Related Posts

Joseph Ward III: A Living Hell: LGBT Iranians and the Islamic State

Joseph Ward III: A Living Hell: LGBT Iranians and the Islamic State. Like many gay Iranians, Hamid was pressured by his parents to marry a woman based on prevailing traditions in Iran. But knowing he was a gay man, he and his wife divorced, and he was soon kidnapped by local authorities because of his appearance and beaten half to death in his home. “A man with long hair is not a man,” he was told by an officer of the basij, the Iranian security force. “…Of course [your wife] would divorce you.”

News on Tariq Ramadan

via MoorishGirl, I see there’s finally some action on the case of Tariq Ramadan, the Swiss scholar who was denied entry into to US without reason given. Technorati Tags: Tariq Ramadan

Reading a Video

Ali Eteraz has a highly speculative piece up on the latest OBL video. I’m actually with him until he gets to the Bollywood part. I hope that there are professionals watching these videos and trying to figure out next moves, but even in the popular media and quick deconstruction like this would take a lot of air from AQ’s mission. Imagine instead of the headline “OBL loves him some martyrs, run for your lives,” we got headlines like “Latest OBL video give further proof that he’s dead, AQ clueless.” Of course, the second headline shouldn’t be read to minimize the…

2 thoughts on “Idolizing the big 10”

  1. I agree with your comments. Asra Nomani in her book points out that the Saudis are hardcore about pictures of people being idolatrous, but that hasn’t stopped them from plastering Mecca with pictures of the ruling caste. Apparently, not looking directly into the camera is the key difference between idolatry and a halal snapshot.
    It’s hard to believe that Ten Commandments cases are still litigated, but there you go. I’ll predict a split-the-baby (but hardly Solomonaic) decision that will generate litigation (and legal fees) for years still. Here’s my prediction: on a 5-4 vote, displays of the Ten Commandments on public property will be held not to violate constitutional principles of separation of church and state. However, the court will refuse to establish a bright line rule but instead hold that in each case, the question will be whether the display is, in the “totality of the circumstances” for a secular or religious purpose. One “prong” of the test will be how prominent the display is. So a display the size of a house in a public park is out, but a small display in a courthouse along with, say, a display of a copy of the constitution or the magna carta is not. Sometimes, this is as intellectual as constitutional analysis gets.
    But this court is not about to invalidate the countless examples of religious iconography that has always been present in American public life, like prayers before legislative sessions, or even the Court’s baliff’s cry of “God save this Honorable Court” before the Nine take the bench. The last two examples are not implicated directly in the present cases, but you can seen the “slippery slope” that the examples present. On the the hand, I don’t think this Court is prepared to say that it’s ok to have laser light shows over the Capitol building featuring the Ten Commandments and Cecil B. DeMille’s voiceover.
    But of course, I could be wrong. Allahu alam.

  2. Oddly enough, I think I would be OK with the laser light shows. You could argue about the ephemerality of life (Buddhism), the cyclical nature of life (Hinduism), techno-wizadry (Atheism), of course you make the Abrahamics happy. Although I was thinking James Earl Jones for the voice.

Comments are closed.