And the problem is...? It's one of many gyms. And it's only 6 hours a week.Stingray24 wrote:
Which is why there is debate. It's a unisex gym and perhaps other women did ask for women only hours previously. But now since Muslim women asked everyone trips over themselves to comply with their demands.
oops, hence my problem. thank you stingray and SenorToenails for agreeing with me that "women only" would not get such concessions as such that MUSLIM women can get.Stingray24 wrote:
Which is why there is debate. It's a unisex gym and perhaps other women did ask for women only hours previously. But now since Muslim women asked everyone trips over themselves to comply with their demands.SenorToenails wrote:
... it simply says that it was done after these Muslim women asked for it.
wait a second. So Harvard is allowed to adress students' needs, just not those that may have a religious background ?lowing wrote:
Actually I don't give a shit. I am arguing principality, not the report itself. I could use this argument for any special interest group seeking special favor.B.Schuss wrote:
well, lowing, these women are Harvard students. Maybe they want to workout at Harvard gyms ?lowing wrote:
I have already explained, there are ALREADY womens only gyms. GO to one of them. This gym is unisex. The reasons for the special treatment is not sex based it is religious based. WOMEN did not ask for this..MUSLIM women did.
And not pay extra at Curves ?
Harvard simply adressed their students' needs. If there is no explicit Harvard policy stating that all gyms must be co-ed, I wouldn't know why they shouldn't allow one gym to have womens-only hours for 6 hours per week. Especially when two thirds of those hours are from 8-10 a.m. on weekdays. I mean, who want to work out during those hours anyway ?
I think you're making more out of this than there is to it.
Harvard is not addressing students needs, they are addressing religious specific students needs. Big difference.
yeah, that would make sense. No wait, it doesn't....http://www.memorialchurch.harvard.edu/
and look, they even have an islamic student society, on campus. http://www.harvardislamicsociety.org/
may god help us all...
Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't agree with you.lowing wrote:
oops, hence my problem. thank you stingray and SenorToenails for agreeing with me that "women only" would not get such concessions as such that MUSLIM women can get.
lol @ the muslima.com ad, btw.
At least I am getting that here.
At least I am getting that here.
I wish to change my stance on the issue. Lowing makes a good point, that their should be no concessions for minority groups. I am looking at it from a socialist prospective as I am a socialist at heart, which is the only way to look at it.
I knew Comrade Lowing had a bit of Red in him.
I knew Comrade Lowing had a bit of Red in him.
No they can address the needs of there students, just not the needs of specific students by taking away from other students.B.Schuss wrote:
wait a second. So Harvard is allowed to adress students' needs, just not those that may have a religious background ?lowing wrote:
Actually I don't give a shit. I am arguing principality, not the report itself. I could use this argument for any special interest group seeking special favor.B.Schuss wrote:
well, lowing, these women are Harvard students. Maybe they want to workout at Harvard gyms ?
And not pay extra at Curves ?
Harvard simply adressed their students' needs. If there is no explicit Harvard policy stating that all gyms must be co-ed, I wouldn't know why they shouldn't allow one gym to have womens-only hours for 6 hours per week. Especially when two thirds of those hours are from 8-10 a.m. on weekdays. I mean, who want to work out during those hours anyway ?
I think you're making more out of this than there is to it.
Harvard is not addressing students needs, they are addressing religious specific students needs. Big difference.
yeah, that would make sense. No wait, it doesn't....http://www.memorialchurch.harvard.edu/
and look, they even have an islamic student society, on campus. http://www.harvardislamicsociety.org/
may god help us all...
I have no problems with clubs or "societies". My only problem here is, the controversies that 'WHITE" clubs would endure, that black or any other diverse group would not.
People wanna congregate with people from the their own backgrounds and commonalities, unfortunately white people are not allowed this without being labeled racist. But that is for another thread.
Oh I thought you agreed that it was not women who asked for concessions but SPECIFICALLY Muslim women. Which makes this a special interest issue.SenorToenails wrote:
Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't agree with you.lowing wrote:
oops, hence my problem. thank you stingray and SenorToenails for agreeing with me that "women only" would not get such concessions as such that MUSLIM women can get.
LOL, well I guess on issues such as this I do not believe in individuality. So yer right. No special intersts groups should gain favor with any authority.JahManRed wrote:
I wish to change my stance on the issue. Lowing makes a good point, that their should be no concessions for minority groups. I am looking at it from a socialist prospective as I am a socialist at heart, which is the only way to look at it.
I knew Comrade Lowing had a bit of Red in him.
