Dp

^Great arguments. The level of distrust and hatred calls out for your solution. Strangely enough - many folks oppose any sort of federalism or regionalism. And I haven't heard a choherent reason as to why.

Originally posted by Kashafa: Point, About the absolute'ism charge. Do you have some non-negotiable values/principles or is it all relative ? See, you're as an absolutist as I am when push comes to shove. Point proven. Interesting arguments overall. About the only thing I'm absolute on is the fundamentals of Islam as confirmed by learned scholars and that is only because I believe it emanates from God directly. To label the ever-changing, contradictory, shady and opportunistic Somali political scene as push comes to shove doesn't make much sense to me. But I guess that is a matter of opinion.

^Are you looking for a fight - I get that sense . But no I don't disagree.

^Yes - speaking from personal experience - my parents insisted and I mean insisted on speaking Somali in their presence even to siblings and friends. And thus I speak fairly decent Somali(or so I am told) although I've never set foot in Somalia and have lived in Canada since I was a small child.

^LOL - I take it by "(man)" - you referring to the troublesome male Somali and not the less troublesome and hard working female Somali.

Originally posted by Baashi: You seem to believe in absolutes. I don't. I think that's the long and short of all the disagreements and debates in SOL at least. Many people see Somali politics in black and white - and simply brush off or dismiss items that don't correspond to this world view. And worse - these same people cannot acknowledge that others might believe the white to their black or vice versa rightly or wrongly. A wise man would recognize this latter fact and work for an amalgamated gray to suit all sides. This is politics after all.

^You my friend are an inveterate Somalia investigator As far as I know - and I've looked into this a little bit - those animals that have a serious value will have been hunted down and are/almost extinct in Somalia. Those that don't have much value are left alone. So with Giraffes/zebras I'm sure there are some and this is concentrated in souther Somalia. With the leopard - it's a trickier issue. Leopards have been hunted for their prized skins but these animals are very secretive, shy and able to live almost unnoticed in a relatively urbanized landscape. There are reports of leopards living in urbanized areas like Nairobi and Zanzibar etc. So there is still hope on this front. For better news - there is still tons of bird life, gazelle/antelope, ostrich, wart hog and many other creatures of the Arican savanna.

Originally posted by Kashafa: Invading Ethiopian troops fighting side by side by an unelected unrecognised goverment composed of warlords. That's the pink elephant in the room, as soon as we come to terms on that, everything else will(can) fall in place or be negotiated. Is your real objection to the Ethiopians or the TFG itself? If it is only the Ethiopians - then if they leave tomorrow - will you support the TFG? Or if your real objection is to the TFG itself and the Ethiopians are just a convenient durbaan - then what process do you have in mind to build a government?

Nope - all gone. We even went into other countries to hunt them down!

Originally posted by Legend of Zu: ^^^^LoooL who can refute a nice office in the upper level :cool: But what does this mean for Dubai, Financially, strategically and politically - I think this move has a wider implications that just saying "oh they were after iraq or just the result of globalisation". Halliburton didnt move to Doha or Jeddah or any other US ally capital it has rather moved to Dubai. Cheers Sounds like you have some thoughts - why not share? Cheney and his pupil's term will end in a couple of years - why not depart the litigious environment of the US for no regulation Dubai particularly now that the Democrats have taken over Congress and there is a good chance of a Democratic president in the next elections. Wise move - flee before the investigations, probes and lawsuits start to come in full force. Or so I think.

Xiin & Baashi - pardon my interruption - but I had to add 2 other questions to the list for Xiin: 1- If the Ethiopians leave en masse next week - will the violence suddenly end - and if not how do you deal with it? ie. given an intractable intransigence on the part of some people how do you go about building a government? 2- What are the parameters of this negotiated settlement to be arrived at the national reconciliation meeting that will, in your mind, lead to a lasting peace? What is the (realistic) grand bargain to be arrived at to establish a functioning government in Somalia?

^I like directness. I don't agree with bypassing the prof and speaking to someone higher up. I say speak to the prof and tell her what you're saying is offensive,insensitive and mistaken. Please refrain from it. At that stage - if nothing happens - then you take it to a higher level. After all the proof of the offending statements is clearly there.

^Let's just give it up dear lads I think the relevant points have been made repeatedly

^LOL - oh God - always something pleasant to say.

^Alle ha u naxaristo. i'm sorry for ur loss and wish u strength during this difficult time

^God - how many times are we going to see posts like this :confused:

AP GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - The rival Hamas and Fatah movements formed a long-elusive unity government Thursday, hoping to end bloody infighting and lead the Palestinians out of yearlong international isolation. Israel immediately said, however, that it would not deal with the new government. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070315/ap_on_re_mi_ea/palestinians_government_israel;_ylt=AnCB5T1yF4ziGS2_w.bq.SjMWM0F ---------------------------- It will be interesting to see what the Arabs will do now - given all their efforts on this unity govt. Good ol US of A faced with 2 allies that are butting heads.

^Commerce and its associated materialism should be well away from the holy sites.

