| JuryFury.com
A New Issue Every Monday ! SUBSCRIBE NOW !! Online School of Politics |
||
| Areas of Interest THE USA American Foreign Policy US House and Senate US Presidents State & Local Politics Regional Politics Politics of China The British Commonwealth Indian Subcontinent Middle East The European Union Africa Latin America ASEAN NATO United Nations The Non-aligned Movement Eastern Europe New Nations of the 20th Century General Topics Constitutional Law Human Rights Nuclear Disarmament & Treaties International Warfare Environmental Law Peace Treaties Economic & Social Alliances International Organizations Journalism & Media Racism and Democracy Women in the Workplace Family Law Courts and Practices The Judicial System Higher Education Education and Government Health Care & Insurance Rights of the Disabled Copyright & Working Online Legal Representation Legal Insurance Pornography Domestic Violence Religion & Law Workers Rights Employers Rights Prison & Life after Social Organizations Welfare & Poverty Taxation and Democracy Third World Aid Programs Space Exploration Alternative Energy Petroleum Industry & Cars Nuclear Power Programs for the Arts Sports Education Policing the Internet Privacy and freedom Immigration Food and Regulation War on Drugs War on Pharmaceuticals Public Housing Pollution and Control Sexual Harrassment Discrimination Electoral Process Consumers Rights Investors Rights Abortion Death Penalty Social Security Gender & Sexuality Grassroots Organization ACLU World Watch Oxfam UNICEF United Negro Fund Ford Foundation (suggestions welcome at our chatsite) Law of the Economy Join I-Traderschool, our sister magazine, for debates and news. |
Islam in America New Immigration Laws in the US by Sophia Barkat "Into the Arms of Strangers" is a PBS.org documentary told by children of the Holocaust. The kids, now elderly men and women recall with horror the last days of their childhood. One woman mentions how the elders always discussed leaving the country but how they never could. Too many visas, sponsors, and exit permits were needed. Incidentally, if you fall under the list of countries (demographically Muslim countries NOT Islamic States) what was INS - Immigration Naturalization Services - and is now BCIS - http://www.bcis.gov - now requires you to undergo Special Regggistration, fingerprinting etc. It's meant to be for all men born before 1986 in any of those countries or of such national origin. The new rule is when we exit the country we have to have a small interview with the BCIS officer at the airport. If you don't you won't be able to fly. Currently, the ACLU - http://www.aclu.org - is fighting the US Government - BCIS, FFBI etc - over the illegal imprisonment and deportation of people from demographically Muslim countries who had applied for Visa extensions but INS had delayed who's Visas up to the point of deportation. FBI told them that they were OUT OF STATUS even though it was not their fault. Hence INS deported hundreds. Frankly, Visa extensions and immigration for people with Muslim-sounding names will not be easy and we will be made to under-go much of the bullshit Jews in Europe had to go through. I'm not suggesting this is another Holocaust in the making. But what is happening in the name of national security is appalling. It's a bad time in the job market and foreign workers come first when you need to fire people, but to create illegal ways to make people deportable is a bit more than the racism I can deal with. Unless America wants to be recognized as a neo-Nazi nation, people need to rise up to unseat these racists in powerful places. by captmingus@ev1.net Re: Sophia's post Your desire for justice is admirable, but blaming this on Republicans just doesn't wash with me. Any political force you could imagine being in control right now hypothetically would do the same thing. It's not fair, but were not talking internment camps here. Do you really think that John Public out there would let the Democrats or any other party in control allow immigration and freedom of movement in the US to go back the good old days? When the next terrorist act comes (I'm a pessimistic Optimist) you could kiss re-election goodbye. I've heard that down in FL. there's a civil case against the state brought by a Muslim immigrant woman who refuses to de-veil for a drivers license photo. My question to you is, since I was born in the US and I must give up my "anonymity"(sic) to obtain the privilege of receiving a driver's license. Should this women be given the privilege of the license only out of fear of disrupting here religious beliefs. Is there a Lawyer in this group? Does my Religious practices supersede public safety? I'm curious. by Trevor Batten Re: post by captmingus@ev1.net I believe that some years ago, Sikhs were allowed to wear turbans instead of motorcycle helmets in the UK -but I suspect that this has already changed. In the Netherlands there have been some recent problems with Muslim girls insisting on wearing veils to school -although I personally don't see the problem (except perhaps for exams) -unless one also forbids the wearing of a crucifix, David's star or any other religious sign. Incidentally, I understand that under the Turkish secular constitution, female government officials are not allowed to wear the veil while in function. Who knows if this will change under the new government. I can't help believing that the problem really concerns a western society based entirely on the commercial exploitation of humans objecting to any form of belief system which