-
Website
http://www.thecrimson.com/ -
Original page
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=521977 -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Bonzo
63 comments · 2 points
-
menckenlite
202 comments · 24 points
-
saracen
51 comments · 5 points
-
HNIC2alchemistprodigy
111 comments · 2 points
-
db08
31 comments · 26 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Defending the Indefensible
| The Harvard Crimson
1 week ago · 177 comments
-
French Connected
| The Harvard Crimson
9 hours ago · 2 comments
-
ANYONE'S KESS: Harvard Has Chance To Challenge Big Red's Dominance
| The Harvard Crimson
9 hours ago · 1 comment
-
Greening the Globe
| The Harvard Crimson
5 days ago · 8 comments
-
Masturbation is an Honor Code Violation | FlyByBlog | Harvard Life. To Go.
2 weeks ago · 32 comments
-
Defending the Indefensible
| The Harvard Crimson
If I was a student; I'd be livid. I'm assuming part of your tuition covers the cost of the gym. And now their telling you when you can and cannot go depending on your sex/religion. Well, I'd ask for part of my tuition back.
Hit them where it hurts, Harvard students.
Curtis
Seeing how this is a private university I can understand making rules like this, but this would insane to do in a public university where everyone should be seen as the same and everything is open to the public.
Different religions have different rules, but it is not an institutions responsibility to make special rules for a religion. It is a person's right to choose their own religion and when choosing said religion they need to realize that there maybe certain limitations on what they are able to do in the world. It is called personal accountability. Something I think most of the world has forgotten about.
You liberal academics crack the rest of us Americans up. You should know that most of the rest of the country are literally laughing at you.
What a bunch of hooey.
This is a case of some equality here, and a little more there and then a pinch there.
Thanks for accommodating me.
Can we please not always see this as a Islamification of the West? Or the conquest for Sharia Law etc? I mean Orthodox Jews and Christians also appreciate having a women's only hours. Why the university doesnt offer for men is a very valid question to ask. But please lets not make this into a bigoted discussion.
Also, its funny how you treat the presence of a mosque on campus as a horrid thought. Thankfully, the world is not like all of you who are commenting on this list. Because if so, we'd be screaming about the presence of Memorial Church of Harvard Hillel. Or invoking notions of segregation with lines of "Separate yet Equal" about the fact that each dining hall has a Kosher-only fridge.
But no- thankfully, the majority of America is not like that.
What a great American institution. WHERE ARE THE FEMINISTS?????
Give me a break: Harvard is sitting on a legacy worth mulitple $billions: they don't need one penny of tuition money -- in fact I believe I read just last week that Harvard has stopped charging poorer students tuition altogether.
On the other hand, Harvard has accepted $millions from Saudi sheikhs. Of course, they will cave in to the demands of Muslim students.
The Islamic women are in no way prevented from using the gym whenever they want.
All men have been banned from using the gym whenever they want.
It's that simple. Those girls rights are in no way being violated. If they want segragation they should go live in a country where that's practiced. It's not praticed in the USA, didn't Martin Luther King die for this?
Men are bad, who cares about men? Men deserve to beaten down.. isn't that what this is really saying. You know the backlash to all this man bashing won't be pretty.
Oh, and you nandy pandy little boy that wrote this article, grow a pair. It's ok to be outraged by this, you don't have to couch your anger in PC BS.
I'm sure there are many other animal lovers who would also like these hours to be reserved for animal workouts.
what's next -- partitions for men and women in the classrooms and cafeterias?
I do not think this is a smart step. I think it is riduculous to infringe on the rights of the other students. I am all for everyone practicing whatever religion they want as long as it does not affect others around them. This affects others. I think it is a terrible precedent that is taking us backwards.
But still, even though part of the reason for thsi new rule is due to the modesty and comfort level of Muslims, I would think that would apply to a lot of women in general. I mean, my non Muslim friends and I work out together at a women's only gym in San Francisco because we all feel uncomfortable going to a gym, veing someone's eye candy. It just makes you less self concious. So even though this rule did come about at the suggestion of Muslim women, other people can definitely take advantage of this.
Notice any similarities with Muslims?