Stingray, it is your right to say whatever you want and defy logic while doing it, but if you cannot realize that it is women who are receiving a special consideration, and not muslims, then perhaps you should think about it some more. Harvard took their religious views under advisement and arranged a fair deal that does not solely favor muslims and provides this group of women (those who asked and those who didn't) a small amount of time to work out without men around. Read the article about this on Time.com. This athletic facility is on the edge of campus and is the least used one. I do not see how this is an unfair arrangement.Stingray24 wrote:
Which is why there is debate. It's a unisex gym and perhaps other women did ask for women only hours previously. But now since Muslim women asked everyone trips over themselves to comply with their demands.
The Harvard faculty member directly said in the article this policy was done for religious reasons.
I'm glad you think I didn't read the article, but hey, I actually thought about it. Unlike you.
So muslims asked for a 'concession' and an arrangement was made to benefit all women, regardless of religion. How is this favoring muslims in particular? They aren't the only group benefiting. I would think this arrangement would be more along your lines, because it's not favoring a social group but a gender, which is a broader more acceptable thing to do. Complaining about this is like complaining that women have different restrooms. Afterall, those ladies are getting a special consideration--They have more toilets.lowing wrote:
Oh I thought you agreed that it was not women who asked for concessions but SPECIFICALLY Muslim women. Which makes this a special interest issue.
I snuck in the gym to see for myself... lol
nice
nice
Last edited by [TUF]Catbox (2008-03-07 09:26:06)
Love is the answer
It would not have been granted if not for them being Muslims.SenorToenails wrote:
So muslims asked for a 'concession' and an arrangement was made to benefit all women, regardless of religion. How is this favoring muslims in particular? They aren't the only group benefiting. I would think this arrangement would be more along your lines, because it's not favoring a social group but a gender, which is a broader more acceptable thing to do. Complaining about this is like complaining that women have different restrooms. Afterall, those ladies are getting a special consideration--They have more toilets.lowing wrote:
Oh I thought you agreed that it was not women who asked for concessions but SPECIFICALLY Muslim women. Which makes this a special interest issue.
I am not complaining, I am voicing my opinions on how I feel about special favors for special interest groups.
Thats quite wrong and its definitely not civilized or the "American way".JahManRed wrote:
I wish to change my stance on the issue. Lowing makes a good point, that their should be no concessions for minority groups. I am looking at it from a socialist prospective as I am a socialist at heart, which is the only way to look at it.
I knew Comrade Lowing had a bit of Red in him.
You see in civilized and democratic and socially developed Bosnia and Herzegovina we proudly give concessions to minority groups. Catholics are exempt from work or school during mayor religious holidays, so are Orthodox Christians and Jews. The whatsitcalled (zoning commission maybe) will not issue a permit for opening a pub if its in the close vicinity of a church or Christian/Orthodox/Jewish cemetery. During mayor holidays of Catholics or Orthodox Christians the state TV will devote most of the day to programs, movies, documentaries and religious sermons pertaining to that particular holiday. A lot of private TV stations will do the same depending on their targeted audience.
Since there are many workers from India in some factories, it they request it, arrangements are made to make an isolated part in mess halls for them. But you see, its not a news worthy scandal when they request something like that. If it makes sense and its feasible and doesnt intrude too much than its done. Plain and simple.
Does that make Bosnia better or worse than a hypothetical "Lowing - My way or the Highway" country?
My way or the highway??zeidmaan wrote:
Thats quite wrong and its definitely not civilized or the "American way".JahManRed wrote:
I wish to change my stance on the issue. Lowing makes a good point, that their should be no concessions for minority groups. I am looking at it from a socialist prospective as I am a socialist at heart, which is the only way to look at it.
I knew Comrade Lowing had a bit of Red in him.
You see in civilized and democratic and socially developed Bosnia and Herzegovina we proudly give concessions to minority groups. Catholics are exempt from work or school during mayor religious holidays, so are Orthodox Christians and Jews. The whatsitcalled (zoning commission maybe) will not issue a permit for opening a pub if its in the close vicinity of a church or Christian/Orthodox/Jewish cemetery. During mayor holidays of Catholics or Orthodox Christians the state TV will devote most of the day to programs, movies, documentaries and religious sermons pertaining to that particular holiday. A lot of private TV stations will do the same depending on their targeted audience.
Since there are many workers from India in some factories, it they request it, arrangements are made to make an isolated part in mess halls for them. But you see, its not a news worthy scandal when they request something like that. If it makes sense and its feasible and doesnt intrude too much than its done. Plain and simple.
