Politics As Usual

[Not Me]

Originally posted by baltassoc
the protestant work ethic

What are you saying about Catholics?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Not Me
What are you saying about Catholics?

women can't be priests

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
How 'bout this:

The average muslim woman is treated less well in life than is the average christian woman.

If both women are in Indonesia? If both women are in China? If both women are in Gaza? If both women are in the Phillipines?

You will win this argument in the hearts and minds of most Americans quite easily, because our vision of the life of the "average" Muslim woman is in Saudi Arabia, and the "average" Christian woman is in the U.S. Would I like to wake up tomorrow as a woman in Arkansas or in Saudi Arabia? The answer is easy, even for me, a moral relativist. But Christianity should not claim credit for the superiority of life for women in the U.S. Would the widespread growth of Christianity in Saudi Arabia in 611 A.D. have resulted in better conditions for women than we see today? I doubt it, unless you're thinking about salvation (praise Jebus!).

BTW, if Islam had prospered in a place with gradual exploitation of natural resources and concurrent growth like the U.S., such a nation would likely be a thing to behold. The devout Muslim's personal discipline/work ethic/business savvy is impressive, when properly applied. Those fuckers are up at dawn to pray. Oh, except there's the compound interest thing. Oh, well.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
In order to ensure I'm not on the business end of a Turing Test gone horribly, horribly awry, I need to know your basic principles first.

Is a religious-based rule that facially treats women differently from men sexist?

Yes, unless it is legitimately based on an anatomical difference and doesn't put a woman in an inferior or disadvantageous position relative to men. I cannot think of any, but maybe there are some that I don't know about.

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Must religiously-based rules be facially neutral with regard to sex to avoid your ire?

Except for those that are legitimately based on anatomical differences and don't put women in an inferior or disadvantageous position relative to men, yes.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I was with you (sort of) until you got to the part about dogmatic turns in Islam "creat[ing]" a period of economic stagnation. Until about 1880, Islam prospered in regions of the world where the natural resources were, um, overlooked. They did not have an industrial revolution as a result.

I was refering to the first dogmatic shifts of the late middle ages that moved the center of rapid advancement in sciences and the arts from the Islamic world to Western Europe. I'm no scholar of 19th century Middle East, so I'll take your word on the worsening effect of the exploitation of oil, but the colonization of the Islamic world by Europe was long underway by that point already, and largely due to a period of stagnation on the part of the Islamic world. In the 12th Century, the Islamic culture was the most dynamic one in the West, and certainly controlled large areas that one would consider rich in non-oil resources (3/4 the Mediterranean, Spain and Portugal, and part of France, much of the souther portion of Eastern Europe, Turkey, Iraq, Iran and a substantial part of the Indian subcontinent). 500 years later empires were built out of small pieces of Islam's domains (Spain, France) that would eventually dominate and colonize much of the Islamic center. Islam, like the Amish, acheived a certain level of comfort and then stayed there while their neighbors passed them by. The Amish are lucky that we Baltimorons don't view Lancaster County, PA the same way Napoleon viewed Egypt.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
women can't be priests

I was addressing the "protestant work ethic" statement. Don't Catholics have a similar work ethic to protestants?

BTW - Some protestant sects don't allow women to be spiritural leaders.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
I do see Islam as a code that dissuades from outward, material and technical achievement far more so than christianity, and most of the learned commentary I've seen either supports this view, or at the least doesn't refute it. For this reason, there is an economic handicap to traditional Islamic culture.

Hunh? I fail to see how a society that managed to conquer as much of the known world as Alexander the Great, and whose achievements put the Christian West to shame for centuries, is inherently handicapped in relation to Christianity. If anything, it is handicapped in relation to secular modernity. In other words, your sources suck.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Not Me
I was addressing the "protestant work ethic" statement. Don't Catholics have a similar work ethic to protestants?

BTW - Some protestant sects don't allow women to be spiritural leaders.

Good thing your science and math regimen didn't addle your pretty little head with any US history. Moron.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Not Me
What are you saying about Catholics?

Setting aside the obvious issues with the treatment of women in the Catholic church that Hank already pointed out, I'm saying that it was not the Catholics who drove the mass expansion of Europe and North America's economies in the 17th and 18th centuries. Which isn't to say they didn't participate, but only that their participation was in reaction to an ethic that arose form protestant dogmas. Protestants started working hard because Luther and Calvin told them that was how to get into heaven. Catholics started working harder because a) a little bit of Calvin rubbed off and b) their protestant neighbors were getting rich, and the Catholics are no fools.

It's not a criticism of the Catholic religion, but there wasn't the dogmatic impetus that there was for early protestants.

ETA: See, Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

[Slave Once Again]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
Moron.

Hey. let's keep the ad homily flames over on the fashion board. This place is for civilised political intercourse.

[sgtclub]

To continue the prior topic . . .

I've been trying to educate you people on this for a while now. There are many conservatives that have been anti-war and/or critical of Bush's handling of Iraq. Kristol is one of them. I find him to be a rational, principled guy, though his predictions are often wrong.

Brit Hume is the best journalist on TV these days. NotMe is right, it is very clear when he is acting in his "objective" reporters role and when he is acting as a pundit. - he even sits in different seats, depending on the role he is playing.

I think those of you who don't watch Fox News would like it. Yes there are conservative pundits on there, but it is clear who the pundits are. There are also liberal pundits as well - Juan Williams (NPR), Mara Liason (NPR), CC Collins (Time), Mort Kondrake (Roll Call) to name a few. Name another major news outlet with this kind of balance.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Hunh? I fail to see how a society that managed to conquer as much of the known world as Alexander the Great, and whose achievements put the Christian West to shame for centuries, is inherently handicapped in relation to Christianity. If anything, it is handicapped in relation to secular modernity. In other words, your sources suck.

In but not of, sonny. Your vaunted golden age achievements were managed by cultures taken over by Islamics, and only in spite of Islam. In other words, your sources suck.

[sgtclub]

http://www.wistv.com/global/story.as...Type=Printable

[Sen Hollins alleged antisemitic article]

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I doubt it, unless you're thinking about salvation (praise Jebus!).

A most poorly-aimed quip.

[sgtclub]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...1507&printer=1

Not sure on whether I agree with this, but I think I do.