Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Who Said "Freedom Requires Religion"?

1

when in rome, do as the romans.

if american firms with american employees are so hot to grasp after saudi dollars, they have to live with medieval, misogynist saudi rules.

american businesswomen, too.

its not like its a secret that the entire male population is so scared of women they have to keep them locked up or on a leash. they even know about it on pitcairn island.

Posted by max solomon | February 6, 2008 4:47 PM
2

Pitcairn Island...

I just KNOW somebody's going to ask you to explain that one! (But not me - I've read BOTH books!)

Posted by COMTE | February 6, 2008 4:54 PM
3

@1: I was going to suggest that we bomb Saudi Arabia into the Stone Age, but I like your idea, too.

Posted by J.R. | February 6, 2008 4:58 PM
4

if freedom does not allow for religion, than it is not freedom.

if freedom does not have equality, then it is not freedom.

if freedom is without justice, then it is not freedom.

Posted by infrequent | February 6, 2008 5:08 PM
5

Is the US government doing anything to help this lady?

Posted by JD | February 6, 2008 5:12 PM
6

Nukes.

Just saying.

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 6, 2008 5:31 PM
7

Oh wah! Some idiot broke local rules and got punished by the local authorities and then cried about it. Shocking.

Posted by Smegmalicious | February 6, 2008 5:33 PM
8

I read in The Looming Tower that a lot of these religious "police" are ex-cons.

Posted by scojomojo | February 6, 2008 5:48 PM
9

Kill them all and let Allah sort them out.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty | February 6, 2008 5:53 PM
10

Pitcairn Island...OH that's the TV show with that little midget that screamed, "Deh Plane Deh Plane" right? I didn't know that TV show was based on a book.

Posted by Sargon Bighorn | February 6, 2008 6:53 PM
11

Freedom doesn't require religion, it requires a populous with democratic ethics. Things like tolerance, responsibility, and a respect for legitimate authority.

If a religion breeds though then great, if not then the problem lies with the religion.

Posted by Giffy | February 6, 2008 7:35 PM
12

Re: "Oh wah! Some idiot broke local rules and got punished by the local authorities and then cried about it. Shocking."

Yes. Shocking. Because some laws are completely barbarically idiotic and should not be pandered to - these poeple broke the law too today, and are now being executed:

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view/20080206-117193/Iranian-faces-execution-for-drinking-alcohol
http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English/Security/?id=1.0.1845704219


Would you say we shoulnd't decry the executions of these people who broke the law?

Posted by B | February 6, 2008 11:08 PM
13

B?

Please remove that post before Mayor Nickels gets any ideas.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | February 6, 2008 11:41 PM
14

I am free and have no religion.
The friends I have that have religion always seem to be a slave to it. Constantly trying to justify their lives with religion. They are not free of it, ever.

Posted by -B- | February 7, 2008 12:05 AM
15

Well - In George Washington's farewell address he mentions that it would be difficult to have morality without religion; but in his own defense he doesn't mention WHICH religion, a fact that Fundamentalists constantly overlook.

Posted by Colton | February 7, 2008 1:13 AM
16

Seriously. Wacky & Wild.

Posted by FanoDan | February 7, 2008 1:52 AM
17

I deal with Saudi Arabia a lot at work, and trust me, the woman being charged with a crime after she was raped, or this recent charming incident, aren't remotely isolated incidents. About one-third of the population of the country is migrant workers, mostly from India, Sri Lanka and the Philippines, and they aren't even covered by the law. It's literally legal to murder someone there, as long as you're a muslim and they're not.

Posted by Rottin' in Denmark | February 7, 2008 2:17 AM
18

Religion, especially "Christianity" make up whatever "morality" suites their financial and political goals. Take for example stem cell research. Nowhere in the Bible does it say "Thou shalt not research stem cells" or "cells in a petri dish are live humans and must be protected from any harm" But why not if this was a book written by "God"? And why don't "Christians" just say they will not seek any cures discovered with stem cells instead of stopping research altogether for everyone else? They cannot abide freedom. And because it is a "morality" newly minted for political purposes. If women were voting for or against the political leadership of Saudi Arabia you'd start to see real change, but that threatens the authority of the religious leadership so they are kept enslaved. Don't forget that "Christians" were solidly behind the enslavement of Africans and profited from it handsomely both here and in South Africa during aparthied. And the Bible was cited as requiring it in both cases.

Posted by Vince | February 7, 2008 8:19 AM
19

"And why don't "Christians" just say they will not seek any cures discovered with stem cells instead of stopping research altogether for everyone else?"

Because, you know, they know best. Us poor heathens just aren't thinking clearly.

Posted by Toby | February 7, 2008 9:51 AM
20

George Washington's farewell address clearly suggests that popular govt (democracy) cannot work without religion.

In fact, he also said,

"Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ?"

You see, without religion, someone in the govt might have thought it was ok to take George Washington's slaves away.

George Washington was a poor general, a worse philosopher, and wise to delegate the operation of the first presidential administration to people who knew what they were doing.

Posted by Quinn | February 7, 2008 9:58 AM
21

As to why the religious police are mostly ex-cons in Saudi Arabia ... it's because if you can demonstrate you've memorized the Koran, you can get out of jail free.

No, I am NOT joking.

Nukes.

(with a warning so my high school friend from Trail BC can escape in time, used to have a crush on her)

Posted by Will in Seattle | February 7, 2008 10:19 AM
22

Instead of "nukes" how about a U.N. with some balls?

Posted by Vince | February 7, 2008 10:55 AM
23

@22. would those be nuclear balls? if so, i think they would be less effective.

Posted by infrequent | February 7, 2008 12:38 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).