Does that make Bosnia better or worse than a hypothetical "Lowing - My way or the Highway" country?
My way is everyone is treated equally and fairly. America is too diverse for special treatment. There should be one standard and everyone should know what that standard is. You can not please everyone so the best course of action is to stop trying and have everyone expect the same treatment and that treatment should be fair and balanced.
But people are different man. Small concessions are necessary. You cant have one standard for everyone if that standard is designed to suit majority. For example, if you have 50 Chinese students on the campus and they wish to celebrate their new year that does not coincide with ours. You could say "there is only one standard and one "new year" and you cant celebrate any other "new year". Or you could let them celebrate it, give them access to a ball room or party room or whatever you call it. I think the second option is right and more civilized.lowing wrote:
My way or the highway??
My way is everyone is treated equally and fairly. America is too diverse for special treatment. There should be one standard and everyone should know what that standard is. You can not please everyone so the best course of action is to stop trying and have everyone expect the same treatment and that treatment should be fair and balanced.
I do not care who celebrates what. As long as what you do does not affect others I do not care. But that is not what we are talking about. This special treatment affects others, in fact affects the majority.zeidmaan wrote:
But people are different man. Small concessions are necessary. You cant have one standard for everyone if that standard is designed to suit majority. For example, if you have 50 Chinese students on the campus and they wish to celebrate their new year that does not coincide with ours. You could say "there is only one standard and one "new year" and you cant celebrate any other "new year". Or you could let them celebrate it, give them access to a ball room or party room or whatever you call it. I think the second option is right and more civilized.lowing wrote:
My way or the highway??
My way is everyone is treated equally and fairly. America is too diverse for special treatment. There should be one standard and everyone should know what that standard is. You can not please everyone so the best course of action is to stop trying and have everyone expect the same treatment and that treatment should be fair and balanced.
Using your example, The Chinese can rent whatever ballroom they want, as long as they were first in line for whatever time slot they were looking for. If not, then you do not kick out the person who rented that ballroom first in that time slot, because the Chinese complained and screamed discrimination.
Concessions are not necessary, the rules have long been established, assimilate to them or go home.
Last edited by lowing (2008-03-08 03:06:53)
But we are talking about small concessions to accommodate for cultural and religious differences. We are not talking about huge America-shattering concessions. A while back Ive read about an Airport in America (cant remember which one) that installed in the bathrooms the thing for washing you feet so that Muslims can use it when preparing for praying (most of the Taxi staff are Muslims). They had to remove one or two urinals to make room for it. Occasionally someone will have to wait in line for a minute or two because there are 2 less urinals but so what.lowing wrote:
I do not care who celebrates what. As long as what you do does not affect others I do not care. But that is not what we are talking about. This special treatment affects others, in fact affects the majority.
Using your example, The Chinese can rent whatever ballroom they want, as long as they were first in line for whatever time slot they were looking for. If not, then you do not kick out the person who rented that ballroom first in that time slot, because the Chinese complained and screamed discrimination.
Concessions are not necessary, the rules have long been established, assimilate to them or go home.
Edit: and for Chinese example I was thinking of that day in the year being a designated day for celebrating the Chinese new year (every year) so no one else can have that slot, its completely off limits. And I wasnt thinking about renting a private ballroom but using the universities one.
Last edited by zeidmaan (2008-03-08 03:23:29)
Ok so tell me then, where exactly do you draw the line at concessions or appeasement??zeidmaan wrote:
But we are talking about small concessions to accommodate for cultural and religious differences. We are not talking about huge America-shattering concessions. A while back Ive read about an Airport in America (cant remember which one) that installed in the bathrooms the thing for washing you feet so that Muslims can use it when preparing for praying (most of the Taxi staff are Muslims). They had to remove one or two urinals to make room for it. Occasionally someone will have to wait in line for a minute or two because there are 2 less urinals but so what.lowing wrote:
I do not care who celebrates what. As long as what you do does not affect others I do not care. But that is not what we are talking about. This special treatment affects others, in fact affects the majority.
Using your example, The Chinese can rent whatever ballroom they want, as long as they were first in line for whatever time slot they were looking for. If not, then you do not kick out the person who rented that ballroom first in that time slot, because the Chinese complained and screamed discrimination.
Concessions are not necessary, the rules have long been established, assimilate to them or go home.
Edit: and for Chinese example I was thinking of that day in the year being a designated day for celebrating the Chinese new year (every year) so no one else can have that slot, its completely off limits. And I wasnt thinking about renting a private ballroom but using the universities one.
