1. Allowing Women To Drive Would Mean No More Virgins, Saudi Arabia Religious Council Says

    atheismfuckyeah:

    Allowing women to drive in Saudi Arabia would mean no more virgins and an increase in homosexuality, according to academics at Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council, Majlis al-Ifta’ al-A’ala, it has been reported in the Telegraph.

    More pornography would be used if women were allowed on the roads and rates of prostitution and divorce would also risethe report stated.

    Produced in conjunction with Kamal Subhi, a former professor at the King Fahd University, the study into repealing the ban predicted that there would be no more virgins left in the Arab kingdom in 10 years.

    Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world which bans women from driving.

    Professor Subhi described sitting in a coffee shop in an unnamed Arab state where “all the women were looking at me“.

    “One made a gesture that made it clear that she was available,” he said. “This is what happens when women are allowed to drive.”

    The report was produced for the country’s legislative assembly, the Shura Council. However this institution has no power as Saudi Arabia is ruled by a monarchy with absolute power.

    The state’s controversial ban on female drivers last came under attack in September after Shaima Jastaniya was sentenced to 10 lashes just days after Saudi King Abdullah granted women the right to vote. The punishment was overturned after international and domestic pressure.

    Saudi Arabia is currently considering a law for women to cover up their eyes if they are deemed too“tempting.”

    HuffPo

    WHAT. WTF Saudia Arabia. Seriously? 

    All bolding in the above is mine. Because WHAT.

    Seriously, Saudi Arabi, what the fuck are you doing. 

    I cannot respond to this coherently right now. Jesus fucking christ.

    ~Mooglets

     
  2. Utah Judge Orders Mother to Cut Her Daughter’s Ponytail as Part of Shitty Public Punishment

    atheismfuckyeah:

    Remember when colonial Americans used to lead miscreants into the public square and put them in the stockades for a whole day, so they could be mocked and gawked at as an example of what happens when you transgress? Well, in Utah, the land that the Book of Mormon built, a judge recently ordered a totally vintage, eye-for-eye type punishment when he told the mother of a 13-year-old girl who’d cut a toddler’s hair in a McDonald’s to either hand her daughter over for an extra 150 hours of detention, or cut the girl’s ponytail off.

    According to — deep, calming breaths — Fox News, District Juvenile Judge Scott Johansendreamed upa public haircutting as a way for Valerie Bruno to reduce her daughter Kaytlen Lopan’s sentence by 150 hours. Lopan and an unnamed 11-year-old girl admitted to cutting a 3-year-old’s hair in a McDonald’s, so you can definitely see where Judge Johansen would think that the only thing that would set the universe back in order was if the shears were turned on the shearers (the 11-year-old was allowed to have her hair cut at a salon, which doesn’t seem like a punishment so much as, you know, a haircut).

    Bruno was understandably freaked out when Judge Johansen ordered her to cut her daughter’s ponytail off in the courtroom, but said she felt intimidated under the severe glare of Old Testament justice. “I guess I should have gone [sic.] into the courtroom knowing my rights,” Bruno said, “because I felt very intimidated. An eye for an eye, that’s not how you teach kids right from wrong.” No, it really isn’t. It is, however, a great way to build resentment and create a never ending cycle of violent retribution, until, before you know it, Mercutio’s dead and it’s a damn shame because he’s easily the most entertaining character in the whole play.

    Judge Johansen also asked Mindy Moss, the mother of the recently shorn toddler, if her hair-lust had been satisfied (it wasn’t), which also seems like the exact right way to carry out justice in ancient Babylon and the exact wrong way to do it in 21st century America.

    —-

    Jezebel

    Not strictly religious, but there’s an intersection here.

    Also, I just can’t even. I mean, seriously. 

    ~Mooglets

     
  3.  
  4. People have the right to believe anything they choose, but not to impose that belief upon others. Protesting otherwise is merely trying to defend bigotry with pseudo-intellectual semantics.
    — David Robert Grimes, Irish Times (via atheismfuckyeah)
     
  5. I recently had a conversation with a Christian acquaintance over the subject of feminism.  She attempted to explain that ‘true’ feminism, from a Christian perspective, meant understanding the purpose given to you by God. The word ‘feminazi’ was dropped and I admittedly became irate.  She assertion that “women deserve better than abortion, abortion isn’t a choice,” and then my brain exploded out of the back of my head.