Originally posted by Caano Geel: Point: First its alright doesn't mean just do it, its more like if others do it, your ok with it -- and this is why a theological problem may exists here. I say may, because interpretation is as varied as there are opinions .. but this is point of reasoning. It's alright may not mean just do it - but there is a link. If the indoctrination is it's alright - one is more likely to do it. At the very least - forced promotion and approval like this is beyond the purview of a school. Anyhow, if we take this as an experiment, with the hypothesis that providing information about being gay increases the chances of people becoming gay... I know you can see my point .. It wouldnt hold, for societies where such practices are dutifully suppressed we still see gay women and men - and if we had the capacity to collect real data on it, i dont think the rates would be different to society which are open about it, only the peoples life experiences would differ.. I love the spin here - or dare I call it something else. This in not a factual book about homosexuality. This is a book that attempts to instill gay friendly themes by telling a story about a prince choosing his dream guy. Nor does it matter about other societies. I don't know where that came in. Also i dont think the point of taboo here extends to the other relationship types you have mentioned. These relationship types are nurtured - with this point, i think we (I) get woolly, there is not as far i understand a brain function that says you will be attracted to woman A and not B (not the form of type but in person), so the actions that lead to incest are nurtured - i.e. a person involved in such action will not be exclusive to their partner, but would also be ok with a choice involving anyone of the same gender as their partner. This is not the case form homosexuality, i.e. there is a strong gender exclusivity, as implied in the title I mentioned 3 different types of relationships not only that with a sibling. Additionally, with the sibling case - it is apparently exclusive since the persons in question on both sides have chosen only each other. It makes the rest of your point moot. anyhow i think indoctrination is too vague a concept, as i said such an action can at best make it ultimately acceptable for people to be gay, not make people gay. Whether this is a problem depends on how you see your role in determining how other people live their lives, since ultimately you or i will not judge ... Indoctrination is what happens to all young children. Parents, siblings, relatives and the community at large indoctrinates kids both overtly and subtly in order to make them (hopefully) productive members of society. From telling them stories to punishing them for transgressions to providing role models - the indoctrination is there. And it can be a good thing or a bad thing. Again - making things acceptable and palatable likely increases the chances of someone engaging in these practices. But even that is moot point - because it is inappropriate to be indoctrinating young children in this manner given that people do not subscribe to the same value set. Additionally - I don't determine how other people live their lives - the laws of the nation do. But why the hell are gays and their supporters trying to teach my child that the gay value set is good and correct. Aren't they interfering in my life by trying to influence my kid? Let me break it down for you thru some simple questions: 1- Is it appropriate for a school to have a story that makes a hero of a religious figure and attempts to portray this figure in a positive light? Is pushing this agenda not forcing a particular value system on one who may not necessarily subscribe to it? 2- Picture the same scenario above and then throw in the impressionable minds of young children who can be molded relatively easily. Now do you really believe that is appropriate for young children? How can a gay friendly indoctrinating fairy tale be appropriate for a 7 year old? Simple answers will do.

Originally posted by Cara: The Point, you say that "every society sets boundaries". Precisely. This society has decided it's wrong to discriminate against others because of their race or religion or sexual orientation. To raise the spectre of paedophilia or beastiality cheapens your argument saxiib. Arbitrary moral lines are wrong if they promote injustice, no matter how dearly a society clings on to them. Certainly this society has decided that - but refusing/objecting to indoctrinate one's children into contrary values isn't discrimination. Just as not teaching kids about ethnic minorities, religions isn't discrimination. I fail to see how the discrimination card makes it into this debate. This is definitely not the road I wanted to travel - to be debating gayness in a general contezt. As an aside - my comments re paedepholia etc doesn't cheapen my argument. It goes to show how arbitrary this whole issue is and how various socities can decide what is and what is not appropriate for them. And your phrase - "Arbitrary moral lines are wrong if they promote injustice, no matter how dearly a society clings on to them." - raises a whole plethora of other arguments. Legalizing/legimitizing gay marriage and relationships while refusing to allow willing and adult siblings to marry simply highlights the arbitariness of the west on this issue. Additionally, what is injustice? Is unjust not to allow the siblings to marry but the 2 gay men to? What about injustice against the Creator or does that not enter into the realm we are in? etc etc etc. We've definitely strayed far from the topic and I've played a part. The question remains: Is this type of indoctrination appropriate for young children? A demain

^Thanks Aisha - did not know the particulars. There is much to know in the religion and it's best to investigate in the absence of solid knowledge.

Originally posted by Cara: Xiin, sexual preference is innate. Do you choose to be straight? At some point in your life, did you decide that you're going to limit your sexual preference to women? Is there anyone here who's going to claim that they occasionally consider having a same-sex partner, but desist on account of their values or upbringing? ThePoint, most teens like to fit in, to be "normal", whatever that means. Knowing that there are other people like them may mitigate feelings of alienation. More importantly, it may make a callous classmate reconsider calling them names or marginalizing them. Unless you're living in a cave - I think that latter point is fairly well known and part of the everyday culture. It's cool to have a gay friend etc etc. As to innate or not - boy is that a deep well to be going into. But regardless - every society sets boundaries. If someone is innately sexually attracted to children or their siblings or animals or what have you - one cannot say because it is innate it's alright. There have to be lines - and they may be appear to be arbitrary. However, as Muslims - we may say they are not - they are divinely inspired. If any being may legitimately draw lines for humankind - it's their creator. If you so believe that is.

^Even then - the suicide has to with a basic conflict of their 'orientation' and family values. Telling them there is a million and one others out there is not going to resolve that conflict. On that note - is there a need to tell anyone living in the western world above the age of 7 that gays exist????

Good post - all of these different names can have your head spin. Might as well have something in the profile listing all previous names. Get to work Admins.