Originally posted by Socod_badne: quote:Originally posted by Khayr: Once you take God and Religion out of the picture, then ANYTHING and ALL is Permissible and Relative to SOCIETAL DEFINITION . There is no place in the world where anything and all is permissible where God is out of the picture. You're too fond of reductionism! For example, Canada is secular democratic nation but not ALL and ANYTHING is permissible. Paedophile is one good example. Why shouldn't sex with children be legal or acceptable? Anything and all things are permissible, right? I am fond of Onthological Reductionism and my guess that you are fond of Scientific Reductionism! and Yes, All and Anything is Permissible when GOD and Religion are TAKEN OF OUT THE PICTURE. Reason being nothing becomes Sacred anymore, and anything and all becomes Relativized subject to change today or tomorrow. What was unacceptable 10yrs ago, is acceptable today and can change in another 10yrs. Its all Relative, subject to pPOPULAR SENTIMENT-emotion, feeling etc. of the population. Who knows, relationships btwn father and daughter can be deemed legal in a few yrs...so can pedophilia, murder etc. These things are currently social Taboos but wait until tomorrow or the day after, when people will agrue and fight for these things to become a 'RIGHT' of the people.

There is a dua that nabi Musa (calihe asalam) said in sura Taha to make Allah help his people to understand his speech. Nabi Musa (calihe asalam) had a stuttering speech problem laakin and he had a brother, nabi haruun who could speak normally, but Allah still wanted him, with all his speech problems.... to relay the Divine message, to relay the Revelation...... The dua goes like this... (Moses) said: "O my Lord! expand me my breast; And ease my task for me; And loose a knot from my tongue That they may understand my saying Sura Taha v. 25-28 So inshallah, I am hoping that it helps us to understand the points that I made. My contention, that you CAN measure qualitatively effects of certain social behaviour, still remains. I give you few pointers: education, health, suicide rates etc. SB, I agree that these things are measurable but MORALITY and DECENCY are not Measurable-That is THEIR ARGUMENT. That is what Secular Liberalism agrues, hence why Religion and God are taken "Out of the Picture". Once you take God and Religion out of the picture, then ANYTHING and ALL is Permissible and Relative to SOCIETAL DEFINITION. i.e. Gambling was illegal 30yrs ago, but today, that is a different story in many countries in the world.

What I meant is that the STANDARDS of MEASUREMENTS are different. You can't QUANTIFY the damage that permitting 'bawdy houses', strip clubs etc. does to society and societial values. These things are measured Qualitatively but in a world dominated by Capitalistic ideals, it is Quantity that counts i.e. What can be turned into Statistics, tangible monetary Benifits etc... Therefor, PERMISSIVENESS makes SENSE and SENSIBILITY is knowing that what makes people HAPPY and Pre-Occupied (belly's full, pockets fat etc.) is really what counts. Thats good politics!

Originally posted by Socod_badne: quote:Originally posted by Khayr: e.g. Fornication was a Major societal taboo but now, its an encouraged behavior. High on your delusions again, aren't ya? I lived in Canada for nearly ten years and I can categorically tell you fornication is not encouraged . As usual, the gulf between what you say and the truth is as wide as the Atlantic ocean. Also, what is HARMFUL has to be immediately QUANTIFIABLE i.e. dollars and cents, physical harm etc And rightly so. How else should what is harmful be measured if not by the scale of it's baleful outcomes? corruption ... not MEASURABLE and do not translate into ECONOMICS. You really believe that? That there is no direct correlation between corrupt governments and poor economies? Governmental corruption is MEASURABLE but SOCIETAL CORRUPTION is not MEASURABLE i.e. Dollars and cents. This is the argument that secularism upholds and hence the implicit and explicit denial of Religion in Public Governing Affairs. Rather SOCIETAL CORRUPTION translates into HUGE PROFIT MARGINS. Creating a NEED when it doesn't exist and driving off people's weaknesses and lusts has proven to be very,very ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. Permissiveness that leads to Hedonism is very good for CAPITALISM and the MARKETS.

Will Liberal ideals come through for Pro-Polygamists or will liberalism show its biasness towards Religious traditions? Conflicts are sometimes unavoidable-right?

