Passport photo of girl, 5, banned 'in case it offends Muslims'

[Veiled Princess 1]

No, but there is such a thing as sympathy. Just because you haven't lived through what I have and vice versa, doesn't mean that we can't relate to one another by virtue of the fact that (ostensibly) have the common human emotion of sympathy.

I'm not asking you to agree. I'm just asking you not to devalue something someone else says because you choose not to relate to it. The actions that occurred throughout history all bring us to this point; the actions you see now will affect the future just as surely as the past has. It is completely valid to look at the issues going on within the ME in the context of 'their' history and in the context of US history (in terms of foreign policy and relations). Why should it be less valid to view US current actions in the context of US history?

I'm not talking about sympathising with anyone. Sympathy and understanding are two different things.

It's easy to say I sympathise with somone but it's totally another thing to understand what drove them to behave in a certain manner because you yourself have experienced it. I hope you get my point.

What you're talking about is sympathy and empathy. I, a cauasian woman cannot empathize with a ME man because our paradigms are too dissimilar. However, I can sympathize with the difficulty they go through because I can imagine what it must be like.

Human beings can imagine what it would be like to have been a human being 150 years ago too. We can imagine (aka put ourselves in the place of for greater UNDERSTANDING of others) a variety of things we don't experience.

What you're saying, in essence, is that what happened 150 years ago isn't as relevant to you as what's happening in the ME today. Fair enough. Charles felt it appropriate to draw a parallel to 150 years ago, something that is relevant to him and possibly to others. And you not only negated it out of turn as irrelevant but insisted that because we don't live it, we can't possibly understand.

Personally I can't understand 150 years ago, nor can I understand the ME conflicts. I can, however, sympathize. That was where the 'sympathy' was brought in. You, a US citizen presumably do not live there full time. You can't even 'understand' fully what someone there goes through. You might have factors that mean you can sympathize more readily or have a greater understanding than someone else could.

I would hazard that if you determine things as irrelevant so will others and in the past you haven't seemed to appreciate when it's done to you.

I never said I understand... in fact I said we can't understand....

I did not say it's irrelevant.

allot of muslims recognize israel as a nation and a right to have their borders protected and be free from terrorism...and allot of islam nations have diplomatic realtions with israel.. so, what is the beef? i have no problem with israel... i do have a problem with terrorists though whether they be muslim influenced, christian, jewish, pagans, chopf##ks, hindus, commies or whatever.. deliberating killing noncombatants is wrong and criminal ..and sisters against the the teachings of the Qu'ram

Absolutely

[*Robert* 2]

[Veiled Princess 1]

I died my hair pink in college just like yours. so...I have been there, done that...then decided to become a professional and in my field, pink hair was not allowed...

moving on...

Hmmm... I never had a problem with pink, purple or blue... whichever I chose that day... even in an office. Of course I would never had worn it like that on the interview... wait a few weeks (or months) and spring it on them. Didn't even have a problem when I had it braided and each little braid a different color

Here is yet another example of a Muslim trying to force a change in our laws to accommodate their faith:

Veiled Drivers License

Fortunately, the judge in this case had a level of SANITY and was not intimidated by this stupidity. Unfortunately, there were many similar cases where Muslim women were granted the right to wear their head scarfs in the driver's license photos.

That was one case involving a mentally challenged individual. I know MANY fully veiled sisters all of whom thought that chick was off her rocker! It's an ID for the love of God! How can you be ID'd if you're invisible????

Regarding the headscarf... there is no reason a muslim woman should not be allowed to wear her scarf over her hair in the pic. Christian women who do it are allowed with no big fuss. As long as you can identify me by my face you have nothing to worry about It should also be noted that this was not something that muslim women forced into law to accomdate them... it was a pre-existing law for christian and other women who did this that muslim women just happen to take advantage of

[Fandango 1,440]

One thing has nowt to do with the other....and I find it a complete olympic sized leap for you to even attempt a relation between the two. This is a marriage-visa forum. We have seen many of our friends here wind up in a mess of divorce with all the usual questions & problems. How that relates to you getting your knickers in a twist over someone giving you her opinion, is anyone's guess.

