Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Today at School

  1. Mar 24, 2004 #1
    I was in my World Affairs class when my teacher and I were discussing whether or not muslims should be able to wear headscarves and that is when a girl raised her hand and very sincerely and innocently asked: "I thought muslims were another word terrorists." Now, Im not mad, infact, I kinda fealt sorry about the situation, but how can someone slip so far through the cracks like that? Worse yet, I would bet there were other people in my class that were just as uneducated.

    These are voters? I have lost faith.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 24, 2004 #2
    That sucks.
    I doubt she votes.
    Muslims should be able to wear headscarves.
     
  4. Mar 24, 2004 #3
    Actually, she is the type who reciprocates and regurgitates what is told in class, and consequently recieves decent grades, and is heading to college via her instistive parents. Statistics show that college graduates have a high voter rate.
     
  5. Mar 24, 2004 #4
    Maybe she was "just joking"...? (Hopefully?)/(possibly?)
     
  6. Mar 24, 2004 #5
    Unfortunately there are a lot of people out there who think like this.

    As far as the wearing of the hijab- it's culture tradition in many muslim countries that it is obscene for women to expose their faces in public (I've read it's not actually in the Koran, it's just cultural tradition).

    Now in the United States, it's considered, by cultural tradition, obscene for women to expose their breasts in public. I think forcing women against their will to remove their hijab is like forcing women to expose their breasts.
     
  7. Mar 24, 2004 #6
    Well atleast this is Highschool. So there is still hope she will stop being a dumbass later in life.
     
  8. Mar 24, 2004 #7
    Wasn't there a news not too long ago in Saudi where American servicewomen were forced by the Saudi government to wear a headscarf because they're in a Muslim country. They were also Christians, not Muslims to begin with.

    I totally didn't get that, we don't force Muslim women to not wear their headscarf when they're in the US.
     
  9. Mar 24, 2004 #8

    Janitor

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    If the word 'Muslim' is understood to not mean "one who calls himself or herself a Muslim," but rather one who believes every commandment in the Koran is the literal and true word of the god Allah, then it seems to this old fellow that Muslim = terrorist.
     
  10. Mar 24, 2004 #9
    humm...funny here in Ontario, it is pefectly legal for a woman to walk around with her breasts bared, (Gwen Jacobs case) but I would agree that nobody should really be "forced"...but most (what?) 'honest' men will admit that a womans bared skin (can) drives temptation...(Yeah! I know, depends upon what she looks like....shallow...) so having to "keep it covered" is law, over there, because of that, it's a 'hotter' (= Anger incitement) climate too, and 'latitude changes attitudes'...so many reasons we here, in North America, don't even consider....
     
  11. Mar 25, 2004 #10

    FZ+

    User Avatar

    No, then Muslim would just mean fundamentalist. And if he takes "Thou shall not kill" very seriously, he can't actually be a terrorist. Of course, this is straying into one of those "true religion" potholes.
     
  12. Mar 25, 2004 #11
    Indeed, and if the word 'American' is understood to not mean "one who lives in America," but rather one who believes whatever the government tells them to believe then it seems to this fellow that American = terrorist as well. So you see how easily we can arbitrarily assign definitions and make someone look like a terrorist?
     
  13. Mar 25, 2004 #12

    jimmy p

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I have to agree, we respect their cultural ways, but they abuse ours. I mean for instance, if we were deeply offended that they wore headscarves, would the situation be different?
     
  14. Mar 25, 2004 #13
    That's not even close to a good analogy, considering that Islam requires the belief that the Quran is the absolute, perfect, and uncorrupted word of god - and therefore, everything is to be taken literally because god does not make mistakes.

    On the other hand,no where does it state that being American requires such absolute belief in our government.
     
  15. Mar 25, 2004 #14
    You're right, it's not a perfect match, but no analogy is. All things are relative, if you can't see the connection then you have a closed mind. My point is that a person's beliefs are not the concern, both your statement and my alteration are blatant generalizations that simply cannot be drawn logically. How does a person's beliefs define them as a terrorist? It seems to me that their actions should be the concerning factor, not their beliefs. The reason that such blind faith is a problem for Muslims is because of the self-righteous leaders who have used the Koran to force people into their own distorted way of thinking. They are not terrorists because they are Muslims, they are terrorists because they have been fooled into believing the person they follow is a messenger of Allah. The case is no different for the crusaders, in that time and place crusaders were terrorists and the Pope was their Osama. Does that make Christians terrorists? No, only crusaders.
     
  16. Mar 25, 2004 #15
    Here in the US a woman briefly flashed a breast on live TV and people were outraged, forcing people to be fired, delays added to live events, the FCC cracking down on "obscenity." It's sort of an american taliban.
     
  17. Mar 25, 2004 #16
    Oh, so you've read the Koran?

    I feel compelled to remind you that the Bible endorses slavery, even Jesus himself is in favor of it.

    So does it seem to you, old fellow, that christianity = proslavery?
     
  18. Mar 25, 2004 #17

    But unlike the Quran, the bible is not the "all perfect true and absolute word of God". Thus, the bible is able to be moderated, and infered differently. The Quran calls for an absolute adherence, for God makes no errors, so all callings must be true and exact.
     
  19. Mar 25, 2004 #18
    Please where in the Bible does Jesus Promote slavery?? pleeeeeease tell me where!!??
     
  20. Mar 25, 2004 #19

    dduardo

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus

    Dude, give me a break. I think it's this absolute belief junk that pushes people over the edge to commit terrorism. Just relax, do good onto others, and live life to the fullest.

    People would be much happier if they just believed in themselves.
     
  21. Mar 25, 2004 #20

    Janitor

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Chemical,

    No, in fact I have not read the Koran. I have however read English translations of parts of it which make it seem like it is commanding adherents to kill with the sword those who do not believe the same way they do. Is there not something in the Koran about Allah being pleased with the slaughter of 900 (?) Jews as well?

    You ask if "christianity = proslavery." I have not read the Bible since my childhood days of being a believer. I have not believed the Bible in my adult years. So the best I can do for you is to recall that the Old Testament speaks of taking an awl to your slave's ear in order to punch a pattern of holes in it which will identify the slave as belonging to you. That would seem to make Old-Testament Judaism rather pro-slavery, I should think. (I can hear biblical apologists saying something like, "Well until the Lord instructed them to punch holes in the earlobes, slaveowners were carving their initials in the skin of the slaves, so the Lord really was improving the conditions under which the slaves lived, see.")

    As far as the New Testament goes, I can remember nothing specifically pro-slavery, but maybe that just shows that I have forgotten much of the scriptures. Can you enlighten us? I guess you could point to this or that place in the New Testament where Jesus may have said his followers ought to obey Jewish law, and then you could claim that in doing so he was endorsing any pro-slavery sentiments that were in the books now known as the Old Testament.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2004
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Today at School
  1. UN today ? (Replies: 20)

  2. Today's the day! (Replies: 236)

  3. Todays environmentalism (Replies: 34)

  4. Is outrage alive today? (Replies: 32)

Loading...