I graduated from Harvard and now live in Europe. Despite American liberals' fantasies about a 'secular European paradise,' the fact of the matter is that Europe is not secular: It is increasingly Islamic. Muslims -- including supposedly 'moderate' ones -- have hijacked European traditions and principles of freedom and tolerance in order to implement aspects of Sharia law, the kidnapping of young Muslim women for the purpose of forced marriages and (even) 'honor' killings, etc. And don't forget that the key players in 9-11 terrorist attacks were Muslims who had studied in Europe. Don't even get me started on the Madrid bombing, London bombings, etc.
It's the 'good cop, bad cop' routine that the Nazis used ... Muslims try to wrap themselves around rights, freedoms, liberalism, democracy, tolerance, etc. (which, BTW, they wouldn't extend to Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Agnostics, Homosexuals, etc.) in order to subvert and destroy those very values they so cynically hijack. And there is always that pregnant pause ... 'or else' ... the implied (or direct) threat that they will hijack airplanes, buses, trains, Sbarro pizza parlours, etc.
Being familiar with Harvard students (having been one myself), I know that it isn't just political correctness that is preventing people from speaking honestly about all of this. It is career-ism ('what if I have to get a job in Qatar for McKinsey?'), elitism (never having experienced anything outside of their pampered upbringing -- apologies to the few students like me who were working class -- how can they process what's really going on?), and, frankly, fear ... look at Salman Rushdie, the row over the Dutch newspaper cartoon, the film director (and descendant of the artist, Vincent) Theo Van Gogh (who was murdered in the Netherlands -- an uber-liberal European country) , etc.
If you think I'm an overwrought American ex-pat in Europe, just look to the North: In Canada, a respected columnist (Mark Steyn) writing in a respected newsmagazine (Maclean) is getting threatened with laws against hate speech when, in fact, his column wouldn't be out-of-place in the New York Times or the Washington Post:
BBC News:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/72738...
The original op-ed (read it before it gets banned):
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=2006...
(BTW, Maclean also had an article suggesting that Christianity should reject Jesus ... I'll bet you that they won't be getting the death threats and lawsuits to censor them that they would, and have gotten, from Muslims.)
Frankly, I am more afraid of the Muslims (the supposed 'moderates') who hijack liberal democracy than the ones who hijack airplanes and public transport. At least Al-Qaeda has the decency to not cynically hide behind 'rights,' 'tolerance,' etc. while their supposedly more 'moderate' brethren -- and apparently sisters in the case of Harvard -- do while they are hypocritically destroying those values.
Why is it okay to have a women only room? That's not any better than this. I was a member at a Bally's that decided to make a room for women only. I protested and used it anyway. If I am in a co-ed gym and pay my dues, I should be able to go anywhere except the female locker rooms.
Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Matthew 10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." -Jesus Christ
There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.
-- Ezekiel 23:20 (NIV)
If you read all of Matthew chapter 10, you'll understand what Jesus was saying. He knew his teachings of PEACE would not be accepted by everyone. That those tha
t felt threatened by Jesus's teachings would want to destroy his followers. He wasn't saying that his followers should behead everyone that is a non-believer.
Exodus is full of rules and punishments. When was the last time you've heard of a
Christian killing a witch? You lost me on the whole genitals comment. I am not sure how that ties into the conversation.
If you want to have a Dialog about Sharia Law( I added the A just for you Vir, Feels good dosen't it?) then lets have one.
Currently in the News an Iranian Homo-sexual is trying to get assylum in the U.K. Why is that important you ask? Well because his Iranian lover was just found guilty of sodomy and hanged. Under Sharia Law that is the punishment for being a Homo-sexual.
Under Sharia Law you are allowed to leave the muslim religion, only after you are put to death.
Under Sharia Law anyone who critizises Islam, Mohammed, The Koran or Sharia Law is to be put to death.
Under Sharia Law crimes are punished "eye for an eye", literally. If you are caught stealing you lose a hand.
Under Sharia Law all drinkers and gamblers should be whipped.
Under Sharia Law unmarried fornicators are to be whipped and adulterers are to be stoned to death.
The list goes on and on.
So Vir, kind of a slight difference from, "Do unto others" and "Thou shall not kill."
So we should have compassion and tolerance for a Law that teaches no mercy and intolerance. Odd.......
(hope you find all of my grammatical errors....have fun)