Originally posted by Jamilah: [QB]If you are a believer that ignorance is bliss and you prefer to overlook one’s shortcomings than sentimentalism would aid your view of an individual’s character. Sentimentalism in that case might play a role (minor role) but it isn't that overarching guide in shaping the VIEW (s) of the Believer. The 'BELIEVER' takes into count what has shaped their PERSONALITY through their RELIGIOUS traditions by way of REVELATION, SACRED SAYINGS, SCHOLARLY WORKS, their Religious HISTORY/TRADITION etc. No such ambiguity exists in this question, because I believe sentimentality hampers your judgment of what you believe is right or wrong. If all of mankind allowed his feelings to govern his actions I think we would be living in a catastrophic world. After all, one must always combat against the lust of their hearts. But is this not the age wherein most people can not THINK for themselves hence the MEDIA becomes the PRIMARY source of EDUCATION i.e. Ads, Television, Print media, internet etc. and these mediums SHAPE your THOUGHTS, SHAPE your IMAGINATION and most importantly feed of your SENTIMENTS and not your 'RATIONAL FACULITIES' because MOST PEOPLE are not capable of sensing things INTELLECTUALLY and are prone to using EMOTION as a major SENSORY TOOL. They often FEEL before they THINK, and if they THINK,then it is often lead by FEELINGS-RIGHT? In regards to the final question posed I believe the answer is all about moderation. And somehow I believe the contrasts evident between the Dashwood sisters in Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility is trying to convey this message. One doesn’t always want to be sensible lest they be given the title king or queen ice (as my peers often refer to me as such) and on the contrary too much sentimentalism can mean naivety. But is that really possible to achieve that BALANCE btwn SENSE and SENSIBILITY? What determines what SENSIBILITY is anyways? Is it society, religion, family???

In its latest attempt to set guidelines that govern sexual morality in Canada, the top court said two swingers clubs in Montreal were not operating as illegal "bawdy houses," because what went on there did not cause any harm to society . There is no evidence that "the sexual conduct at issue harmed individuals or society, " Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in the majority decision, representing seven of the nine judges on the court. When the decision came down for this case, it came down to defining what DECENCY is and that what is Decent is RELATIVE to TIME and SOCIETAL CHANGES. e.g. Fornication was a Major societal taboo but now, its an encouraged behavior. Also, what is HARMFUL has to be immediately QUANTIFIABLE i.e. dollars and cents, physical harm etc.... corruption, decadence, morality are not MEASURABLE and do not translate into ECONOMICS.

