View Single Post
Old 01-04-2011, 11:53 AM   #917
boxcorner
»(°±°)«
boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.boxcorner ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
boxcorner's Avatar
 
Posts: 826
Karma: 775629
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: divisive reader
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGB View Post
Quite a difference. Apparently the habit is traditionally worn by both monks and nuns, and it is not dictating what regular believers should wear, and certainly not what non-believers should wear. So, yes, there's a vast difference ...
My question was, "Do you object to these groups: the Catholic and Anglican churches, and their habits?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGB View Post
... Yes, there's a vast difference as I mentioned above. It's not about "choosing", it's about whether or not the patriarchs in a Patriarchy dictates what is "correct" and what is not, usually using interpretations of scripture ...
My question was, "Do you think there is any significant difference, between a nun who chooses to wear a habit, and a Muslim woman who chooses to wear a hijab, apart from their different religions?"

You seem to believe that all Muslim women who cover their heads with cloth are forced to do so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AGB View Post
... I'm not sure what you mean. It seems you are defending the likes of nguirado's rights to dictate what other people can wear, read, behave, show, based on his religious morals ...
It's a simple enough question, concerning something that you wrote. So, why would you assume that I am defending nguirado's rights to dictate something that you wrote. Surely, that would be illogical.

What I asked was:
Has anyone in this thread, concerning Amazon defending a book about Paedophilia, supported any "society dictating what other groups should wear, how to look, and how to behave, based on their own religious beliefs"?

Those words in italics were written by you, not me or nguirado.
You appear to be making assumptions about someone else's religious beliefs, based on the actions of some fundamentalist groups of the Muslim religion, and then applying them to the religion as a whole. That seems illogical to me. It's like attributing American Christian fundamentalist values to all Christians, or Zionist settlers fundamentalist values to all those who practice Judaism.

When you say, "... the likes of ...", it sounds like you are making a derogatory comment. It implies that you think nguirado's rights differ from anyone else's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGB View Post
... I will form an opinion on the actual judgement ...
My view is, Phillip Greaves is innocent unless he has been convicted of committing a crime.

Last edited by boxcorner; 01-04-2011 at 02:25 PM.
boxcorner is offline