Egypt (1 Viewer)

[SoBeDad]

There's been a great amount of looting going on and now some fools have broken into the Antiquities Museum in Cairo- idiots. They could do permanent damage to some of the world's greatest treasures.

If Mubarak is going down, he could gain some favor on the way out by sending the military to protect such national treasures.

 

[QuizGuy66]

Here's hoping violence is minimized tomorrow/this am.

latest i've heard is bad weather - heavy/torrential rain probable for tomorrow. the test is if the military will fire on civilians (military heavy units deployed this evening). if they fire, s@#$, hits the fan. if they don't mubarak is toast.

From the US perspective of wanting stability in the region, shouldn't we be secretly hoping Mubarak is successful? It is highly likely whatever emerges will not be friendly towards the US. Egypt is a more moderate country, but when revolutions happen, it is not the moderate voices when carry the day.

I think that it's a faulty assumption to think that it's highly likely that whatever emerges will not be friendly to us. Anything can happen once the region is destabilized, but so far the protests appear to be secular in nature.

It's totally possible that it will be less bad for us than we fear. A lot of this depends on how things fall with the military and their role in how this ends. Our huge amount of aid goes as much to that military (and by extension our manufacturers - though the 'Made in the USA' tag isn't exactly helping these days) rather than Mubarek and his government. The disappearance of that aid money would be crushing to their military leaders (and the biggest thread, er persuasion, to Mubarek has been that we'll cut it off) and a situation that evolves where that remains intact is very possible. That would require a certain amount of friendliness to the U.S.Now part of the question is whether another country (say China or Russia) would be willing to come in and take on that sort of role and if Egypt would accept. That could really complicate things.In the meantime, maybe we should stamp "Made in the USA" on the inside of the next batch of tear gas cans...-QG

 

[wazoo11]

Tim, you keep saying Fox is watched by people around the world. Do people from other countries really tune into this channel for insight, or are you just referring to Americans that might be abroad or something llike that? I would be very disappointed if foreigners were watching any of our major cable news networks.

I had a friend travel to Rome recently, a family member travel to Columbia, another to China, another to Turkey, and I myself was just in Costa Rica. All of them matched my own experience- Fox News is everywhere. CNN is in most places, but not everywhere- Fox News is everywhere.

I made the switch to Al Jazeera English for world news and have not looked back,imo.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Here are my main questions as it looks like Egypt will be overthrown very soon.

1. Who would control the canal and the passing of ships?

2. Would Al Q and other terrorist cells become welcome in Egypt?

3. Will this make life tougher for Israel and other democratic/peaceful countries?

4. Is there anything America should be doing other than recognizing the new government and welcoming them into the World community?

I'll hang up and listen.

 

[higgins]

Here are my main questions as it looks like Egypt will be overthrown very soon.

1. Who would control the canal and the passing of ships?

2. Would Al Q and other terrorist cells become welcome in Egypt?

3. Will this make life tougher for Israel and other democratic/peaceful countries?

4. Is there anything America should be doing other than recognizing the new government and welcoming them into the World community?

I'll hang up and listen.

Over react much?

There really isn't much organization to this, thus who exactly is doing the overthrowing?

This will gradually calm down more as the military stabilizes the situation.

Mubarak will have to cede some power...how much remains to be seen.

 

[cr8f]

Rumor-Mubarek's wife left for London.

They are using teargas with made in USA labels.

We should sponsor an honest election there and should have in Afghanistan too.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Rumor-Mubarek's wife left for London.They are using teargas with made in USA labels.We should sponsor an honest election there and should have in Afghanistan too.

You can't have "honest elections" in Afghanistan, HTH.

 

[cr8f]

Here are my main questions as it looks like Egypt will be overthrown very soon.

1. Who would control the canal and the passing of ships?

2. Would Al Q and other terrorist cells become welcome in Egypt?

3. Will this make life tougher for Israel and other democratic/peaceful countries?

4. Is there anything America should be doing other than recognizing the new government and welcoming them into the World community?

I'll hang up and listen.

Over react much?

There really isn't much organization to this, thus who exactly is doing the overthrowing?

This will gradually calm down more as the military stabilizes the situation.

Mubarak will have to cede some power...how much remains to be seen.

ElBaradei is saying the same thing and Mubareks wife left the country. This reminds me of what happened with Marcos.