Ottawa, paid for report that says Charter might negate criminal ban National Post, January 13, 2006 A new study commissioned by the federal government recommends that Canada legalize polygamy and change legislation to help women and children living in plural relationships. The paper by three law professors at Queen's University in Kingston argues that a Charter challenge to Section 293 of the Criminal Code banning polygamy might be successful, said Beverley Baines, one of the authors of the report. "The polygamy prohibition might be held as unconstitutional, Ms. Baines said in an inter- view last night. "The most likely Charter [of Rights and Freedoms] challenge would be brought by people claiming their freedom of their religion might be infringed. Those living in Bountiful would say polygamy is a religious•tenet." The possibility of a Charter challenge to polygamy laws has added significance since Paul Martin pledged this week that the first act of a new Liberal government would be to remove the federal government's ability to use the Constitution's notwithstanding clause to override Supreme Court decisions dealing with Charter rights. ( Translation: Religious priests,imams,guru's etc. have to take a backseat to their Religious Duties and do what the Government commands of them ) Polygamy has been practised for more than 60 years in Bountiful, in southeastern B.C. Last year, the RCMP launched an investigation into allegations of child abuse and sexual exploitation within the fundamentalist Mormon community of I„000 people. No charges have ever been laid. The Martin government commissioned the $150,000 study into the legal and social ramifications of polygamy just weeks before it introduced divisive same-sex marriage legislation. Polygamy has been practised for more than 60 years in Bountiful, in southeastern B.C. Last year, the RCMP launched an investigation into allegations of child abuse and sexual exploitation within the fundamentalist Mormon community of 1,000 people. No charges have ever been laid. The Martin government commissioned the $150,000 study into the legal and social ramifications of polygamy just weeks before it introduced divisive same-sex marriage legislation. 'Why single out this behaviour?' "It is vital that researchers explore the impacts of polygamy on women and children and gender equality, as well as the challenges that polygamy presents to society:' Sayd Mumtaz All, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said last year that he opposes same-sex marriage, but said if it is legalized in Canada, polygamists would be within their rights to challenge for their choice of family life to be legalized. "This is a liberally minded country with regards to equal rights, and literally millions live common law," Mr. All said. Multiple marriage is legal in most Muslim countries, be said. But Muslim men who take more than one wife must prove to local courts that they are capable of treating them all equally, Mr. All said. Chief author of the report Martha Bailey told The Canadian Press that criminalizing polygamy serves no good purpose. "Why criminalize the behaviour?" she said. "We don't criminalize adultery. "In light of the fact that we have afairly permissive society, why are we sin gling out that particular form of behaviour for criminalization?, Ms. Bailey told The Canadian Press. Ms. Baines said polygamy is rarely prosecuted. "No one is actually being prosecuted but the provision is still being used in the context of immigration and refugee stuff. People are not being admitted to the country" She said removing it from the Criminal Code will not force marriage laws to recognize it, but would only remove criminal sanctions. The report — commissioned by the Justice Department and Status of Women Canada and written by Ms. Baines, B1ta Ama ni and Ms. Bailey — al-so says the criminalization of polygamy does not address the harms that women in polygamous relationships face and suggests Canadian laws be changed to better serve women by providing them spousal support and inheritance rights. "They are denied access to our divorce law... You have a great deal of difficulty claiming your rights with access to children, custody of children and finaneial support for the children" she said. "We are starting to make accommodations for some small things in some of the provinces [such' as] extending support law to women and children in any kind of marriage. "Polygamous marriages are legal in some countries. They come to Canada, the vast majority of them will not know the law and they have no legal protection. They could be prosecuted. Suddenly, they're living in fear." Polygamy, outlawed in Canada but accepted in many countries, typically means a man having several wives at the same time.

Originally posted by xiinfaniin: This horse is never too dead to beat! Not for some folks on SOL, another thread will be started in a day or two...with probably the same biased SENTIMENTS being expressed. LaVie, I am not questioning their sexuality but rather how they parade around and hand behind 'Costumes' singing the SAME TUNES...over and over and over again...much like a BROKEN RECORD. Layzie Girl, There goes AI and Lebron....go...go get'em >>>>>>>

Originally posted by Castro: Perhaps. I'm no investigative reporter, atheer. It is better to bring such things to light so others can put in their two cents and have a discussion like this. If it's true, the "scholar" deserves tongue lashing , if it isn't, the confusion is cleared. And in an earlier post you said Atheer Khayr, when a learned scholar of Islam says something like marriages are annulled and voided with full nudity between a married couple, he or she is begging of mockery and rebuke. Village Member, What gives you the 'NERVE', the 'Right', to speak ill of any ALIM/Scholar of Islam. The Ulama sacrfice their TIME, their Family life, their Privacy etc. for Allah and his rasul (salallahu caliyhe wasilm)and service to the Ummah and don't get a quarter of that back in appreciation from the Ummah AT ALL. They get underpaid, overworked, overburden, overscrutunized etc.and all you can do is try to Critique them. :mad: If the Ulama are the Inheriters of the prophets (hadith) and are the ones that fear Allah the Most (in quran) and Allah and his rasul (salallahu caliyhe wasilm) have honored them, then ya fursadha kuusiye inaadh kuu caay doontid. Have you read any of the great works of the Ulama, the many volumes that scholars like Ghazzali, Suyuti, Asqalani,Nawawi, Shafi etc, Do you know that many of the Scholars of today have to Memorize some of these volumess works to be a scholar, on top of quran and hadith? Waryadha, if you don't respect the scholars and want to join in in rebuking and making fun of any of them, then don't be surpised if you get dealt with harshly! Allah yah deekuum!

Eiid wanagsan nomads! Inshallah, you take the opportunity this eid to spend with family and friends,for those of you who can do it, I urge you to participate in a Dhabiha following the sunnah of nabi Ibrahim (calihe aslam).