interferes with profit. In Holland, many of the discussions with Muslims seem to be reruns of arguments held perhaps as recently as ten years ago with Christian religious groups. In fact, I believe there is a small Christian political party in the Netherlands that still refuses to allow women to become members. Interestingly, in the Netherlands, Christian groups have supported the creation of Muslim schools -because this increases the possibility of increasing the number of Christian schools. I believe that in the UK (where there is not a tradition of specialist religious schools -as in the Netherlands) the Labour government was faced with the problem of either being seen to be opposed to immigrant wishes -or opening up the state school system to all sorts of new school types. However, it does seem that in some western countries, Muslims may have more freedom concerning activities related to religion than perhaps westerners are allowed (concerning alcohol, freedom of women?) in countries such as Saudi Arabia (although once again, this may depend on ones social status). by Sophia Barkat Veils and Women's Rights in Islam Captainmingus wrote: "I've heard that down in FL. there's a civil case against the state brought by a Muslim immigrant woman who refuses to de-veil for a drivers license photo. My question to you is, since I was born in the US and I must give up my "anonymity"(sic) to obtain the privilege of receiving a driver's license. Should this women be given the privilege of the license only out of fear of disrupting here religious beliefs. Is there a Lawyer in this group? Does my Religious practices supersede public safety? I'm curious." I don't know what kind of woman wears veils while driving. Seems ludicrous and dangerous. I also heard about the case though never looked into the matter. No, I don't think she should be given a license on the very grounds that she is likely to drive into things. In fact, it's excuses like this that might be used against women in Arab countries who might want to drive, though I'd suspect they have chauffeurs, and the real effect of this would fall on those less oil-rich Muslim countries whose governments think they must follow Saudi norms to appear Islamic. Veiling if anything is much more like lingerie in Arab context. You see the face, the eyes, the lips, but through a thin material. Must drive men mad. If you ask me it's meant to. The burquah - much like what the men wear - keeps one cool from the desert heat. It's more a necessity due to the harsh climate than to hide. But as to why women veil in America, you'd have to look at her family. Does she have an abusing husband or in-law who requires her to? Or does she do it because she finds being gawked at by men whom she is not married to - so prevalent in any society with men who aren't getting any - and this is her way of hiding. Or perhaps she does it because she thinks God is obsessed with her hiding her body from people or that this is ordained by the Quran - which says that both men and women must dress in ways as not to mess with the hormones of the opposite sex. Who knows? Frankly speaking I do not like it when all Muslims get lumped into such groups - camel-riding sheiks who have four wivess, veil-wearing women who drive cars into trees, etc. Many of us come from secular societies, and so I don't like the way INS or BCIS has lumped us together. While some Arab countries had veiling laws that are ridiculous, many demographically Muslim countries do not. As for the treatment of woman in Islam, remember that Arab societies were burying girl children, buying and selling women slaves, and women had no property rights, and their parents had to pay large dowries before Islam. Mohammed changed all of this. Now, try to marry any Arab women. You have to sign a pre-nup, declare what property she will have rights to during the proposal, and have to wait in line behind a huge line of eligible bachelors. The idea was, men were providers, and women benefactors. As such property laws supported sons more than daughters - daughters got less than sons did by inheritance. Wives inherited from husbands, too. I don't think western society had any property rights for women in Mohammed's time. But look at western society now. It has given women equality in many ways by law. But look even in the US - at how women do not get same scale jobs as their male colleagues. Law does not deter inequality, and so is the case in Islam. captmingus@e... wrote: "Your desire for justice is admirable, but blaming this on Republicans just doesn't wash with me. Any political force you could imagine being in control right now hypothetically would do the same thing. It's not fair, but were not talking internment camps here." I always say that the difference between the Republican Party and the Democrats is shorter than the space between my eyes. Both represent lobby groups and not the American taxpayer. Neither provide public schools nor health care nor basic amenities for the elderly, unemployed or poor. The way there is no opposition in the Congress over any matter, it would be ridiculous to assume they were unique. Both parties are thieves - taxing people and delivering nothing but air and the mystic of power. Both fool the average Joe that what he or she is "is the Citizen of the US" - a powerful person indeed - and yes power is what he or she can survive on. Who needs anything else.. But yes, the space between my eyes represents some differences. Namely, Republicans don't lie and say they represent the people. They go right ahead