|
subhousewife7 -> RE: Harvard gym tests Muslim women only hours (3/6/2008 2:53:30 AM)
|
exactly, following your "interesting" (being politically correct here lol) beliefs is one thing but imposing it on an entire campus is crazy. quote:
ORIGINAL: rook42 The basis for the switch was not discomfort: it was the argument that their religious upbringingĀ demanded the absence of males. The argument is that it is unequal to not allow for this difference in religion. I think this is hogwash. It is imposing limits on the behavior of others for one's own religion; essentially, a pressing of your religious behaviors on others without your religious beliefs. Your right to freely practice your religion ends with yourself- it does not entitle you the right to influence the actions of others outside of your belief system. Assuming I don't have any details of the case wrong, then charge females a greater gym fee for greater availability of the gym :) As it stands, the males of that campus are subsidizing the gym use by people other than themselves. Or give an equally large and convenient males only time... There are many religious men that have problem with being around half-naked women, as well. My university had a successful male driven lawsuit for not allowing proper distancing between male/females in living settings. The religious discomfort for those of the opposite gender is NOT gender-specific, regardless of which side has gained more press in this case. As a useful mental exercise... If someone refused to sit in seats that women had sat in, on the grounds that female essence had "tainted" them and rendered them a danger to one's own spiritual purity(It's not as silly as it sounds- there are those who believe this)... Would the university be obliged to create male-only seating in the classroom?
|
|
|
|