Originally posted by Ahura: quote:Originally posted by Khayr: Once again the VILLAGE PEOPLE CASTRO, JB/Rainbow man and company....where one posts the other follow! They have spoken from where they defecate ...... I understand that that a possible intent to start this post could be to make fun of Muslim Ulama/Scholars and muslims in general. And he still persists with the cheap shots! Khayr , stop second guessing people's intentions and get a life, will ya? And soon enough the other SENTIMENTALIST-CW/Athena will follow in support. Ahura, stop being a one sided SENTIMENTALIST It’s reckless to condemn the culumaa based on one or two fatwa’s you don’t agree. There might as well be a valid reason for discussing such topics. It’s likely they spoke and wrote about poverty and all those things you listed but it’s not for them to splash it on your monitor screen. Ducaqabe, saxib you really live up to your SOL name, Masha Allah. :cool: This is the point that is lost in oversight to the constant Bullshidh that the Village People and other SENTIMENTALIST fill SOL with. The Good is not focused on when it comes to muslims, its always about the PROBLEMS with Islam, with muslims etc....and yet they keep forgetting that their lineage, their history is deeply rooted in ISLAM-like it or not! When you get pulled up at the airport line and singled out, remember folks you are part of the same UMMAH that you mock in your daily lives. Allah yah deekum May Allah guide you all, inshallah! If it walks like a duck,sounds like a duck, looks like a duck, it's a duck! Just kiddin. Bisharoo, are you a poet by any chance!

The fashion for sentimental novels started in the mid-eighteenth century with the publication of Rousseau's Julie, ou La Nouvelle Héloïse (1762) and Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther (1774). Throughout the 18th century and earlier, upper-class male-female sexual relations had mainly consisted of a) quick gratification with a prostitute, b) marriages arranged for financial and social reasons, and c) affairs and seductions after marriage. These two novels introduced a new kind of sentimental love that "etherialized sex and made it into an affair of religious devotion rather than the body, a secular equivalent to the love a religious devotee feels towards the godhead. It burgeoned in rural simplicity rather than panelled drawing rooms, seeking--and failing--to transcend all social restrictions and conventions. It gloried in the pain as well as the exaltation of love and thought in terms of the commitment of a lifetime--Jane Austen's Marianne Dashwood is typical of her disapproval of 'second attachments'. Most significantly, it believed that man and woman in love could be free and equal--equally noble, equally passionate" (Christiansen 99). Along with a new vision of love, sentimentalism presented a new view of human nature which prized feeling over thinking, passion over reason, and personal instincts of "pity, tenderness, and benevolence" over social duties. Rousseau insisted that people were naturally good, and that "natural feeling could only flourish in natural surroundings, away from the corruptions of cities, with their spirit of emulation and greed" (Christiansen 96). Gray's "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard" celebrates the "homely joys" (30) of simple farmers, contrasting them with the "pomp of power" and the learning and pride of those who live in cities. The second part of Gray's poem imagines itself as an elegy for a natural poet, a "mute, inglorious Milton" (59) who lived "Far from the madding crowd" (73). In her novel Sense and Sensibility (1811), Jane Austen contrasts two sisters, one (Elinor) who approaches life and love with "sense" (reason) and the other (Marianne) who navigates by her "sensibility" (instinct or feeling). The first sister runs the risk of missing out on romance altogether, while the second risks being deceived or "ruined" by a charming but dissolute fortune-hunter. Later, in 1859, George Meredith defined sentimentalists as readers who seek escape--and only escape--from consequences, from themselves, and from real emotion: "Sentimentalists . . . are they who seek to enjoy Reality without the incurring the Immense Debtorship for a thing done." "It is . . .a happy pastime, and an important science, to the timid, the idle, and the heartless, but a damning one to them who have anything to forfeit." George Meredith, The Ordeal of Richard Feverel, chapter 28 (1859) SOURCE Does SENTIMENTALITY hamper or aid in your view of: PEOPLE i.e. what you think of a person MOVIE REVIEWS What is Right or Wrong? Do you think SOL nomads can be SENTIMENTALISTS?

