U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-13-2011, 05:48 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,314,380 times
Reputation: 7407

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad View Post
"We should start with mosques in the U.S., and the government should help promote democracy in places of worship by denying non-profit tax-exempt status called 501(c)3 designation to places of worship that practice gender inequity"

This would could result in loss of tax exemption for Orthodox synagogues. It could I suppose be invoked against ANY denomination that does not ordain women - which would include the Roman Catholic and most Eastern Orthodox churches. Whoever wrote this was not thinking through the implications.

Why can't muslims who want gender equality just start their own mosque?
Check this out and perhaps you can see what happens when you try to start a Mosque. Say Anything Muslim Couple Trying To Build Mosque In Rural North Dakota Meets With Hostility, Bigotry
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-13-2011, 09:35 AM
 
Location: The Port City is rising.
8,817 posts, read 10,731,458 times
Reputation: 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
religious practices can be anything, even illegal activities...I have heard that the courts decided that in matters where religious practices are illegal, the states may do as they see fit, as long as there is a reason other than needless religious persecution. the word "practice" is not included in the first amendment for a very obvious reason, that being that depending on the circumstances, any which practice could be hazardous to the general wellbeing of the people.

You may not be aware of this, but discriminating by gender in a social organizations (as long as you arent commercial establishment selling certain things, like liquor, or accommodations, IIUC) is NOT illegal in the USA. There are gender seperate private schools and colleges(including secular ones) gender seperate health clubs, athletic orgs, etc, etc. This would apparently be specifically aimed at religious orgs, and as such would violate the 1st amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 09:37 AM
 
Location: The Port City is rising.
8,817 posts, read 10,731,458 times
Reputation: 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
Check this out and perhaps you can see what happens when you try to start a Mosque. Say Anything Muslim Couple Trying To Build Mosque In Rural North Dakota Meets With Hostility, Bigotry

I suspect in such a place founding any mosque would be difficult, which is another topic. I am specifically asking in regard to a place where there is a traditional gender segregated mosque - like where I live (where there are many mosques of different varieties, Islamic schools, etc, etc)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Earth
1,480 posts, read 4,485,701 times
Reputation: 1430
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingdomcome1 View Post
It needs to change(and will change) because this is America, not some middle eastern country where women are treated like second class citizens, that's why. This being the norm in mosques is not acceptable. As I have mentioned before in other threads, my Iranian friend who is here in the states cannot enter into a mosque because he is gay. Enough is enough.....This is coming from a Conserative, who abhors discrimination on any level.
Orthadox Jews also seperate men from women. Women aren't even allowed to join the Freemasons - should the government intervene there, too?

You're right, this is America. And if a woman doesn't like the way her religion treats her she can choose another religion. Or if Muslim women want to fight for this change, more power to them. The government should have nothing to do with this.

You sound pretty liberal to me... and this is coming from someone who leans left.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 09:46 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,938,402 times
Reputation: 12178
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
religious practices can be anything, even illegal activities...I have heard that the courts decided that in matters where religious practices are illegal, the states may do as they see fit, as long as there is a reason other than needless religious persecution. the word "practice" is not included in the first amendment for a very obvious reason, that being that depending on the circumstances, any which practice could be hazardous to the general wellbeing of the people.
The constitution wasn't meant to be a dictionary with all possible words in English language included. It is a document designed to provide a framework for governance, and later expanded to ensure that rights are protected against any abuse. The governments don't have limitless power to call anything illegal, which they could by making laws as they wish. Such powers are restricted.

Let us look at this issue from a different perspective. The government passes a law to force churches to operate only within a set time and that it must have half its preachers as women. Would it be okay?

The Bible also quotes a head covering requirement for women, not for men (in fact, the opposite). How about a law that makes the practice illegal? Would it be okay?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 03:58 PM
 
Location: The Port City is rising.
8,817 posts, read 10,731,458 times
Reputation: 2523
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
The Bible also quotes a head covering requirement for women, not for men (in fact, the opposite). How about a law that makes the practice illegal? Would it be okay?
men required NOT to have their head covered? what strange goyish interpretation is THIS?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 10:59 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,938,402 times
Reputation: 12178
Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad View Post
men required NOT to have their head covered? what strange goyish interpretation is THIS?
Well, please go ahead and interpret the following from the Bible, for us lesser beings...

Quote:
Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that [a]Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of [b]Christ. 4 Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. 5 But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman [c]whose head is shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover [d]her head, let her also [e]have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to [f]have her hair cut off or [g]her head shaved, let her cover [h]her head. 7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.

1 Corinthian 11:2-7
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2011, 01:46 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,753,015 times
Reputation: 1333
Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad View Post
You may not be aware of this, but discriminating by gender in a social organizations (as long as you arent commercial establishment selling certain things, like liquor, or accommodations, IIUC) is NOT illegal in the USA. There are gender seperate private schools and colleges(including secular ones) gender seperate health clubs, athletic orgs, etc, etc. This would apparently be specifically aimed at religious orgs, and as such would violate the 1st amendment.
Yes, I see where this is going. That's a very good point, the law would have to transend it's religious aspect for a more secular purpose. However, there are certain aspects of some organizations that make them more in control from the government, the extent to which religious institutions, especially those of Islam, are tied to government wellfare is unknown to me. But I sort of was making your same point, in that gender segragation would have to be made illegal in general. whether the states would chose to excuse muslim practices after that might be a whole nother story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-14-2011, 01:57 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,753,015 times
Reputation: 1333
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
The constitution wasn't meant to be a dictionary with all possible words in English language included. It is a document designed to provide a framework for governance, and later expanded to ensure that rights are protected against any abuse. The governments don't have limitless power to call anything illegal, which they could by making laws as they wish. Such powers are restricted.

Let us look at this issue from a different perspective. The government passes a law to force churches to operate only within a set time and that it must have half its preachers as women. Would it be okay?

The Bible also quotes a head covering requirement for women, not for men (in fact, the opposite). How about a law that makes the practice illegal? Would it be okay?
no laws respecting an establisment of religion as if though it was legitimate, nor shall it pass laws forbiding the excercise/believe in an established(practices recognized by the governmnet as legitimate) religion. the words "respecting" and "established" have very clear meanings, as I'm sure the founding fathers realised when they were writting and signing them. illegal practices, whether religious or not, are still illegal, unless the states make an exemption. anyone have any court history to show differently?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,938,402 times
Reputation: 12178
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuminousTruth View Post
no laws respecting an establisment of religion as if though it was legitimate, nor shall it pass laws forbiding the excercise/believe in an established(practices recognized by the governmnet as legitimate) religion. the words "respecting" and "established" have very clear meanings, as I'm sure the founding fathers realised when they were writting and signing them. illegal practices, whether religious or not, are still illegal, unless the states make an exemption. anyone have any court history to show differently?
You might see semantics and specific words in a document as a rescue but the leading founders couldn’t have been more clear about the need for a wall of separation between religion and government. A quote from Madison, I posted earlier, illustrates that aspect. The idea they promoted was one of being able to separate personal beliefs from such beliefs becoming what a government does.

A corruption of, diversion from, this idea would lead to such authorities writing laws to oppress religions (clearly, minority sects, within a particular religion or across religions). And with laws, just about anything can be made illegal. Do you think that was the idea they espoused instead? Give me an example that would demonstrate just that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad View Post
Moderator cut: orphaned
Moderator cut: Orphaned reference

Last edited by june 7th; 07-15-2011 at 10:40 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top