You didn't say it was the only reason..that is true...but it's NO reason whatsoever & completely and utterly irrelevant

Wanting to give support to those whose marriages have not wound up to be happily ever after is not because we're so 'juvenile'

It's not as huge a leap as you think it is. I think people here have enough issues on their own to be attempting to start up a fight with someone over something as much of a non-issue as my cat ears. I'm glad people want to give support to people going through a rough time, and I think it's a great idea, but how about giving your focus to them versus spending your time trying to drag someone down for what she wears? For people who claim to be so caring, you're not showing it very well here.

My knickers aren't in a twist over anything, I'm merely defending myself, which is what I have been doing this entire thread.

My issue is not with the opinions being said, it is with the hypocracy going around here. Telling me I'm being disrespectful while being entirely disrespectful to me, etc. In all honesty, like I said back on page 6 of this thread, I'd rather people just ignored me if they're that bothered by how I look. Since that seems so hard for you, I'll do us all a favor and end at this post-- It's up to you if you want to continue to try to push your opinions onto me. I know I've personally got better things to be doing. Take care.

Well, first of all, if you think VJ won out over a 'spend time with my boo or VJ' match, you're sadly mistaken.

Secondly, as it's been mentioned, the only one making a big deal over your cat ears is YOU. I couldn't give a sh!t less what you wear on your head. Yes, I asked about the photo...only because of your 'they are a part of me' comment. It intrigued me. But I wasn't judging you for it. And I've also done the pink hair "i'm an individual just like everyone else' thing before too....well mine was purple hair that blended into pink...so that's a non-issue to me as well. I think you seem to be strangely sensitive to these things...I say strangely because they are obviously a choice, but hey, that's my opinion. So yeah, no big deal.

Why I agreed with Karo earlier is because of the 'hey if you don't like it, tough' attitude towards showing cultural respect. I don't agree with it, I think it's selfish and quite ignorant, but whatever....you don't know me and I don't know you, so who cares anyways?

But to judge ppl here as if their marriages are failing because we're juvenile/b!tchy/like highschool....well IMO that's too ludicrous for words.

Edited August 18, 2006 by LisaD

[Veiled Princess 1]

the 'hey if you don't like it, tough' attitude towards showing cultural respect. I don't agree with it, I think it's selfish and quite ignorant,

[*Robert* 2]

There is no reason not to be more tolerant. There would definitely be less fighting.

[UmmSqueakster 54]

Here is yet another example of a Muslim trying to force a change in our laws to accommodate their faith:

Veiled Drivers License

Fortunately, the judge in this case had a level of SANITY and was not intimidated by this stupidity. Unfortunately, there were many similar cases where Muslim women were granted the right to wear their head scarfs in the driver's license photos.

*gasp* I'm shocked *faints* Oh no wait, my head is covered on my drivers license. And my passport... I'm just an ebil ebil person forcing Minnesota to do that for me. Oh wait, minnesota lets people wear baseball caps and cowboy hats on their license. Ebil minnesota.

News flash...535 members of congress try to change our laws daily! The laws of the United States aren't static. Our law makers introduce bills for new laws, and to strike down or modify existing laws. Lawyers present arguments daily in court to intpret our laws. The USC of today is certainly quite different from the USC of 50 years ago. Heck, it's different from even 1 month ago.

[ceriserose 1]

No, but there is such a thing as sympathy. Just because you haven't lived through what I have and vice versa, doesn't mean that we can't relate to one another by virtue of the fact that (ostensibly) have the common human emotion of sympathy.

I'm not asking you to agree. I'm just asking you not to devalue something someone else says because you choose not to relate to it. The actions that occurred throughout history all bring us to this point; the actions you see now will affect the future just as surely as the past has. It is completely valid to look at the issues going on within the ME in the context of 'their' history and in the context of US history (in terms of foreign policy and relations). Why should it be less valid to view US current actions in the context of US history?

I'm not talking about sympathising with anyone. Sympathy and understanding are two different things.

It's easy to say I sympathise with somone but it's totally another thing to understand what drove them to behave in a certain manner because you yourself have experienced it. I hope you get my point.