Once again the VILLAGE PEOPLE CASTRO, JB/Rainbow man and company....where one posts the other follow! They have spoken from where they defecate Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, was asked this same question. He is on record saying, "By God this is strange. I am being told that people in the West strip butt-naked during intercourse. It is not recommended that you take off all your garments during "Jimaac" (i.e. copulation). Here is something that I found that could be of some help. I understand that that a possible intent to start this post could be to make fun of Muslim Ulama/Scholars and muslims in general. But don't be so NARROW MINDED, afterall, isn't that what you are trying to live by-OPEN MINDEDNESS Can I Remain Naked When Alone? In general, it is either recommended or wajib to cover one's awra even when alone, except when there is an inevitable need. Ibn Abidin deemed the latter opinion, though the former is valid, too, as many chose it. It goes back to the Prophet's words (Allah bless him & give him peace), "Allah is more deserving of one's shyness." Imam Zayn Ibn al-Nujaym said in his al-Bahr al-Ra'iq: Know that there is scholarly consensus (ijma`) that it is obligatory to cover one's nakedness (`awra) in front of others... And when alone, there is difference of opinion [as to whether it is obligatory], but the correct opinion is that it is necessary (wajib), unless the uncovering was for a valid reason, as mentioned in Sharh al-Munya. [al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, 1: 283) Imam al-Haskafi said in Durr al-Mukhtar: (And to cover one's nakedness), this is a general obligation, even when alone according to the correct opinion, unless it is for a valid reason. Ibn Abidin explained in his Radd al-Muhtar: (Even when alone) That is: Outside of prayer, it is obligatory to cover one's nakedness in front of others by scholarly consensus, and even when alone according to the correct opinion... Now, the apparent meaning of covering one's nakedness when alone outside of prayer [in this context] is that which is between the navel and knee, such that even women do not have to cover other than that [when alone] even if it is of their nakedness (awrah) [in front of others]... (According to the correct opinion) For Allah Most High, even though He sees the covered just as He sees the naked, sees the one with their nakedness uncovered leaving proper manners and sees the covered exhibiting proper manners. These proper manners [here] are obligatory [f: because of the primary texts about them] whenever there is ability to exercise them. (Unless it is for a valid reason) Such as using the toilet or cleaning oneself. In the Quniya, several opinions are mentioned about showering naked: that it is disliked; that it is excused, insha'Allah; that there is nothing wrong with it [i.e. but it is better not to]; that it is allowed for a small amount of time; that it is allowed in a small washroom... [Radd al-Muhtar, 1: 404-405) The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) instructed all men and women that, "Modesty is from faith," and that, "Modesty brings only good." Wassalam, Faraz Rabbani

Salamz, 11. Pride, commitment, teamwork--words u use to get me to work for free. Dont even try that!! Ain't dat the truth! Pride-In my phat wallet every two weeks! Commitment-To making it to another paycheck, by any means necessssary! Teamwork-Only when its time to get blamed. When I am doing the blaming, DUCK DOWN, cause I will be waving with my fingers to Everyone and email tracing YOU to be blamed for everything. Work mottos!!!

Salamz, 'Allah is Beautiful and Loves Beauty' So draw near to the good which therein is Beauty and a reflection of Divine attributes that will propel us to Jannah, inshallah. If we concentrate and make mention of what is UGLY and Hated by ALLAH and his rasul (salallahu caliyhe wasilm), then what of our Imagination then, then what of our sense, our thoughts etc. will be imbued (filled) with negativities, especially of our Ummah and Deen. What kind of Islamic Identity then would you be showing to yourself, family,classmates, neighbour, co-workers, children,masjid etc.?