I mean the number 1 is a small number, so is 2 maybe even 3, but once you have conceded your ass up to 99, 100 makes very little difference in comparison to 99, but to the original number 1, there is a big difference. So tell me, where is the definitive line in the sand??
So you will lock me out from the hall even though I want to celebrate my Festivus on the same day? Even though I got to the hall first? Even though you will not lock anyone out for me? Nope, unacceptable.
Of course there is a line, I repeatedly said "small concession", Im not saying make the entire month of Ramadan a national holiday when no one works. It is a must in any civilized democratic society. There are numerous different cultures and small accommodations need to be made for them by the MAJORITY. And please don't make it sound like the majority is endangered or has a harder time than minorities.
You did not answer the question....WHERE is the line. WHO decides how small or big a concession is? WHAT do you do when you think the concession is too big and the ones asking for it does not??zeidmaan wrote:
Of course there is a line, I repeatedly said "small concession", Im not saying make the entire month of Ramadan a national holiday when no one works. It is a must in any civilized democratic society. There are numerous different cultures and small accommodations need to be made for them by the MAJORITY. And please don't make it sound like the majority is endangered or has a harder time than minorities.
So do you agree that some concessions should be made for small request that dont hurt the rest too much?lowing wrote:
You did not answer the question....WHERE is the line. WHO decides how small or big a concession is? WHAT do you do when you think the concession is too big and the ones asking for it does not??zeidmaan wrote:
Of course there is a line, I repeatedly said "small concession", Im not saying make the entire month of Ramadan a national holiday when no one works. It is a must in any civilized democratic society. There are numerous different cultures and small accommodations need to be made for them by the MAJORITY. And please don't make it sound like the majority is endangered or has a harder time than minorities.
And as far your questions, it all depends on the case. I cant write a list now of all possible request and tell you which ones I think should be done and which not. I mean if a Jewish girl and her parents request that she not play the role of Miss Piggy in the class play - perfectly reasonable. If they request that the character of Miss Piggy be completely removed or a completely different play be played - unreasonable and asking too much.
Again, you did not answer the question. You need to tell me where the line in the sand is drawn and who gets to make that distinction.zeidmaan wrote:
So do you agree that some concessions should be made for small request that dont hurt the rest too much?lowing wrote:
You did not answer the question....WHERE is the line. WHO decides how small or big a concession is? WHAT do you do when you think the concession is too big and the ones asking for it does not??zeidmaan wrote:
Of course there is a line, I repeatedly said "small concession", Im not saying make the entire month of Ramadan a national holiday when no one works. It is a must in any civilized democratic society. There are numerous different cultures and small accommodations need to be made for them by the MAJORITY. And please don't make it sound like the majority is endangered or has a harder time than minorities.
And as far your questions, it all depends on the case. I cant write a list now of all possible request and tell you which ones I think should be done and which not. I mean if a Jewish girl and her parents request that she not play the role of Miss Piggy in the class play - perfectly reasonable. If they request that the character of Miss Piggy be completely removed or a completely different play be played - unreasonable and asking too much.
Nope, no special treatment for special interests groups.
He just gave you a perfectly good example!!lowing wrote:
Again, you did not answer the question. You need to tell me where the line in the sand is drawn and who gets to make that distinction.zeidmaan wrote:
So do you agree that some concessions should be made for small request that dont hurt the rest too much?lowing wrote:
You did not answer the question....WHERE is the line. WHO decides how small or big a concession is? WHAT do you do when you think the concession is too big and the ones asking for it does not??
And as far your questions, it all depends on the case. I cant write a list now of all possible request and tell you which ones I think should be done and which not. I mean if a Jewish girl and her parents request that she not play the role of Miss Piggy in the class play - perfectly reasonable. If they request that the character of Miss Piggy be completely removed or a completely different play be played - unreasonable and asking too much.
Nope, no special treatment for special interests groups.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Whether or not a girls plays miss fuckin' piggy or not, is hardly an example of society or the govt. conceding to special interest demandsVaregg wrote:
He just gave you a perfectly good example!!lowing wrote:
Again, you did not answer the question. You need to tell me where the line in the sand is drawn and who gets to make that distinction.zeidmaan wrote:
So do you agree that some concessions should be made for small request that dont hurt the rest too much?
And as far your questions, it all depends on the case. I cant write a list now of all possible request and tell you which ones I think should be done and which not. I mean if a Jewish girl and her parents request that she not play the role of Miss Piggy in the class play - perfectly reasonable. If they request that the character of Miss Piggy be completely removed or a completely different play be played - unreasonable and asking too much.
Nope, no special treatment for special interests groups.