Ah. Well, all I can say is that the bottom line of any religion should be "choose life". I know people in Shul (synagogue) with me on the holiest days of the year who carry open walkie talkies. Why? Because they're on call for a volunteer rescue service. When a call comes in, they do head with it. No worry about prayers. No worry about the restrictions of the day. A life is at stake and they have to move. Life is the top priority.
On a side note (as it will come up), married Jewish women are required to cover their hair. A wig, hat, head scarf, etc. It does not obscure their features and there is never a problem with it when taking a photo. Anything that obscures the face unnaturally (i.e. not facial hair) is not allowed for official pictures in most states. To take it a step further, you can be stopped and forced by law to remove any facial covering in NY. This was used a few years back to block a KKK march. They would have to do it open faced and they refused. As for the Rah, Rah, I'm just pissed at the State Department and the WHO. State has a list of 'sanctions' drawn up to force the 'roadmap' down Israel's throat. Free choice? Ha. I really hate the State Department (sorry Tim). The WHO, at one of their conferences decides to ignore the raging health problems and instead gets into politics again by condemning Israel. Doesn't matter that the Arabs in Israel have better health, lifespans, etc. than their brethren outside. Doesn't matter that there are more important things to worry about like Sars, Aids, etc. It's a UN thing so they have to condemn Israel. It's formula now. > I was talking specifically about the concept that it would be better for > a woman to die then touched by another man (i.e., a fireman). (And I > wasn't trying to say America was perfect, so no need for the rah/rah > stuff. ;) > > -rc > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 1:59 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: Makes you shake your head. > > > > > > Women aren't allowed to drive in SA which makes the point > > moot. Rah, Rah, America for upholding the rights of women, > > religions, etc. Rah, Rah, the UN for the same. > > > > > > > So ... is it safe to assume then that this is accepted > > practice in SA? > > > Well, not accepted practice as in it happens everyday - but does > > > anyone remember if this was "ok" with the general public and the > > > government? To put it bluntly, it's better for a girl to > > die than be > > > touched by a man who isn't her husband or father? > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
