Chris Stedman, an advocate for interfaith(atheists included) dialogue, has a new book coming out. I know this, because I read it on PZ’s blog. This is one of the many reasons I like PZ; he is so intuitively aware of his own postmodern meta-narrative, that he can, with a few strokes of the keyboard, both promote a fellow atheist’s work, and deconstruct it. And yes, that is a compliment.
As the resident accommodationalist, I’ll review it as soon as I can get a copy. I know the word ‘faith’ bugs a lot of atheists, but I like to keep my objections to religion practical and reasonable. It is not the fairy stories that bother me, nor is it the fashion sense.
Unfortunately, the French are being less reasonable, and its made them look silly, to the point I was convinced this was an Onion article.
A woman summoned to a court charged with breaking France’s burka ban was not allowed in after she refused to remove the veil.
Good to see Inspector Clouseau is still on the job.
On a more serious note, while the french thing is mostly just inept and stupide, Saudi women are fighting their country’s own form of intrusive government stupidity.
Under the guardianship system in force here, women need permission from their father, husband or brother to marry, travel outside the country, work outside the home and have certain kinds of medical procedures.
Yes folks, this is actual ‘patriarchy’. And it is stupid.
But it’s nice to know that in Canada the law doesn’t treat women like children, who are too ignorant, stupid, and/or weak, to make their own decisions.
A coalition of feminist and progressive groups, however, stood alongside the conservative Christian organizations in supporting the current laws, although for different reasons.
Janine Benedet, lawyer arguing on behalf of the Women’s Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution, comprised of seven women’s groups, including the Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centres, argued the laws should be kept so men can be penalized for victimizing women.
/facepalm. So… instead of letting individual women make choices about their bodies, we’re just going to replace the religious patriarchy with the feminist matriarchy, or I guess in this case, fuse them into some grotesque mutant government thing.
Meanwhile… in la belle province… hijabs are dangerous and hijabs aren’t required by religion…. but now hijabs are religious.
“Refs don’t have any contact with the other players, so I figured that there’s no danger,” she said.
“They’ve changed what they’re saying and now they start saying it’s a religious symbol — back then it was about safety.”
Seems no other sport is as good at moving the goal posts as soccer, and using young girls as footballs, in the process. It’s OK to be Muslims, as long as you’re not too Muslim. Sound familiar?
Here’s an idea, if you value individual choice, you have to let people actually make choices. Sometimes, they will make bad ones, sometimes they will make choices you don’t like. We should help and encourage people to make choices that affect them in positive ways, and help people with the consequences when they make choices that affect them negatively. Helping is not about demanding, or issuing edicts from on high.
Let women have abortions, let gays marry, let people smoke weed, and let men and women dress like sluts, or like Muslims, or become whores, if they so choose.
Edit: Link fixed. Thanks!