I say the Arab League or someone have a real election. Does the army stand with the protesters or Mubarek?

This has been going on for a long time. He has rearranged the deck chairs on the Titanic before with no real changes.

 

[cr8f]

Rumor-Mubarek's wife left for London.They are using teargas with made in USA labels.We should sponsor an honest election there and should have in Afghanistan too.

You can't have "honest elections" in Afghanistan, HTH.

Then we should leave. Actually we could help put together a real election with the UN. They have done this before.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Rumor-Mubarek's wife left for London.They are using teargas with made in USA labels.We should sponsor an honest election there and should have in Afghanistan too.

You can't have "honest elections" in Afghanistan, HTH.

Actually we could help put together a real election with the UN.

See my first post.

 

[higgins]

Here are my main questions as it looks like Egypt will be overthrown very soon.

1. Who would control the canal and the passing of ships?

2. Would Al Q and other terrorist cells become welcome in Egypt?

3. Will this make life tougher for Israel and other democratic/peaceful countries?

4. Is there anything America should be doing other than recognizing the new government and welcoming them into the World community?

I'll hang up and listen.

Over react much?

There really isn't much organization to this, thus who exactly is doing the overthrowing?

This will gradually calm down more as the military stabilizes the situation.

Mubarak will have to cede some power...how much remains to be seen.

ElBaradei is saying the same thing and Mubareks wife left the country. This reminds me of what happened with Marcos.

I say the Arab League or someone have a real election. Does the army stand with the protesters or Mubarek?

This has been going on for a long time. He has rearranged the deck chairs on the Titanic before with no real changes.

I don't doubt that he may indeed have to leave the country, but there's enough of a civilian population there that it's not going to devolve into "Oh no, AQ is going to control the canal!".

 

[higgins]

Does the army stand with the protesters or Mubarek?

The upper echelons of the army should stay solidly along-side Mubarak, but I wouldn't expect the lower levels of the army to be attacking regular citizens. They're merely going to stabilize the situation the best they can.

 

[griff321]

Rumor-Mubarek's wife left for London.They are using teargas with made in USA labels.We should sponsor an honest election there and should have in Afghanistan too.

You can't have "honest elections" in Afghanistan, HTH.

Then we should leave. Actually we could help put together a real election with the UN. They have done this before.

Corruption and graft is just an ingrained part of that society. If you don't buy out the tribal leaders they will sell to who will.It was that way when Alexander conquered the region and it's that way today.

 

[tommyboy]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

 

[timschochet]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

It's not that I'm disagreeing with you necessarily. But the problem with this way of thinking is that authoritarians have held us hostage with it for years. In the days the Ferdinand Marcos and Pinochet, it used to be, "You need to support us or the Communists will take over." Nowadays the Middle East authoritarian leaders are telling us, "You need to support us or the Islamists will take over." We always seem to fall in the same trap of supporting these dictators.

 

[HellToupee]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

the devil you know.....

 

[cr8f]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

I don't think so, In Iran and Egypt most of the population is young and not fundamentalist. Most like the west. It doesn't matter though because these are their countries.

 

[timschochet]

It doesn't matter though because these are their countries.

Of course it matters.

 

[jon_mx]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

I don't think so, In Iran and Egypt most of the population is young and not fundamentalist. Most like the west. It doesn't matter though because these are their countries.

Sharia Law is popular even among the moderate. The best we could hope for is a repressive anti-gay anti-women anti-religious freedom anti-free speech government who is OK with the US.

 

[timschochet]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

I don't think so, In Iran and Egypt most of the population is young and not fundamentalist. Most like the west. It doesn't matter though because these are their countries.

Sharia Law is popular even among the moderate. The best we could hope for is a repressive anti-gay anti-women anti-religious freedom anti-free speech government who is OK with the US.

This is wrong. We can hope for better than this. I do.

 

[Pope Benedict XVI Fan]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

I don't think so, In Iran and Egypt most of the population is young and not fundamentalist. Most like the west. It doesn't matter though because these are their countries.

Sharia Law is popular even among the moderate. The best we could hope for is a repressive anti-gay anti-women anti-religious freedom anti-free speech government who is OK with the US.

