|
|||||
Still not clear on the conceptIn Yemen, an Islamic
Yemen is a US ally in the war on terror. Foreign fighters, while not numerous in relative terms, are responsible for mayhem far out of proportion to their numbers in Iraq. The majority of their victims are other Muslims. The WSJ version of this story (behind the wall) concluded with a paragraph stating the judge’s “shock” at the critical reception this novel interpretation aroused not only in the US embassy in Sana, but also among the members of his extended US family. Trying to see his decision from a US perspective, he asked -
Well, I can save him a trip and let him know that we handle that particular conundrum by ah, not having a religion. Which is sort of what we’ve been on about, these last several. Ask for a tourist visa, judge. We’ve got problems enough of our own already, and having a man of your evident perspicacity move in long term might just cause us to give up all hope. 7 comments to Still not clear on the concept |
 |
||||
|
Copyright © 2009 Neptunus Lex - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
Last year my daughter had an Indian girl in her class. We had them over for dinner and did a few things with them to get to know them better.
At some point we discussed religion and my wife mentioned becoming a Christian when she was in college. They were very surprised by that statement and asked, ‘But you are an American. Haven’t you always been a Christian?’
It would be interesting to know just how many people view us this way.
Unless it’s trout I only approve of this form of catch and release:
http://www.thejump.net/humor/catch-and-release.jpg
B2
It does seem that countries that are theocracies of some kind (particularly the Muslim kind) really can’t understand how it is to accept other people’s differences in religious practice, and not feel the need to slaughter them en masse.
And it’s interesting to note that while the judge first says “…Yemeni law…” he clarifies what that REALLY means when he says “…Islamic sharia law…”. It’s a different justice book in so many ways isn’t it.
Yemen is a what? You can say that with a straight face?
“…we handle that particular conundrum by ah, not having a religion.”
Very well put. A pity that the Pledge of Allegiance in the great nation of ours is not quite in sync with that admirable sentiment. Since 1954, anyway. From 1892 until 1954, religion had not yet pledged to divide the indivisible.
Had summat to do with them godless communists as I recollect, and was considered at the time a non-controversial branding distinction. Now it is I suppose the relic of a simpler time, which some among us cannot bear to part with for sentimental reasons, and which others purport to take offense at for reasons of their own.
But it’s fair to say that I tilt at other windmills Paul, and will leave that particular one to you.
Yup. A relic.
Thought you demolished that particular windmill whereas I just ticked off Sancho. You keep what’s left of that windmill. I’ll purport to stick with your solution to the conundrum and focus on Dulcinea. http://www.pdngallery.com/legends/legends6/large/08.html