These videos speak volumes about Europe's xenophobia and growing intolerance. They certainly had no problems trampling cultural values when they brought their armies into Africa and pillaged what they could. It's distressing but the backlash against muslims (and visible minority immigrants) is everywhere and only going to get worse. It's enough to hear the nostalgia of radio callers for the 40's/ 50's immigration when most were white and christian.

^ Ah yes, I remember the Plan B dilemma as well. Interesting that it would be a source of debate at all given that as a hormone-based contraceptive, medical supervision is necessary in most if not all cases.

Bush's administration doesn't really care about the spread of STDs among people, especially teens. They don't want to be associated with or seen as signing of pre-marital sex. Religious and social conservatism was the platform that got them the midwest polls. They use similar arguments with giving out condoms and abortion. When people ask them about the birth of children to teenagers and people who can't care for them, they have nothing but blank stares. Who cares about the kid once born as long as condoms are not given out on their watch. Do you know of other similar cases (of diseases) falling under this religious prohibition vs. medical prevention debate? You may be thinking of stem cell research that they've set back a few years. The research is in its infancy and its benefits are still in debate but the potential use of an aborted fetus/umblicial cord froze many of the grants.

Originally posted by STOIC: Chronic anger may drive a person to unhealthy behaviors like smoking. Whenever I do poor on a test my blood pressure goes up, I become nervous and easily irritated by the slightest provocation. No doubt. I read once that hostile behaviour/anger was more related to cardiovascular disease than being the so-called type A personality. It gives a person something to think about as that vein in the temple begins to throb and the fists clench and unclench .

^ What a difficult and hideous reality! If the absence of fathers partly lead to this generation's demise, then we can expect more of the same in the next as these young men father children they cannot adequately parent . In response to the worsening situation for young black men, a growing number of programs are placing as much importance on teaching life skills — like parenting, conflict resolution and character building — as they are on teaching job skills. Not to bash 'lifeskills' but if the quality of schooling is a serious issue, why aren't these programs teaching trades/technical skills? I wonder what they mean by 'job skills'. I think one would be hard pressed to find good schools that sacrifice academia/trades training for teaching parenting and character building. Dropout rates for Hispanic youths are as bad or worse but are not associated with nearly as much unemployment..... How come? . I wish there was more about this and the type of work these Hispanic youth are finding.

Stress of Discrimination Tied to Heart Disease in African-American Women by Jai A. Dennison Chronic exposure to discrimination might increase the risk of cardiovascular disease in African-American women, suggests new research preseneted at the American Heart Association's 45th Annual Conference on Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention. The more discrimination African-American women report, the more likely they are to have coronary artery calcification -- a buildup of calcium in the vessels that is associated with atherosclerosis, the researchers said. "We know from other studies in this area that stressful life experiences can have an effect on cardiovascular outcomes," said Tené Lewis, Ph.D., a health psychologist in preventive medicine at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago. "Discrimination appears to be a stressor that has particular relevance for the health of African-American women." Black women and heart disease I spent a few hours today waiting for my car to be fixed and couldn't help thinking of the grating nature of contact with racists. No matter the establishment, common courtesy and decency (not even customer service) seem to evaporate. Rude, rude, rude. :mad: From the bank teller to the parking lot attendant to the guy filling out the form at the Canadian tire. Just how much of this blood-boiling labyrinth does a white woman run through on a daily basis? What makes your blood boil (and possibly your heart harden)?

Originally posted by Castro: [QB] ^ I'm the resident feminist objector dear. You have to have 2000+ posts to even apply for that position. Glad you're contemplating a response. If for nothing else, the gallery needs it. I will hold my application till then .