Sharia is a catch all term that isn't particularly useful outside of context - as ever with concepts derived from religious texts, it depends on who is doing the translating and how they interpret it. Egypt already incorporates Sharia into its legal system, as do Morocco, Turkey, Malaysia etc. all to varying degrees and in different ways. It's incorrect to read or hear a Mulsim out of context referencing Sharia and immediately assume they mean a legal system akin to Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan.

 

[facook]

Britain's Daily Telegraph is indicating that leaked documents show that the US has been supporting the dissidents.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...d-uprising.html

This is not getting enough love. So the uprising was "sponsored" by the last administration, but has been "sanctioned" by the current? Or am I reading that wrong? Regardless, it reads like a chapter in a CIA spy novel. Very interesting to me.

Well, Great Britain's newspapers make the Enquirer look like the a reputable scientific journal. They're apt to run all sorts of stuff that ends up being total garbage. The Telegraph is a little better than some, but still prone to running just about anything as long as it will guarantee lots of attention.

Point taken.

 

[jon_mx]

I suppose I should rephrase that. I should have said, the best we can reasonably hope for. Here is a write-up from CFR on Sharia Law. It does not paint a promising picture. If 71% support Sharia Law, how in the world is Egypt not going to end up with Sharia Law. CFR is not exactly a right wing kook organization to say the least.

In a 2007 University of Maryland poll (PDF), more than 60 percent of the populations in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, and Indonesia responded that democracy was a good way to govern their respective countries, while at the same time, an average of 71 percent agreed with requiring "strict application of [sharia] law in every Islamic country." Whether democracy and Islam can coexist is a topic of heated debate. Some Islamists argue democracy is a purely Western concept imposed on Muslim countries. Others feel Islam necessitates a democratic system and that democracy has a basis in the Quran since "mutual consultation" among the people is commended (42:38 Quran). John L. Esposito and John O. Voll explain the debate in a 2001 article in the journal Humanities.

 

[Pope Benedict XVI Fan]

I suppose I should rephrase that. I should have said, the best we can reasonably hope for. Here is a write-up from CFR on Sharia Law. It does not paint a promising picture. If 71% support Sharia Law, how in the world is Egypt not going to end up with Sharia Law. CFR is not exactly a right wing kook organization to say the least.

In a 2007 University of Maryland poll (PDF), more than 60 percent of the populations in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, and Indonesia responded that democracy was a good way to govern their respective countries, while at the same time, an average of 71 percent agreed with requiring "strict application of [sharia] law in every Islamic country." Whether democracy and Islam can coexist is a topic of heated debate. Some Islamists argue democracy is a purely Western concept imposed on Muslim countries. Others feel Islam necessitates a democratic system and that democracy has a basis in the Quran since "mutual consultation" among the people is commended (42:38 Quran). John L. Esposito and John O. Voll explain the debate in a 2001 article in the journal Humanities.

Again though, this study is useless if it does not clearly establish what the respondents mean when they say Sharia. I'm not saying it didn't, perhaps it did and if there is a more detailed link I would be interested in reading it, but just quoting a simple statistic like that is pretty meaningless.It's like polling Americans as to whether federal law should be based on Christian principles. I bet you'd get a large majority voting yes, but unless you also ask these people to define what they mean it's a waste of time.

 

[timschochet]

it would be nice to get rid of all the dictators of the middle east and replace them with free, democratic republics but unfortunately i think whats more likely to happen is they'll be replaced by islamic republics and suppression of people will remain firmly in place.

I don't think so, In Iran and Egypt most of the population is young and not fundamentalist. Most like the west. It doesn't matter though because these are their countries.

Sharia Law is popular even among the moderate. The best we could hope for is a repressive anti-gay anti-women anti-religious freedom anti-free speech government who is OK with the US.

Sharia is a catch all term that isn't particularly useful outside of context - as ever with concepts derived from religious texts, it depends on who is doing the translating and how they interpret it. Egypt already incorporates Sharia into its legal system, as do Morocco, Turkey, Malaysia etc. all to varying degrees and in different ways. It's incorrect to read or hear a Mulsim out of context referencing Sharia and immediately assume they mean a legal system akin to Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan.

This is EXTREMELY important and unfortunately certain hardline conservatives in this country don't get it no matter how many times its repeated.

 

[BoneYardDog]

Hey Dr Detroit is the expert here, I am sure the west, women, the gay and labor unions will all be loved in the new Egypt...

He can even move there and love his woman and daughters even more...