     
  6. atheismfuckyeah:

This has likely already been seen by many of you, but I thought I’d share it anyway.
~Mooglets

    atheismfuckyeah:

    This has likely already been seen by many of you, but I thought I’d share it anyway.

    ~Mooglets

     
  7. It’s time to focus on the common good – not minorities, says Archbishop of Canterbury

    atheismfuckyeah:

    The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has said that the United Kingdom is in danger of losing its identity over gay rights and feminism.

    In a recent speech to Welsh teenagers, the 61 year-old – who recently resigned from his role to return to academics – claimed that identity had become a “slippery” word because too much emphasis has been placed on the rights of minority groups.

    Instead, he insisted that society focus on the common good. 

    “Identity politics, whether it is the politics of feminism, whether it is the politics of ethnic minorities or the politics of sexual minorities, has been a very important part of the last ten or 20 years because before that I think there was a sense that diversity was not really welcome,” he said.

    “And so minorities of various kinds and … women began to say: ‘Actually we need to say who we are in our terms, not yours’ and that led to identity politics of a very strong kind and legislation that followed it.

    “We are now, I think, beginning to see the pendulum swinging back and saying identity politics is all very well but we have to have some way of putting it all back together again and discovering what is good for all of us and share something of who we are with each other so as to discover more about who we are.”
     
    He added: “Identity isn’t just something sealed off and finished with … it’s always work in progress. Once we start saying, “This is my identity and that’s it” then I think we are in danger of really fragmenting the society we belong to.”

    The comments come shortly after he scolded British people who rely on state welfare and social benefits as a danger to society.

    Pink Paper

    Why is this man ever allowed to open his mouth, let alone why is he ever given a public forum to espouse his hateful views?

    ~Mooglets

     
  8. Rick Santorum’s 2400-word essay about how he was justified in saying that JFK’s speech about separation of church and state made him want to “throw up.”

     
  9. Bill Donohue Gets Tough on Rape Victims, Wants to Fight Them ‘One by One’

    atheismfuckyeah:

    Catholic League president Bill Donohue issick and tired of coddling rape victims. That’s why he supports efforts by lawyers for two Missouri priests accused of sexual abuse to cripple an organization that advocates on behalf of the victims of pedophile priests – Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP). 

    SNAP is not involved in the Missouri litigation, but the priests’ lawyersare seeking“more than two decades of e-mails that could include correspondence with victims, lawyers, whistle-blowers, witnesses, the police, prosecutors and journalists.”
    Donohue thinks this effort, which seeks to bankrupt and embarrass the organization, is justified because “SNAP is a menace to the Catholic Church.”
    Donohue went further, telling theNew York TimesLaurie Goodsteinthat the Catholic Church “has been too quick to write a check” and could save money “in the long run if we fought them one by one” – them being rape victims.
    He also claimed that the bishops are reaching the conclusion that “they had better toughen up and go out and buy some good lawyers to get tough.” “We don’t need altar boys,” he continued, as only Bill Donohue could.
    Donohue may just be projecting though, or at least speaking out of turn. Sister Mary Ann Walsh, a spokesperson for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, told Goodstein thatDonohue was wrong: “‘There is no national strategy,’ she said, and there was no meeting where legal counsel for the bishops decided to get more aggressive.”
    Meanwhile SNAP is resisting subpoenas in the Missouri cases, but national director David Clohessy hasalready been deposed.
    He told Goodstein that the deposition was “not a fishing expedition,” instead it was “a fishing, crabbing, shrimping, trash-collecting, draining the pond expedition.” He said the real motive is to “harass and discredit and bankrupt SNAP, while discouraging victims, witnesses, whistle-blowers, police, prosecutors and journalists from seeking our help.”
    As for Donohue, he really can’t seem to help himself. He may have been an asset for right-wing bishops at some point in the past, but now he’s a liability. He attacked rape victims without denouncing pedophile priests, and then dropped in an altar boy quip. It’s almost as if he’s in the fight to amuse himself, not to win any arguments or friends.
    But we probably shouldn’t be surprised. After all, Donohue has a history of this sort of thing.
    Wow Bill. Wow.
    ~Mooglets
     
  10.