quote:

Iran, which has launched an annual summer crackdown on "immoral behavior", bans alcohol, narcotics and parties with unrelated men and women dancing, drinking and mixing. Western popular music is frowned upon...

Karaj's public prosecutor, Ali Farhadi, said invitations had been sent out via the Internet and that people from Britain and Sweden were among those held. Zarei suggested they were expatriate Iranians visiting the country...

Under sharia, Islamic law, imposed after Iran's 1979 revolution, women are obliged to cover their hair and wear long, loose clothing to disguise their figures and protect their modesty. Violators can receive lashes, fines or imprisonment.

Link.

What's your view of Sharia law? Would you like stricter laws in your own country (not necessarily sharia style laws)?

Would you have gone if you had received an invitation? What's your view of those who did go?

I would like to see some kind of limitation on corruption, for sure. Violent video games and slasher movies, sexually blatant and demeaning advertising, trash TV, corporate sponsored drug pushing... etc.

As for Islamic law, I do NOT advocate chopping off limbs or genital mutilation (except in case of serial rapists).

I do, however, empathize with the Moslem feeling that US corruption of values has been exported to their country. Surely there is a way to influence them positively through limiting of corporate sponsored corruption and exploitation.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Gnarlodious,

I tend to agree. I think people have more in common that they think; we just draw the line in different places.

The "Power of Nightmares" documentary showed how two different sets of people reacted to the same trends in American culture.

Recently Thom told a story that Dr. Lewis Mehl Madrona had told him about how Native Americans and the Canadian government viewed the same date rape very differently.

America led the way when it became a democracy, and also led the way when it came to creating huge modern multinational corporations (though it was following earlier examples such as the British East India company and British empire-building) and corruption. But life is a relay race - America has simply most recently had the baton. Other countries have followed other routes, and some are rethinking theirs, for example Germany and protectionism. Perhaps it is time for another country or group of countries to pick up the baton and lead the way.

Any candidates?

The mistake Moslem fundamentalists make is that Sharia law is no substitute for cultural displacement. What they need to do is fill their people with a positive vision of the future, instead of punishment for wrongdoing. Until then, the battle against rapacious American corporations is a losing proposition.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Gnarlodious,

Oops! sorry, I just accidentally edited instead of replying.

quote:

The mistake Moslem fundamentalists' make is that Sharia law is no substitute for cultural displacement. What they need to do is fill their people with a positive vision of the future, instead of punishment for wrongdoing. Until then, the battle against rapacious American corporations is a losing proposition.

Just so long as it isn't those virgins that martyrs get.

Christianity has mostly been about punishment too, in spite of the example of Jesus. It seems that control of others is far too popular, whether religious or political or commercial.

We end up back with a problem that Thom has written about - how do we (Muslem countries in this instance) win against the conquerors, without becoming the same as them?

quote:

Violent video games and slasher movies, sexually blatant and demeaning advertising, trash TV, corporate sponsored drug pushing... etc

but who makes the determination what is violent, what is sexually blatant, trash tv (one mans trash is another mans treasure), ect?

it doesnt matter who makes that determination, as it wont satisfy all involved and discriminate against some. for example, you would probably ban violent video games. but these video games are less violent (and make believe btw) than real life.

instead of banning make believe wars in video games, i would be advocating banning REAL wars in real life. these wars dont have reset buttons, extra lives, or do-overs. i personally am a big fan of the very games you wish to ban.

what do you consider trash tv? a southern fellow might enjoy watching larry the cable guy, while you might not. i personally think talk shows like the View, Oprah, and Dr phil are all trash. but would it be right to outlaw or censor them? no it wouldnt. the same applies to shows you deem 'trash'. and besides, one can easily change the channel if they dont like the program on. noone is forced to watch tv.

I'm finding it not a coincidence that this type of story about Iran is featured at the same time we get:

U.S. Blames Shiite Militia For Attacks

www.abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3449837

(excuse me for shouting this): YOU KNOW WHAT"S REALLY WEIRD? WE HEAR "AL-QAEDA" 75 TIMES IN ONE SPEECH AND THEN THE U.S. BLAMES 73% OF ATTACKS ON SHIA!!!

