Comments on: Harvard Muslims Don’t Need to Assimilate

By: Bret

Bret — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 01:37:00 +0000

Fear of the lack of assimilation of ethnic groups in recent history, drove the placement of the American flags in public classrooms, and the pledge of allegiance.
I fear that we will create laws that are Wahabi based. I feel that the Muslim religion fears western traditions based more on a fear of losing their patriarchal control than any true sense of what their deity may require.
To be Muslim=the Subjugation of women! The degree of which only varies by individual comfort level. Some more extreme than others.
Muslims in this country will try to make their religious beliefs law. It is their belief that the Koran is the law.
The question remains will our American melting pot eventually water down some of their beliefs to the point where they do not impede on the belief systems of others?
Freedom of religion is a delicate balance driven and propogated by separation of church and state. If any faith removes this balance our country will be headed toward civil war!

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:51:01 +0000

Yeah, Steve, can you imagine if we still had separate bathroom facilities for men and women in public places? Oh, wait.

Silly analogy. The only issue here is that it happened to be the Muslim women who petitioned for this, and people are being hypersensitive to the idea that the request for gender separation came about because it is a religious issue for these women. Ali Eratz points out that it wouldn’t have been a problem if they’d found support among non-Muslim women on campus (we know that many women prefer to exercise in women only facilities, because private facilities have arisen to meet this demand too- certainly women’s gyms aren’t springing up around the country just to serve Muslim women.)

So pragmatically, Ali is probably right, there’d have been less backlash against this if the request was made on a secular basis- yet I still think that’s only because a lot of people are overreacting. One of six student athletic facilities is being reserved for women during a few hours of the day, and some are calling this the first step toward Sharia law. Yeah, OK, whatever.

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:38:30 +0000

Didnt we just go through an entire Civil Rights struggle in this country so things like segregation arent allowed?

If you, the small minority, dont like something, why not raise some funds and set up your own private gym. From what I can tell, everyone’s student funds go into these Gyms and now those contributors are denied service? Ridiculous. There is no Muslim law that is being violated here, they just feel "uncomfortable". Where in the Constitution, the so-called law of the land, is there any guarantee that you wont feel uncomfortable.

This is wrong on so many levels.

By: MEL

MEL — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:15:38 +0000

I need to ask why do we try to make them happy, when we can’t have a bible or pork even a beer in there country. Maybe it’s time for these women to rethink who is being wronged here. Just try to read a bible and drink a beer in thier country. YOU COULD BE IN JAIL FOR LIFE….

By: Mark_Bee

Mark_Bee — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 20:02:34 +0000

admin: bigotry = ban

By: Obbop

Obbop — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 04:31:22 +0000

Just accept it.

The general American culture is doomed.

Obey your new Muslim overlords.

By: A. A. B.

A. A. B. — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:17:23 +0000

@C Stanley #24
"it is indeed a problem in many or most Muslim cultures today that people don’t have the ability to choose to practice a more rational version of their religion (or free to choose not to practice it at all.) This is where the focus should be- on promoting freedom of religion, not banning the more extremist forms of it except to have safeguards against the things that really do violate human rights."

I see, but isn’t Harvard located in the US? From a legal perspective, the women there do have the ability to practice non-Sharia Islam, another religion or nothing at all. But instead, they insist on gym segregation. In your opinion, how should Americans (and also Europeans) react to these cultural problems, as you call it, in our own countries?

By: Nihat

Nihat — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:41:10 +0000

Yes, C, that’s why I say ‘bite the bullet.’ I am afraid you might not agree that it’s a bullet, but so be it.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:30:32 +0000

Interesting that you put the "necessarily" in there. Necessarily? Perhaps not necessarily. Often? Yes.

But it matters whether the two things are necessarily linked or often linked, because you can undo the problem in different ways depending on which it is. That’s why I’m pointing out that when these religious groups exist within a wider culture that safeguards against the use of religion for oppression, we don’t see the problem. Therefore the fix is to promote those kinds of societal changes rather than banning the one practice which isn’t really even harmful to anyone as long as its done by choice and not by force.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:27:38 +0000

Nihat- the problem with your analogy to blacks sitting at the back of the bus is that there’s no other reason that they’d choose to sit exclusively there if they had a choice, while I’ve already shown that there are other reasons that women would choose the modesty of the traditional Muslim garments. You want them to reject it because you believe it’s coupled to these other noxious practices, but they don’t see it that way. If in your analogy, the back of the bus actually had some advantage that black people wanted, then it would have followed that some black people would have exercised their choice to move to other portions of the bus while some would exercise a choice to sit at the back, once the prohibitions were lifted.

AAB- yes, I stand corrected- I meant the Amish not the Quakers.

All of you who are arguing culture vs. religion are correct- it is indeed a problem in many or most Muslim cultures today that people don’t have the ability to choose to practice a more rational version of their religion (or free to choose not to practice it at all.) This is where the focus should be- on promoting freedom of religion, not banning the more extremist forms of it except to have safeguards against the things that really do violate human rights.