According to the Sharia, despite declarations of the equality of the sexes before God, women are considered inferior to men, and have fewer rights and responsibilities. A woman counts as half a man in giving evidence in a court of law, or in matters of inheritance. Her position is less advantageous than a man’s with regard to marriage and divorce. A husband has the moral and religious right and duty to beat his wives for disobedience or for perceived misconduct. A woman does not have the right to choose her husband, or her place of residence, to travel freely or have freedom in her choice of clothing. Women have little or no autonomy and are deemed to need the protection of their fathers, husbands or other male relatives throughout their lives. Any conduct that undermines the idea of male supremacy will fall foul of the Sharia...

Praise Allah...

 

[jon_mx]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

 

[squistion]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

I always find it amusing that conservatives never want to do anything to advance any type of gay rights in this country but they are the first to talk about how horrible gay people have it in other parts of the world when they are trying to make some unrelated political point.

 

[timschochet]

Hey Dr Detroit is the expert here, I am sure the west, women, the gay and labor unions will all be loved in the new Egypt...He can even move there and love his woman and daughters even more...

Do you have something worthwhile to contribute?

 

[DiStefano]

From what I am reading, this appears more and more like an internal move to oust Mubarak, rather than a true revolution brought about by popular revolt. It has been Mubarak's intention to have his son be his successor, and that undoubtedly has upset a number of people within his administration.

If this is true, it is likely that Mubarak will agree to leave, and that a caretaker government will be appointed so that some form of "directed" elections will take place. Kinda like replacing the CEO when results have been bad, and appointing someone who is already on the board.

 

[jon_mx]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

I always find it amusing that conservatives never want to do anything to advance any type of gay rights in this country but they are the first to talk about how horrible gay people have it in other parts of the world when they are trying to make some unrelated political point.

It is not really amusing. There is a difference from not wanting to recognize gay marriage and wanting them to be killed. It is quite the hyperbole to equate them.

 

[timschochet]

From what I am reading, this appears more and more like an internal move to oust Mubarak, rather than a true revolution brought about by popular revolt. It has been Mubarak's intention to have his son be his successor, and that undoubtedly has upset a number of people within his administration. If this is true, it is likely that Mubarak will agree to leave, and that a caretaker government will be appointed so that some form of "directed" elections will take place. Kinda like replacing the CEO when results have been bad, and appointing someone who is already on the board.

That is how it started. And it may be how it ends. But when masses gather in the streets and attack police and authorities, the results are unpredictable.

 

[timschochet]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

I always find it amusing that conservatives never want to do anything to advance any type of gay rights in this country but they are the first to talk about how horrible gay people have it in other parts of the world when they are trying to make some unrelated political point.

It is not really amusing. There is a difference from not wanting to recognize gay marriage and wanting them to be killed. It is quite the hyperbole to equate them.

I don't think any reasonable person is doubting your sincerity here.

 

[squistion]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

I always find it amusing that conservatives never want to do anything to advance any type of gay rights in this country but they are the first to talk about how horrible gay people have it in other parts of the world when they are trying to make some unrelated political point.

It is not really amusing. There is a difference from not wanting to recognize gay marriage and wanting them to be killed. It is quite the hyperbole to equate them.

Missing the point as usual and using hyperbole yourself. Conservatives only talk about helping gay people when it does not directly affect them. Outside of the gay Log Cabin Club, I don't think you can find a link to one conservative organization in this country that has done anything to specifically help gay people in any other country (and not just as part of other oppressed groups) The only reason this is brought up here is that it helps in the argument about the dangers of Sharia law.

 

[Boom Switch]

Hey Dr Detroit is the expert here, I am sure the west, women, the gay and labor unions will all be loved in the new Egypt...He can even move there and love his woman and daughters even more...

Do you have something worthwhile to contribute?

Lets get back to Egypt in choas, thats my favorite part....

 

[timschochet]

Missing the point as usual and using hyperbole yourself. Conservatives only talk about helping gay people when it does not directly affect them. Outside of the gay Log Cabin Club, I don't think you can find a link to one conservative organization in this country that has done anything to specifically help gay people in any other country (and not just as part of other oppressed groups) The only reason this is brought up here is that it helps in the argument about the dangers of Sharia law.