Another hot war is on the way

Last time a country attacked this many sovereign states in this short a period of time was the case of Nazi Germany

quote:

I would like to see some kind of limitation on corruption, for sure. Violent video games and

if you do deciede to start a crusade on violent video games, i would start with this one:

army video game

this is a propaganda tool used by the us military to glorify and pump up the act of military service. this game appeals to some vulnerable and easily swayed teenagers. this would be a good place to start a war on video games (even though the entire idea of banning certain games deemed 'violent' is unconstitutional and discriminatory.

Brent, I love it when you shout.
So do you think we should...
or
Do you think that talking about what is happening in Iran (politically or socially) will suddenly make us want to invade Iran?

We have heard for years how bad it is in North Korea and I see no actions by the USA or S. Korea or even Japan to do anything.

Sometimes on rare occasions we even talk about the French here. But luckily those British folks are always good chaps.

flyfisherman,

quote:

but who makes the determination what is violent, what is sexually blatant, trash tv (one mans trash is another mans treasure), ect?

it doesnt matter who makes that determination, as it wont satisfy all involved and discriminate against some. for example, you would probably ban violent video games. but these video games are less violent (and make believe btw) than real life.

instead of banning make believe wars in video games, i would be advocating banning REAL wars in real life. these wars dont have reset buttons, extra lives, or do-overs. i personally am a big fan of the very games you wish to ban.

I think there need to be 2 levels of ban, at least. For war, it should be decided at country level, preferably democratically. For the video games, they should not be marketed publically, IMO, so that youngsters are tempted by them. On the other hand, if there is a total ban, there will be a black market It's difficult.

Banning unacceptable behavior is not the solution. What we need is disapproval. All people need to know is what is unacceptable socially. The majority will follow the rules.

quote:

For the video games, they should not be marketed publically, IMO, so that youngsters are tempted by them

then how would game companies market to adults? a large percentage of video game buyers are actually adults. i certainly have a nice collection of them. i like one in particular, Doom3. this game involves graphic images of slaughtering aliens along with awesome graphics and audio. this game was marketed under

Ronald posted: "Brent, I love it when you shout.
So do you think we should...
or
Do you think that talking about what is happening in Iran (politically or socially) will suddenly make us want to invade Iran?"

Ronald: we have the anti-Iran arms deal (current). We have US naval buildup in the Gulf. We have the US blaming Iran for the state of affairs in Iraq. We have the US arming Sunni militia in Iraq.

There is no analogy to the situation as regards North Korea.

Could well be that the publication of this article at this time is meant to prime the pump of public opinion for action against Iran.

quote:

then how would game companies market to adults?

There's no easy solution, but I'm sure they would think of something.

It's not really that difficult. Tobacco, as one example, is restricted but not illegal. Youngsters learn that they can get tobacco but that it is disapproved of. That is a healthful message to them and the population in general. Illegal drugs, however, are a much more uncontrollable commodity because they are illegal.

Compare that to the current situation where violence is not just tolerated but it is blatantly glorified. That is the problem, there is no societal message that (gratuitous) violence is unacceptable. We have had for many years rating systems for movies, and it has worked relatively well. We need similar ratings and restrictions for violent and sexual videos. It's probably the best we can do, but it's not totalitarianism.

Brent,

quote:

There is no analogy to the situation as regards North Korea.

Could well be that the publication of this article at this time is meant to prime the pump of public opinion for action against Iran.

Actually there really is. North Korea has made unilateral and provocative actions against its neighbors over the years as well as recently. And so has Iran. Talking about some articles such as: Iran Arrests 230 Youths Attending 'Satanic' Rock Concert does not lead to war as I see.

I think the USA already has a bad image of Iran from a long time ago, no need to do more. Has the specials on North Korea convinced a single person to invade NK?