Originally posted by Xoogsade: naden If you were indifferent, you wouldn't have replied. I assume you know forms of argumentations one of which was employed socrates where he reduced his opponent's views to absurdity then suggested better opinions. You tried to belittle my ideas but failed to use a better method. In your case, you admitted defeat by telling me not to address you. All of a sudden, I was taken back in time when I was a kid and I used to tell my opponents, ha ila hadlin Anyway, you get your wish and I won't mention your name although I think it is more respectful to address people directly when you want to talk to them. Tata, I must get back to work. I was being polite when I said I was 'indifferent' to your long-winded, full of half-baked opinions piece. If you really want to debate the issue of abortion, you would consider factors such as the availability of contraception to poor women and family planning within muslim communities. You might even bring yourself to mention the recourse available to women when faced with an unwanted pregnancy either outside of marriage or within a marriage in a large and otherwise impoverished family. This is how you addressed it in your piece: If her legs remain shut till she finds her desired man and with a contract to boot, she won't need to be a murderer and live with a troubled conscience for life. In case you had no instruction on the birds and the bees as a youngster, it takes a man and a woman to create a pregnancy; the guarding of body parts (by shutting of legs or tucking a certain organ in) is a must for all muslims. Anyways, the best source for feminist failures is the West, their achievements, although touted as great, still doesn't amount to the full rights their creator wanted them to have. Rights maybe guaranteed by god but they have to be garnered by people. They have to be realized, articulated, fought for and constantly reformed to fit the times. It's easy to brand feminism as 'extremist' or to claim that women are still 'dominated' in the west. Many rights in the west are yet to be earned but there is no other place where protection of rights and access to all that life has to offer is fought for and gained. On the other side of the specturm, Where late marriages were encouraged, and extreme feminism took hold as in Europe, They are experiencing the effect of dwindling populations as their citizens grew older and replacements for them are not available. 'Extreme feminism' is not the only reason these societies are dealing with reduced birth rates. Economic and social conditions have made starting families or having large ones a challenge for most. Societies' birthrates ebb and flow with the times. Bonnie Smith's 'Changing Lives: Women in European History Since 1700' can point to some of these conditions. Women delaying marriage, as you point out, is no doubt one of the determinants of a low birthrate and failure to replace a generation adequately. Marriage and birthrates are also more than a woman choosing to go back to the 'basics' (I'm assuming it means a natural role as mother/wife). It is an entire society's dilemma and its readiness to support social welfare policies that aid a whole family of mother/father and children and not to mention elderly/sick parents. The issues are a lot deeper than a choice a woman makes between a career and having children as in your statement that They weren't thinking about the biological clock and the health effects of late pregnancies. Your arguments present valid points. However, you might inject the man's changing role in the rearing of a family every once in a while instead of the tired and comfortable bashing of feminists or the choices that some women make. I agree with you that governments should not regulate the size of families and you make a sound argument about the difficulties that will surely face societies that are now exercising infanticide. I did not belittle your ideas, I was puzzled that you would address one person when obviously expressing a long list of thoughts about a wide topic. It was not meant to disrespect but to ask & encourage you not to post it as though it was a back-and-forth argument of two people who are disagreeing. We were not. This is not to take away from your argument but to engage everyone who reads/posts in the thread. This site has a way of watching an argument like it was a bullfight. It is fun to take part in and/or watch but it must be actually occurring. You, on the other hand, showed little respect even in the face of respectful discourse. I can get down and dirty but that depends on how I feel about a topic, and even then, I try my best not direct it at a person but an idea. I don't always do it but I try. You, unfortunately, show absolutely no class. If you are thirsting to pick a fight with a 'real woman', then keep your arguments open to all. Your bait just might be picked up by one.

^ I have no issues engaging someone in a debate and I just might do it at a later time when I have both the energy and the inclination. The poster's essay does have legitimate arguments and weak ones as well. However, I reserve the right to debate/post opinions when I am interested in doing so not when taunted as some resident feminist objector. The issues are worth debating and a later post/thread might do them justice.

Originally posted by Xoogsade: naden There, I addressed your fears if that is why you didn't want your name as addressee. If you were offended by what I said, then it is your prerogative to address them or ignore them. And if you don't want your name be mentioned altogether when I or others reply in these topics, then I am afraid you will have to call off participation in public forums and in this particular situation let real women like Ahura pick up the torch I am sure she has got something to say to me. Hornafrique Good question [/QB] I have no fears that need to be addressed on an annonymous online forum. I was not offended by what you said. I was indifferent. It is not the mentioning of a name that I asked you not to (I mention names all the times), it is the addressing of your sermon in my direction. It is a public forum, and unless asking a specific question or making a specific comment, kindly direct your lecture at the public.

Originally posted by AbdulNoor: by implying because she doesn't want you to mention her name in debates with u, she is somehow not a "real woman". I think how she handled herself shows that she is indeed an intelligent woman. Just respect her wishes brother, no need to say what u said. Thank you. It takes some practice to recognize and ignore trollish behaviour on a public forum.

Originally posted by HornAfrique: ^I take it that you can't answer the question. I'll take a stab at it. Men don't feel equal to women when they wear skirts because they keep trying on women's high heels and underpants instead. There, I said it. Now git with the troll questions.

Originally posted by HornAfrique: Call me a quuqle Quuqle.

Xoogsade, brevity is a lost art it seems. If you absolutely have to share your views (as you are fully entitled), please don't address them to me. While everyone contributes to the thread, you and I are not engaging in a separate debate on these issues (not to say that they're not meaningful and worth doing). With respect and appreciating that you mean well, kindly address the nomad masses with oratio directa.

