Michael Perelman wrote:
I think we might do well to think more about economic matters and speculating
about
religion and sexuality.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
michaelperelman.wordpress.com
.
Typo duly noted...
Tangentially speaking of economics...
Yoshie quoted:
"The Prophet Muhammad introduced Islamic teachings in this patriarchal
Arabic society. Thus, it is possible that the patriarchal views of
Arabic society interfered with the tradition of Islamic interpretation,
including on homosexuality."
This can be taken tangentially to mean that the Arabs are usurpers of
the islamic traditions, most recently as wahhabism, which purports to be
some 'purer' form of islam, but is really a distorted (perverse?)
teaching, as puritanism might be when compared to older christian
traditions.
The economic impact is immeasurable if one considers that the arabs
control THE symbol of islam; makka, control and/or steer the more
radical militant tendencies of islam through political, military and
cultural support of jihad while suppressing opposition to the ruling
powers or clergy of Saudi Arabia.
AND they control the oil, which similarly perverse usurpers of christian
tradition is attempting to obtain, and in the process, teeing off every
muslim in the world.
All this (and more, much more), with a running total of $312 billion for
Iraq's oil alone.
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182
...was that economic enough? Did I mention it was tangential?
Leigh
http://leighm.net/