It just seems to me that your history (recent) of NK is not quite as complete as other areas of the world.

quote:

Originally posted by Sue N:

quote:

... an annual summer crackdown on "immoral behavior", bans alcohol, narcotics and parties with unrelated men and women dancing, drinking and mixing. Western popular music is frowned upon...

....Violators can receive lashes, fines or imprisonment.

Link.

Sue's original discussion

quote:

Sue, I'm quoting language from your post that is more generally applicable, and next, I'll be checking (eventually) for information about the American Comstock laws.



I don't need to go back that far, though, to find out whether public figures have sought to impose stricter moral codes in my own country. I'm thinking of a recent attorney general and a robed Lady Justice. Odd thing is, it's easier to find her without the Ashcroft drapes than it is with them.

Perhaps the google image search exposes the central point: it's difficult to legislate morality.

Ohhhh, I am so offended.
I wonder who is going to get that whipping? He does look confused though...

I know that you are a Christian but I have not seen too much of that value system come out on this board. More like you oppose any religion.

I recently read how Marx was wrong on "Religion is the Opium of the Masses" (too lazy to make sure correct quote). The writer noted that it should be "Church is the Opium of the Masses".

I believe in Grace, Ronald Rutherford, and this post lacks it.

quote:

Originally posted by --Kate:
I believe in Grace, Ronald Rutherford, and that last post of yours lacks it.

Please tell me why you feel that way. What type of "grace"? It just seems too vague of a concept in this simplistic form of communication.

quote:

The Comstock Act (ch. 258 17 Stat. 598, enacted March 3, 1873) is a United States federal law that made it illegal to send any "obscene, lewd, and/or lascivious" materials through the mail, including contraceptive devices and information. The sale and distribution of obscene materials has been unlawful in most of the American states since the early 1800s, and has been prohibited by federal law since 1873. That is, the federal anti-obscenity laws are still in effect in 2007 and are enforced,[1] though there are extensive debates on what is "obscene." Twenty-four states passed similar prohibitions on materials distributed within the states.[2] Collectively, these state and federal restrictions are known as the Comstock laws.

wiki

***

I'd rather examine the Comstock laws, Ronald Rutherford, which I believe speak to the thesis of Sue's original post. Perhaps if you'd like to start a soul searching thread, I might offer something on the subject of Grace.

Strange Kate. Never had any problem getting my Playboys delivered to my home.
Or that matter Penthouse or any of that trash from Larry Flynt. You remember our little discussion about free speech and his right to accuse religious leaders of having incestuous relations with his mother in the outhouse while drinking alcohol?

The point is that you would have in 1873, when the Comstock laws were in force in this country; and the point is, also, that it was on AGAshcroft's list of priorities to purify your mind, in the last decade.

quote:

Originally posted by --Kate:
The point is that you would have in 1873, when the Comstock laws were in force in this country; and the point is, also, that it was on AGAshcroft's list of priorities to purify your mind, in the last decade.

That's brings up another value system in the Liberal mindset. That of trying to equalize the two sides in a BO. Once you create the appearance, that both sides are equal that goes into the meme that all cultures are equal, then you make us the same as the worst of us all. If you really can not see the difference between Iran and the actions the US does... then I can just say I am sorry that you feel that way.

Sunrise use to love to do that also. So I can see the same techniques in you also.

I was looking for my link to a video in Iran that has police and a lady telling people that they were not dressed appropriately, but can not find it now.

You realize that there are laws on the books that you can not ride your horse in the nude or drunk?

quote:

all cultures are equal

Not exactly.

The human condition is a universal trait.

quote:

Originally posted by --Kate:

quote:

all cultures are equal

Not exactly.
The human condition is a universal trait.

So do you think man is basically evil or that it if we somehow made us all equal then there would be no strife?

So why do you want to equate our culture (laws also) here (USA) to the regime in Iran? You are good at noticing the similarities (laws that in some ways are to promote morality) but can you note the differences?