and expose their corporate lobbies and preferential tax-plans. They allow more pollution, kill more "innocents" on Death-row yet have an opposition against abortion - because the Bible says an eye-for-an-eye is okay but abortion is not - and yes, Republicans need votes in the demographically Christian South. They don't bother with minority votes and do not talk about immigration laws that favor minorities. The so-called party of minorities has people like Sen. Edwards and Sen. Lieberman, Gephardt, and Daschle who vote like Republicans anyway. captmingus@e... wrote: "Do you really think that John Public out there would let the Democrats or any other party in control allow immigration and freedom of movement in the US to go back the good old days? When the next terrorist act comes (I'm a pessimistic Optimist) you could kiss re-election goodbye." Yes. I do not have much faith in John Public anymore. John Public thinks Iraqis "did this to us" when referring to 911. Democracies are as good as the people. While Bush Jr. never got the clear vote in 2000, let's say that some 18% of eligible voters did say 'yes'. Now, I'm sure that if more people voted in 2000 the verdict would be a 'no' and I'm hoping more people vote, namely the spoilt brats in High school and college who have no clue what is going on in the world. Why do old people vote? Their prescription bills are huge. Somehow no candidate ever makes college tuition a political issue. I think John Public is very angry right now. Out of work. Stocks evaporated. Bills are still stacking up. Kids don't listen to anything. Can't go to a doctor for an ear-exam without being given trail drugs that almost kill you. And here you have Arabs flying into tall-buildings. Anything could tick him off. And as such, he or she is just like any decent and sick-and-tired Iraqi waiting for US military to leave, Bangladeshi waiting for economic change or North Korean waiting for peace. When we start to think of people as OTHERS we start to give them less power......and less and less....and in turn we dehumanize ourselves. That is why this whole Patriot Act and the BCIS is bad. It's bad irrespective of where it's done. by Trevor Batten re: Sophia's post -- Veils and Women's Rights in Islam "Sophia Barkat" <quietpoly@yahoo.com> wrote: "As for the treatment of woman in Islam, remember that Arab societies were burying girl children, buying and selling women slaves, and women had no property rights, and their parents had to pay large dowries before Islam. Mohammed changed all of this." Yes, I know there are many women who claim this. I guess that if one reads "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall" by Anne Bronte (1820-1849) one can't claim that western society has been too progressive. http://www.englishlit.about.com/library/bl-etexts/abronte/bl-abronte-ten-1.htm From Anne Bronte: http://www.alltheweb.com/search?cat=web&cs=iso-8859-1&q=%22Anne+Bronte%22+%2B+f\ arm&_sb_lang=nl+en Actually, I couldn't find the email back again, but I seem to remember seeing our population fanatic had tried to discredit my remarks about women's education being the best natural birth control method: Clearly, if women are studying then they are not at home playing brood machines to their husbands. If they have professional carriers then they are also less likely to want to continually produce children -and less likely to be economically dependant on bullying husbands who might force them to have many kids. I guess one only has to compare US birth figures from a hundred years ago with current ones. Families are now much smaller than before. Actually, it wasn't even my idea (surprise, surprise) -but I believe from some respected Indian expert. "birth rates" + welfare: http://www.alltheweb.com/search?cat=web&cs=iso-8859-1&q=%22birth+rates%22+%2B+w\ elfare&_sb_lang=nl+en "forced abortion": http://www.alltheweb.com/search?cat=web&cs=iso-8859-1&q=%22forced+abortion%22+&\ _sb_lang=nl+en "birth control" + "abuse of women": http://www.alltheweb.com/search?cat=web&cs=iso-8859-1&q=%22birth+control%22+%2B\ +%22abuse+of+women%22&_sb_lang=nl+en by Cherrie Lynn Lipsett Re: Sophia's post -- Veils and Women's Rights in Islam I enjoyed your reply to the question and the knowledge on Arab customs, Sophia. I must say my grandmother who was born in 1895 and died in 1991 never in her life wore pants. She always wore dresses. Most of her earlier life women did not wear pants and she would not have felt comfortable in pants. It was her choice. But she never said a word about her daughters or granddaughters wearing pants. I imagine some Arab women who have always wore veiling would feel uncomfortable without it. I know when I was in college at OSU in Stillwater OK in the late sixties, early seventies we had a lot of male students from India studying engineering and they brought their wives with them. It is as you said the women wore very thin veiling and the body part and it was beautiful and very sexy my counter part thought. Much more seductive than showing it all as we do in American society. |
Encourage Discussion Join Juryfury Chat Promote Juryfury.com Join online discussion Groups Archives Writers Needed Be a Columnist Be an Editor Become an Owner Writing Training Program Internship Program for Students Advertise with Us Our Staff & Contributors Our Magazines Quietpoly.com I-Traderschool Juryfury.com The Company Our Address: QuietPoly Inc. 240 W. Saunders. Dr. (#146) Flagstaff, AZ 86001 Tel (928) 214-7365 quietpoly@yahoo.com Our Affiliations (pending member) MediaChannel.org IndyMedia.org |