What you're talking about is sympathy and empathy. I, a cauasian woman cannot empathize with a ME man because our paradigms are too dissimilar. However, I can sympathize with the difficulty they go through because I can imagine what it must be like.

Human beings can imagine what it would be like to have been a human being 150 years ago too. We can imagine (aka put ourselves in the place of for greater UNDERSTANDING of others) a variety of things we don't experience.

What you're saying, in essence, is that what happened 150 years ago isn't as relevant to you as what's happening in the ME today. Fair enough. Charles felt it appropriate to draw a parallel to 150 years ago, something that is relevant to him and possibly to others. And you not only negated it out of turn as irrelevant but insisted that because we don't live it, we can't possibly understand.

Personally I can't understand 150 years ago, nor can I understand the ME conflicts. I can, however, sympathize. That was where the 'sympathy' was brought in. You, a US citizen presumably do not live there full time. You can't even 'understand' fully what someone there goes through. You might have factors that mean you can sympathize more readily or have a greater understanding than someone else could.

I would hazard that if you determine things as irrelevant so will others and in the past you haven't seemed to appreciate when it's done to you.

I never said I understand... in fact I said we can't understand....

I did not say it's irrelevant.

I'm honestly way too tired to explain this thread back to you. Especially when I really don't believe you've even started to understand my point.

I'll leave it.

edited for a typo

Edited August 19, 2006 by ceriserose

[Marc and Olga 0]

Here is yet another example of a Muslim trying to force a change in our laws to accommodate their faith:

Veiled Drivers License

Fortunately, the judge in this case had a level of SANITY and was not intimidated by this stupidity. Unfortunately, there were many similar cases where Muslim women were granted the right to wear their head scarfs in the driver's license photos.

*gasp* I'm shocked *faints* Oh no wait, my head is covered on my drivers license. And my passport... I'm just an ebil ebil person forcing Minnesota to do that for me. Oh wait, minnesota lets people wear baseball caps and cowboy hats on their license. Ebil minnesota.

News flash...535 members of congress try to change our laws daily! The laws of the United States aren't static. Our law makers introduce bills for new laws, and to strike down or modify existing laws. Lawyers present arguments daily in court to intpret our laws. The USC of today is certainly quite different from the USC of 50 years ago. Heck, it's different from even 1 month ago.

I think it is interesting that you mention baseball caps and cowboy hats, link to site that shows a reasonable law "Full Face Photographs". I think that would be the key difference then the case involved where the lady's official state issued ID looked just like this~~~>

Don't believe me, take a look:

[*Robert* 2]

Florida RULES!!!!

[~Jess~ 0]

wow is all i will say to this whole topic.

Carry on...

[Veiled Princess 1]

Here is yet another example of a Muslim trying to force a change in our laws to accommodate their faith:

Veiled Drivers License

Fortunately, the judge in this case had a level of SANITY and was not intimidated by this stupidity. Unfortunately, there were many similar cases where Muslim women were granted the right to wear their head scarfs in the driver's license photos.

*gasp* I'm shocked *faints* Oh no wait, my head is covered on my drivers license. And my passport... I'm just an ebil ebil person forcing Minnesota to do that for me. Oh wait, minnesota lets people wear baseball caps and cowboy hats on their license. Ebil minnesota.

News flash...535 members of congress try to change our laws daily! The laws of the United States aren't static. Our law makers introduce bills for new laws, and to strike down or modify existing laws. Lawyers present arguments daily in court to intpret our laws. The USC of today is certainly quite different from the USC of 50 years ago. Heck, it's different from even 1 month ago.

I think it is interesting that you mention baseball caps and cowboy hats, link to site that shows a reasonable law "Full Face Photographs". I think that would be the key difference then the case involved where the lady's official state issued ID looked just like this~~~>

Don't believe me, take a look:

I don't think Rahma was commenting about the nutcase trying to get her driver's license with her face covered. I believe she was responding to the part where he said we shouldn't be allowed to cover our hair.

They will let her have that ID for getting checks cashed or writing checks and things of that nature but it can't be used for driving... she wanted her driver's license to reflect the same thing and that's just stupid.