So what? He's right about this. He's not right about all Sharia law. He may also be hypocritical, somewhat. But none of that really matters. When he and others point out that Islamist societies ain't good for gay folks, then they're right. Who cares what their motivation is? We need to move beyond this "you're a hypocrite for saying that!" stuff. It prevents us from getting to the real issues. If someone is right about something, they should be credited for it. When they're wrong, point it out. Expecting consistency is a waste of time.

 

[Sarnoff]

Leaving partisan stuff aside, I'm kinda surprised this thread is only 3 pages.

Well there shouldn't be anything partisan in here, this has nothing to do with us. Nothing.

Well, now that Timmeh, FSM, cr8f, and jon_mx have all checked in, this should balloon to 12 pages and devolve into Bush vs. Obama bickering by Monday AM.

 

[HellToupee]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

I always find it amusing that conservatives never want to do anything to advance any type of gay rights in this country but they are the first to talk about how horrible gay people have it in other parts of the world when they are trying to make some unrelated political point.

It is not really amusing. There is a difference from not wanting to recognize gay marriage and wanting them to be killed. It is quite the hyperbole to equate them.

in the history of the earth there has never been a better time than now to be gay

 

[Boom Switch]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

I always find it amusing that conservatives never want to do anything to advance any type of gay rights in this country but they are the first to talk about how horrible gay people have it in other parts of the world when they are trying to make some unrelated political point.

It is not really amusing. There is a difference from not wanting to recognize gay marriage and wanting them to be killed. It is quite the hyperbole to equate them.

in the history of the earth there has never been a better time than now to be gay

Im glad for you....

 

[SoBeDad]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

When I was an undergrad during the late 70s, I met some female Iranian students who knew that their females relatives would lose high jobs such as judges after the fall of the Shah. These students obviously did not want to return to Iran. There are many barriers for women in Iran today, but according to wikipedia, females are 60% of all Iranian university students. I'm not sure if Iran is a good example of what is happening in Egypt.

 

[HellToupee]

The story I posted links to the details of the study. The questions was worded Goal: Strict Application of Sharia Law in every Islamic Country. 50% of Egyptians strongly agreed with that and an additional 24% somewhat agreed. We can disagree with what exactly that means by Sharia Law, but it does not bode well for women, gays, and children.

I always find it amusing that conservatives never want to do anything to advance any type of gay rights in this country but they are the first to talk about how horrible gay people have it in other parts of the world when they are trying to make some unrelated political point.

It is not really amusing. There is a difference from not wanting to recognize gay marriage and wanting them to be killed. It is quite the hyperbole to equate them.

in the history of the earth there has never been a better time than now to be gay

Im glad for you....

 

[squistion]

Missing the point as usual and using hyperbole yourself. Conservatives only talk about helping gay people when it does not directly affect them. Outside of the gay Log Cabin Club, I don't think you can find a link to one conservative organization in this country that has done anything to specifically help gay people in any other country (and not just as part of other oppressed groups) The only reason this is brought up here is that it helps in the argument about the dangers of Sharia law.

So what? He's right about this. He's not right about all Sharia law. He may also be hypocritical, somewhat. But none of that really matters. When he and others point out that Islamist societies ain't good for gay folks, then they're right. Who cares what their motivation is? We need to move beyond this "you're a hypocrite for saying that!" stuff. It prevents us from getting to the real issues. If someone is right about something, they should be credited for it. When they're wrong, point it out. Expecting consistency is a waste of time.

Because we wouldn't hear a peep out of them otherwise. How many conservatives on this board complained about when Uganda proposed a death penalty for gay people a year or two back? None, because it really didn't concern them particularly. Did they want gay people in Uganda to be executed? Of course not. But the bottom line is that gay oppression in other countries is of no interest to conservatives unless it is in the context of something else that they really want to discuss, like the Muslims and the dangers of Sharia Law.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Hey Dr Detroit is the expert here, I am sure the west, women, the gay and labor unions will all be loved in the new Egypt...He can even move there and love his woman and daughters even more...Praise Allah...

When the nurse gives you your pill at the Sanitarium, you are supposed to swallow it.

 

[HellToupee]

Missing the point as usual and using hyperbole yourself. Conservatives only talk about helping gay people when it does not directly affect them. Outside of the gay Log Cabin Club, I don't think you can find a link to one conservative organization in this country that has done anything to specifically help gay people in any other country (and not just as part of other oppressed groups) The only reason this is brought up here is that it helps in the argument about the dangers of Sharia law.

