuff to drink
For fellows whom it hurts to think."


"Terence, This Is Stupid Stuff"
from
A Shropshire Lad (1896)
by
A. E. Housman 1859-1936

Regards,
John

[leeroy]

To be honest I feel that I've over-done Guinness recently. There are some good independent pubs in my area that do other stouts - and it is more than about time that I tried them.

I am pleasantly surprised to hear that they have "real" Guinness in Japan. Commonly abroad I've seen fizzy sweet Guinness in bottles. Suffice to say, anything that's fizzy and sweet is not Guinness.

arioch,

The author of the article is (I think) going on the assumption that "Islam in moderation" is the goal for all - especially in secular and/or religiously diverse countries (such as France). Extremely orthodox regimes like the Taliban, for example, would have a hard time mixing it up with Christians, Jews and Hindus in the same neighbourhood... I am also going on this assumption � fanatical and/or extremely orthodox religion brings more harm than good�

But while the not-wearing-of headscarves might be a symptom of moderate beliefs - the relationship is not reciprocal. ("Oh well Chirac says we can't wear headscarves - I might as well give up my ambition to be a suicide bomber...") And as the writer goes at pains to illustrate - his own mother wore a headscarf through her own personal choice, and she was far from being a victim or a fanatic of Islam.

I read another article (by a French muslim woman, as it happens) � who was tentatively for the banning of headscarves in schools. The muslim population of France see themselves as �separate� from the rest of French society. They live in their own neighbourhoods, speak their own language and socialise and marry with their own people. The fact that they wear headscarves at school and others don�t might only serve to exaggerate this �separation� � it keeps the muslims looking different, and thus, somehow feeling different from the rest of society. In the long run, perhaps the banning of headscarves will bring the youth of France closer together � as religion difference will seem less prominent.

If western governments want to coerce, er�, convince muslims that being moderate is the best way to go � then how? Poverty, I hear, is a precursor to fanatical religious belief. Fair enough, I suppose, the extreme stresses that poverty brings might produce a more intense need for comfort and support in the form of religion. So if we get rid of poverty, no-one will have nutty religious beliefs any more and everything will be cool � right?

But the 9/11 bombers were mostly well-off and well-educated. Something else was going on in their heads � it wasn�t a last strike from some desperate under-educated victims of poverty. Most of them had lived in Europe for some time � something happened there to make them snap. Here�s the crux of it:

Islam states that it is the only/best way to live your life. �If you listen to the word of Allah, and follow these rules � then you will be the best and everything will be cool for you.� Much like most religions I believe, it is naturally self-promoting. But a quick look around the world will quickly show that strict adherence to Islam, generally, doesn�t bring you as much as it says it should. An Earthquake of a similar intensity as that in Iran (killing 50,000+) also happened in California, killing no-body (The Evening Standard, last week sometime). Why would the infidels survive while the good, God-fearing muslims died in their thousands? Why are western countries more affluent, why do they have fairer systems of government and better public services? Why is �quality of life� better, generally, for those in the west who, for the most part, don�t care about Islam?

There are two possible answers.

One, Islam was wrong. Being a muslim is not the sole pre-requisite to having a successful life (and wider society). It might say it in the Koran, but in fact it isn�t. The infidels� notion of doing things (like building earthquake-proof buildings) as opposed to hoping that Allah will make them happen is more productive.

Two, the infidels are wrong. Muslims, by following the Koran�s teachings, are doing everything right � and so they deserve to be �on-top�, somehow. The infidels have stolen what rightfully belongs to Islam � and as such are the aggressors and the enemy.

It doesn�t need to be said, really, that it is a lot more comforting to go for the second answer than the first � although in my own (biased) opinion � I would choose answer number one. Even though I have ranted on for far longer than I should, I still feel as if I have over-simplified. This is a complex situation indeed!

[shenyanggerry]

Arioch36, by born-again-bigots I am referring to those who use religion to try to impose their views; those who do not recognize anyone else's views as valid.

I count amongst my in-laws both born-again-bigots and an ordained minister. The minister IS NOT in any way a bigot. She is a kind, loving person who shows her Christianity by example. She does not seek to impose her views on others; she offers them to those that are receptive.

[Canuck2112]

Nah, I'm just being a d1ck.

[guty]

I think the purpose of the French laws are to keep overt religious symbols of any faith out of school, to ensure the secularity of state education.
There is no ban on students at privately funded Muslim schools wearing whatever they like.
Here in the Gulf there are some educated Muslims that rightly do not see this as an attack on their faith, but as the French government acting to preserve, what it sees as, its own heritage.
When this is taken as the starting point there is room for intelligent debate.

[Teacher in Rome]

<<I think the purpose of the French laws are to keep overt religious symbols of any faith out of school, to ensure the secularity of state education.>>

But why is this a problem in France? Why can the only "identity" permitted be "French" - and presumably "non-Muslim"? It doesn't seem to be a problem in other European countries where you often see a class of primary schoolchildren made up of a diversity of ethnic and religious backgrounds. I've not heard any minister in British government say that wearing "symbols" of religion is inherently non-British.

Personally, I find it ridiculous that a country is so worried that it's "identity" might be eroded, that it bans schoolchildren from wearing scarves, yarmulkes, crosses and so on.