Originally posted by Yeniceri: quote:Originally posted by Khayr: However, what good does this do for the IMAGE of Muslims worldwide in exposing the ROTTEN APPLES of the Ummah to the WORLD at large. It just feeds the negative sterotyping and type casting of muslims. What good does this story do for the "image" of the Muslim Ummah? Let me answer that by asking you a question: Are you more concerned for the "image" of the Ummah than their un-Islamic "actions"? Exposing the truth was, is and will never be the wrong thing to do. People, Muslim or not, must know about atrocities such as this "honor killing" crap so that they can be better educated and better suited to defend against such illegal actions. But being quite about this "honor killing" is akin to justifying it, for whatever purpose (protecting Muslims' "image" or not). And the "image" of the Ummah has been stereotyped for decades, if not centuries. Maxay inoo dhinte? We still standing, ain't we? On the contrary, we are falling growing more confused and disunited by the second with: no sense of HONOR If you have honor, then you stay away from what and who is shameful and that which brings shame to you. e.g. if your sister got pregnant by her one night romance, you don't talk about that to people cause that is shameful news to you, your family, clan, somalis,muslim ummah etc. No sense of IDENTITY AS A MUHAMMEDAN UMMAH -If a family member does something embarassing do you disassociate yourself from them i.e. the Act/Behavior are his alone, so family is not affected at all-can this be right at all? -If some muslim murders another muslim, should that not worry you and sadden you? Would you love to hear that news spread to others? Would that ease the pain? All that these stories do is make us more paranoid about muslims and in particular muslim brothers. Yes, the actions are wrong but by giving them attention and spreading news of them, you are making it worse because you have now put negative images in people's minds and imagination. Who's to say that now that we have heard of this, someone won't imagine to replicate such shaytanic and henios acts-la qadra Allah (God NOT Willing it to happen). I heard this story once... One a sahabi committed Zina and came to Abu Bakr, upon which Abu Bakr said Don't tell me about such a thing...the sahabi went to Umar ibn Al Khattab, upon which Umar said to him "What did Abu Bakr say about that matter"...Abu Bakr didn't want to hear the shameful news, so Umar followed the same route...until that person took his story to the RASUL (salallahu calihe wasilm). At that point, the RASUL (salallahu calihe wasilm)had to apply the punishment. Fi Amanillah

I saw it on the paper today that all of isssrael was praying for Sharon. Well, Alhamdulillah I made my du'a's too

Originally posted by Caano Geel: surely you mean: 'the foresnsic qualifications of procastination and cavil and the arts of confounding and perplexing a cause!' Nice cut and past job saxib Waryaa, Bullshiidh kaas naaga daaf!

Salamz, Mumia, Inshallah you had good intentions to post this information and this is a dispecable, disgusting shaytanic act. However, what good does this do for the IMAGE of Muslims worldwide in exposing the ROTTEN APPLES of the Ummah to the WORLD at large. It just feeds the negative sterotyping and type casting of muslims.

Originally posted by Ducaqabe: I see the Admin or mods chose to delete my post with no apparent explanation though I was offering a constructive criticism. Is it possible I dared the untouchable or my advice was out of line? I understand we’re living an era of political correctness and one is expected not to judge on what’s morally right or wrong. I just didn’t know SOL was up to that standard. My apology. Ahura: If Jilbaab (Hijab) is a simple garment; then Salat is a simple workout/exercise and Zakat a give away gift? No? Don’t you agree each is a form of Cibaada, a Muslim identity and symbols of Allah. If so, disparaging and denigrating is supposed to be appropriate and acceptable? Please don’t cheer them up. They don’t know the severity of mocking and poking fun at the expense of the symbols of the deen. MMA: You’re playing wag the dog tactic. Neither Al Itixaad, nor the battle of Luuq or Bari is the topic but since your grievance is unbearable, I urge you go down to your local courthouse and fill a class action lawsuit against Itixaad on behalf of your nieces. I’m sure a Canadian jury will rule on your favor. That way, SOL is no longer objected to your nagging name calling (Reer Surweelgaab) of the group. Ducqabe, waar khaatir baa taaxey! Alhamdulillah

Originally posted by Conspiracy.: ^^ never met a Somali that doesn't like tuna , however Khayr thats quite sudden topic to drop on us bro.. any specific reasons? Salamz, I heard about the Japanese diet today while working out during my lunch hour. It caught my eye and made alot of sense. One thing they said was the the use of the CHOPSTICK helps with dieting and eating right b/c you eat SLOW, MORE CAREFULLY and end up DIGESTING the food better. Smaller portions over a longer period of time. It takes 20min. for the stomach to reach fullness, from what I heard today on the news. About fish, its real expensive to have varieties in your diet and to eat fish when u don't live near a harbor. In anycase, I tried the chopstick thing and I am currently feeling full alhamdulillah and I endup eating half the usual dinner and ate much slower.

