Well, we are back up and running here at PYY. The trip was a comedy of errors, but overall it was a nice getaway with Mrs. Sunsett and not to be regretted in anyway, shape, or form. Peace, rest, and recreation are always items to be coveted in a crazy world that demands so much.
As I seek to get back into the news cycle, here are some things I have found to be hot off the press. And as is usually the case around here, I cannot resist putting my two-cents worth into the mix along with the usual mix of healthy skepticism and sarcasm. We will divide these stories into two categories, things that matter and things that don't.
First, the important stuff:
Sarkozy Seeks Ban On Burqas
Last week, the story was about Scientology and how certain sectors of French society are wanting to ban it. This week, it's about the burqas and how certain secular elements are wanting to ban it.
While I do not agree with many of the teachings of Scientology (or the cultish nature its leadership imposes on its members) and almost none of the doctrines of Islam (or the oppressive nature), I am not a fan of government interference in any religion. I do not live in France, so I guess I have no real vested interest in this. But, as many of the old regulars know here, we used to have some French commenters who liked to proclaim just how tolerant French society was/is, attempting to contrast it with what they percieved to be American intolerance. I can't help but wonder what they think of this and how they would go about defending it.
Iranian Revolutionary Guard Warns Protestors
On one hand, we wonder if this is a bluff. From what we have gathered, these are some huge rallies and would be very difficult to control without massive bloodshed at the hands of those who have the guns. On the other hand, we are dealing with an oppressive regime that already has blood on its hands and is quite desperate to keep the reins of power. They do not seem to care about innocent people's lives and may opt for action that will make Tiananmen Square look like a frolic in the park.
North Korea Accusing Obama Of Nuclear War Plans
Yeah, that's it. Why didn't I see it sooner? Obama is a war monger. He frees Gitmo detainees, takes forever to make a statement on Iran, wants to speak unconditionally with the Iranian leadership, visits nations hostile to the US and Israel, and is secretly wanting a nuclear conflict with NK. Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?
Now, let's look at the things that we could all live well, without knowing and caring:
Perez Hilton Attacked
The man who made such a big deal out of Carrie Prejean's answer at the Miss Universe pageant, an answer she had every right to, has opened his obnoxious mouth one too many times. Like I say, this is usually a non-story here at PYY, but it just goes to show that what goes around comes back around, or you reap what you sow. Like any cheap gossip columnist these days, the man has said some really nasty things about a lot of people, some true and some not true. Now, Perezy-Poo has finally come to realize that not everyone thinks he's very important.
15 comments:
I can't help but wonder what they think of this and how they would go about defending it.
They would argue that this is what happens when you elect a right-wing extremist on the order of George Bush, notwithstanding the fact that Sarkozy is closer to Obama than Bush was. The problem addressed in France, however, is not unlike those confronting every nation: competing interests. Do you think the US government would immediately recognize Sunsett’s Church of the Almighty simply because you prepared stationary with that heading, or would they expect more from you before granting you tax-exempt status? As to the wearing of burkhas, does the state have a legitimate interest in knowing who (or what) is under that long, draping attire? Perhaps only when these garments have been used in the past to hide explosive vests, and public safety is valued over individual freedom of expression. Try walking into the White House with a .44 strapped to your leg, even if you do have a license to carry.
They do not seem to care about innocent people's lives and may opt for action that will make Tiananmen Square look like a frolic in the park.
I have a post scheduled for tomorrow on this; it may interest you. But let us not walk away from the table suffering from erroneous suppositions. What innocent people are you talking about? Do you mean those who, in spite of threats of severe government crackdown went into the streets anyway? Do you wonder if there is not some organization that would dearly love to see more violence? Do you suppose that these people are demonstrating because they want a government like ours? You could be wrong in each of these.
As to North Korea: I have never heard anything from those people that makes any sense. I think you have unreasonable expectations, sir. We might ask, however, “What do North Korea and Perez Hilton has in common?” The answer is, they both need an ass whipping.
//You could be wrong in each of these.//
At any time with any utterance I make, I could be wrong.
But the Iranian regime has innocent blood on their hands from way back. Innocent, here, is a relative term.
The Israelis killed at the hands of Hamas and Hezbollah, two organizations sponsored by this Iranian government, were (for the purposes of this discussion) innocents. The people who were summarily executed without a fair trial (as part of a purge of the Shah's people), some of them may have been innocent.
Which leads us back to today. If the Iranians do unleash on people who are protesting, what would you deem them guilty of? And, would it be a charge worthy of death? If not, then these people are innocents.
//“What do North Korea and Perez Hilton has in common?” The answer is, they both need an ass whipping.//
One down, one to go. Eh?
"we used to have some French commenters who liked to proclaim just how tolerant French society was/is, attempting to contrast it with what they percieved to be American intolerance. I can't help but wonder what they think of this and how they would go about defending it. "
Why, they would rationalize it of course with their superior intellect.
Now pass me another Bud Light!
//Now pass me another Bud Light!//
Sorry. All I have is Spaten in the fridge. But you are welcome to it.
I posted on the burqas in France also and took a similar stance. I have to wonder where the line is between public interest and religious freedom
There are many who assert that the burka is NOT a part of the 'religion'..that it's a cultural thing...they can't let a man see an elbow or he might be whipped into sexual frenzies.
Many don't believe Scientology is a religion, either. Europeans have a terrible time there with them; there are two books written in Germany of 2 women who were literally naerly killed for having left and they discuss in those books some they know who did have 'accidents' and died. There are some VERY scary stories about this cult in Europe.
On the burqas, you know what happens when the gov't tries to legislate basic things like how to dress: many people will just do it more. This type of legislation can have the effect of radicalizing, e.g., burqa-clad women who would otherwise resent the mysoginists (brothers and fathers) who make them wear it and the ideology that commands it.
Spaten?!?! Pass me a Sam Adams, please.
//I have to wonder where the line is between public interest and religious freedom//
It's blurred somewhat, only by the fact that France has made it a point to advocate against the Scientology sect. I am for secular governments, but I am against governments meddling and trying to define what is an acceptable faith.
//Many don't believe Scientology is a religion, either.//
I read L. Ron Hubbard's Dianetics many years ago and found some of it enlightening and worthy of consideration. On the other hand, I found a lot of it to be in the ozones. I always maintain that you can learn from almost any denomination, you just have to filter out the garbage.
//On the burqas, you know what happens when the gov't tries to legislate basic things like how to dress: many people will just do it more.//
Good point, Greg. Rebels without a cause love it, when one falls into their laps.
//Spaten?!?!//
Spaten
Drink one of those and you'll forget about Sammy.
Hi LAS !
It appears to Amerloque that burquas are simply an expression of the faith, rather than the faith itself. The question then becomes 'freedom of expression of religion', rather than 'freedom of religion'.
It also seems to Amerloque that burquas present a clear danger, since the wearer is unidentifable. There is no substantial physical difference between a Zorro-type mask, a latex mask imitating Bill Clinton, and a burqua.
Prohibiting 'hoodies' in UK shopping centers is, roughly, in the same ballpark ...
Since Islam doesn't believe in the separation of Chu(rch and State, perhaps that is the real issue ...
Best,
L'Amerloque
Hi Amerloque,
It's a sticky issue, for sure. The issue of security and being able to identify the wearer is the most plausible one, but it wasn't used. The reason was the debasement of the women in French society. Yet, debasement can come from many different things, not just clothing forced upon them. The question them becomes, is Sarkozy prepared to address the other forms of oppression imposed by men on women?
Post a Comment