Originally posted by Xoogsade: naden If you are free, what are you going to do with your freedom? And are you bound by certain beliefs for example? What being free means is subjective and debatable, and that is where the blame to feminists comes in for their blunder in dictating and monopolizing what constitutes freedom and what doesn't. There are recognized universal needs and women in all cultures need protection and safety, education, to be able to determine their future and so on, but in islamic societies, there will be a self-imposed limit and definitions of what is personal freedom. Anything-goes-freedom is not recognized to be a desired freedom. Freedom with self-imposed limits to avoid contradicting one's beliefs is what most muslims do practice and need to practice. Freedom with moral boundaries is their objective. Besides, I fail to understand what you meant by "Sexual Freedom". Is it doing as one pleases including intimacy with the same sex or just plain sex done any time? PS: I don't claim moral superiority, just confused about certain comments By sexual freedom, I meant what is usually termed 'reproductive rights' meaning when to start a family, how big and so on. Doing as one pleases and whom one shags doesn't concern me and in most instances, doesn't need a state-protected and regulated right. People from the most rural and underdeveloped to those from the richest regions have the same sexual behaviours and inclinations . Social conventions and religious teachings of the young usually channel these inclinations properly.

Not sure what you mean by 'humanism' but the discussion was about what arab muslims could do to help those in need. Any value system that aids the poor and needy is alright by me (I was one before a hand was given to me). I do accept other people's values and no talk of a 'utopia' was in the discussion. Are you sure you're not dragging some incomplete thought from a different thread into this? Originally posted by Khayr: Naden, whats with the fascination of making the world a Utopia - as you deem fit. :confused: People's values vastly differ so why can't you accept that 'Humanism' is not at the top of the chain for some people.

Congratulations, Khayr. Babies are just wondrous beings, mabruuk .

...I am so easily suckered by IQ questions/ads.

^ Pretty devastating stuff . Saw a documentary the other night showing regions of Kenya/Somalia with no rain for over 3 years. Even the normally hardy camel have died in droves.

Pi, I don't know who this Nadellypso/Callypso is but you need to calm down and back off, and the best cure I know for a predictable place is to lay off it. I stand corrected, God did decree the cutting of hands. I still believe it is barbaric and suitable for that society.

Originally posted by Castro: I'm sure you didn't mean to describe Allah's decree as barbaric, did you? I sure did. By today's standards, cutting off limbs is and God did not decree the cutting of hands. Other than crimes such as murder whose punishment is specified in the Quran, the remainder are best left to a judicial system that writes penal law incorporating the spirit of the sharia and taking into account modern variants of a crime. Even with these crimes, there is a flexibility in the punishment to reduce the shukuk.

I tend to agree. Many aspects of the sharia law cannot be applied in a modern society as it would not address all complexities of today's modern life. They applied well to a small desert society where most were traders. Additionally, many of these sharia laws needed to be expanded upon to address family laws such as property, divorce, child custody and so on. Some countries such as Egypt have done a good job incorporating the spirit of some sharia laws into modern penal legislation. For example, cutting off a thief's hand is just barbaric and would not address all the types of robbery and theft that exists now: armed, white collar, and so on. Originally posted by ibtisam: i'm not going to come right out and say shariah is faulty, i think it could not be applied to this day and age, with the current people living in the world. i think shariah law could only work and only worked at the time of the prophet (PBUH) and the Khalifah. Anything after that you only have to read history to see shariah rule, due to different understanding of it become Disaster rule! Shariah allows too much flexibility in its nterpretations, so that any tom and dick could justify his actions using his version shariah laws. It is these different interpretations that cause the problems as well as dishonest Muslims, crooks and power hungry people who see Islamic laws as a way to do want they want without people asking difficult questions. [/QB]

^ We just might see some improvement in our lifetimes. Trade with Asian countries could raise the living standards of some African nations & spurn some reform. China-Africa Trade

Great article! I wish he'd included Korea as well, a mighty hot mess.

Salaam Azmaya, I think we're in agreement but despite my despair at the lot of our people, I refuse to believe that we as Black people are collectively 'lazy' and incapable. I've seen and worked with fellow Africans from the centre to the west to the south who have the highest education and even better work ethics. Anyone who's been to Nairobi, Kenya for instance is surprised at the number of young people competing for universities and high schools and whose families sell and risk everything. The last time I saw a program about Kenya on the BBC, they showed a missionary white couple who opened a sunday school and the spread of cell phones among local merchants. That's fine, that is the only thing they want their audience to see. What is missing is the people struggling so hard to improve their lives but whose the country's economy and infrastructure do not support their aspirations. Near a third to a half of newly-trained doctors from countries like Uganda and Malawi will leave for G8 countries. I agree with you that the mentality of tribalism, cronism and corruption, and dependence on/fight over aid money must be stopped for any hope to exist. But one wonders if all the stakeholders with sticky fingers in our collective businesses will allow this to happen or will we continue to deteriorate.