Salams, This sounds like the movie 'SYRIANA'....something sounds very fishy as to how he died. What was he doing in Aussie land anyways. Do any of you know that Dubai is the LAS VEGAS of the EAST and Europeans love to go there because of its lax laws. It definitely is DUBAI INC.

Jappanesse and Medditerranean peoples who eat in the traditional manner have the highest life expectancy in the world - and their longevity has much to do with their diet. The two diets seem very different, but they have in common a relative absence of saturated fats and margarines, and an emphasis on fish, vegetables and fruit. Features of the Jappanesse ddiet are: High rice content - this is the main dietary staple. Low fat content - especially in saturated fat. Twice as much fish as meat (Westerners, by contrast, have on average 47 times more meat than fish!) Vegetables, which play an important role - the more popular include bamboo shoots, eggplant, various mushrooms, sweet potato, and Chinese cabbage. Many natural flavour additives in the form of herbs, spices and condiments such as ginger, lemon, sesame seed, mustard. Use of rice-based sake wine both as a tenderiser and to minimise pungent aromas. Most dishes involve dashi - stock and seasoning made from kelp and mackerel - and shoyu (soy sauce). A high variety of foods, especially plant foods. A recent Japanese survey of the diets of 200 elderly women revealed they consumed a variety of over 100 biologically different foods per week. By contrast, in most western countries the recommended minimum is only 30. Research shows that the higher the variety, the less risk of many diseases including cardiovascular disease, diabetes and many cancers. A high intake of soy products - approximately forty times more than the Western intake. Green tea - this is particularly rich in antioxidants. Our own black tea is also antioxidant-rich, but the effect is destroyed with the addition of milk, which prevents their absorption. A high salt intake (soy sauce, for example, contains 16% salt). This is a health negative, and is implicated in the high Japanese incidence of hypertension, stroke and stomach cancer. This last disease is the commonest cause of death in Japan. Salt is also implicated in liver and nasopharyngeal cancer. A high intake of pickled foods - another negative. These contain chemicals called nitrosamines which may be implicated in stomach, liver and oesophageal cancers. Low dairy food intake. Since World War II this has steadily increased, and with unprecedented access to dairy products in childhood, the average height of Japanese has increased dramatically. A fondness for fugu (puffer fish), which can be lethal. Fruit is served at the end of a meal. In recent years, a doubled intake of alcohol. The protective effects of alcohol against coronary heart disease are thus outweighed by an increased risk of liver disease, diabetes and hypertension. Japanese who move overseas and adopt a Western-style diet have an increased risk of breast cancer, coronary heart disease and diabetes. The manner of eating, as much as the food content, is important. A traditional Japanese celebratory meal may include a dozen miniature courses served in strict, artistic sequence. With beauty and ingenuity, food will be fashioned to reflect the seasons, with aesthetics, tradition, religion, history, ritual and symbolism woven into every meal - a lesson in relaxation. It is instructive to contrast this with the rushed meal in front of the television which has become a familiar feature of Western dietary routine. Breast cancer is rare in Japan. A low fat intake, and a high intake of soy (with protective phyto-oestrogens), antioxidants and fibre, plus high food variety, are probably all involved, although there may be a genetic element. The Japanese Diet A low intake of meat is a major factor in the low bowel cancer rate in Japan. The lesson from all of this - as from the Mediterranean diet - is to recognise the benefits of a high food variety, with minimal saturated fat, more fish, less meat, and especially more fruit, vegetables and grains. Source

Burden of Proof is always on the Religiously Oriented Nomads...as always :rolleyes: SOL MOB rules for Religiously Oriented Nomads: They Can't have emotions and supposed to be Emotionaless They are not to have a sense of SELF-WORTH If they do have a sense of Humor, it should be self-deprevating humor, otherwise Humor is a NO-NO for them. They can only talk about ritualistic things, otherwise, they are deemed ILLOGICAL=WRONG VIEW i.e. E-Nuri as long as you talk about a few feel good verses, the nomads will LOVE ya! Don't talk about anything of real relevance though, thats a NO-NO! These are Mere OPINIONS....oh I forgot, the Message IS in the MESSENGER! Alhamdulillah caala kuuli xaal wacuudi Bilaah min xaal ahal an nar!