So what? He's right about this. He's not right about all Sharia law. He may also be hypocritical, somewhat. But none of that really matters. When he and others point out that Islamist societies ain't good for gay folks, then they're right. Who cares what their motivation is? We need to move beyond this "you're a hypocrite for saying that!" stuff. It prevents us from getting to the real issues. If someone is right about something, they should be credited for it. When they're wrong, point it out. Expecting consistency is a waste of time.

Because we wouldn't hear a peep out of them otherwise. How many conservatives on this board complained about when Uganda proposed a death penalty for gay people a year or two back? None, because it really didn't concern them particularly. Did they want gay people in Uganda to be executed? Of course not. But the bottom line is that gay oppression in other countries is of no interest to conservatives unless it is in the context of something else that they really want to discuss, like the Muslims and the dangers of Sharia Law.

never heard of this but I don't point my rss reader to everything gay in the world

 

[BoneYardDog]

Missing the point as usual and using hyperbole yourself. Conservatives only talk about helping gay people when it does not directly affect them. Outside of the gay Log Cabin Club, I don't think you can find a link to one conservative organization in this country that has done anything to specifically help gay people in any other country (and not just as part of other oppressed groups) The only reason this is brought up here is that it helps in the argument about the dangers of Sharia law.

So what? He's right about this. He's not right about all Sharia law. He may also be hypocritical, somewhat. But none of that really matters. When he and others point out that Islamist societies ain't good for gay folks, then they're right. Who cares what their motivation is? We need to move beyond this "you're a hypocrite for saying that!" stuff. It prevents us from getting to the real issues. If someone is right about something, they should be credited for it. When they're wrong, point it out. Expecting consistency is a waste of time.

If you are referring to me and the gay issue, please post a link where I have said anything negative...I can if needed post to links where I have said that gay marriage and the gay issue do not mean anything to me...I am socially moderate but fiscally conservative...If I am not the "hypocrite" you are speaking about then please continue, if I am then your apology is accepted ahead of time...Just pointing out a fact that what might happen in Egypt might have consequences to women and gays that are directly opposite to their health and well being... Just like GW didn't understand the "devil" that was in power in Iraq just might have been better than the "devil" we might have to deal with in the future...Where I am consistent you are not...In most parts of the world democracy/republic will not work as a form of government...Edited to add: In addition to supporting gay marriage and gays in the military I also support a woman's right to choose and am agnostic and do not believe in religion... Just as a reference for you to use in the future, so you don't jump to incorrect conclusions like you usually do...

 

[HellToupee]

Hey Dr Detroit is the expert here, I am sure the west, women, the gay and labor unions will all be loved in the new Egypt...He can even move there and love his woman and daughters even more...Praise Allah...

When the nurse gives you your pill at the Sanitarium, you are supposed to swallow it.

some good advice being given here

 

[DiStefano]

Will you people shut up? You want to go talk about gay rights, or how you don't think they should have rights, and bark at each other, go do it somewhere else.

Leave this for the situation in Egypt. They're not barking there; some are laying their lives on the line.

 

[BoneYardDog]

Will you people shut up? You want to go talk about gay rights, or how you don't think they should have rights, and bark at each other, go do it somewhere else. Leave this for the situation in Egypt. They're not barking there; some are laying their lives on the line.

What "they" are you talking about, your post added nothing to the conservation...If 'they" turn out to be the Muslim Brotherhood then all bets are off and you will wish that "they" had been defeated...If "they" turn out to be a young population that is tired of living life like they have been and are interested in a true democracy then the middle east will be better off for it...So what "they" are you specifically betting and hoping on???

 

[DiStefano]

Will you people shut up? You want to go talk about gay rights, or how you don't think they should have rights, and bark at each other, go do it somewhere else. Leave this for the situation in Egypt. They're not barking there; some are laying their lives on the line.

What "they" are you talking about, your post added nothing to the conservation...If 'they" turn out to be the Muslim Brotherhood then all bets are off and you will wish that "they" had been defeated...If "they" turn out to be a young population that is tired of living life like they have been and are interested in a true democracy then the middle east will be better off for it...So what "they" are you specifically betting and hoping on???

Obviously someone as wise and perspicacious as you.

 

[otello]

This is disgusting if true.