And about the "muslims only" zones in Medina and other cities in Saudi Arabia as well?
And how about the laws criminalizing any religion but Islam?
Please, stop. You're just digging an even bigger hole for yourself. Dishonesty does not serve the project well.
Parker
On 12/31/06, Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu- tariqabjotu@gmail.com wrote:
Ugh... sigh... I guess my last message didn't get read. Please carry on this dispute elsewhere.
-- Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu-
P.S. However, the sign is referring to two different places -- Mount Arafat and the city of Makkah (and similarly the cities of Ta'if and Riyadh for the other part). But please, let's abandon this topic...
Silas Snider wrote:
On 12/31/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
<snip />
To be more precise the turn off to the left is to "Arafat Makkah", the actual holy site in Mecca. The sign going to the right has two arrows, which suggests two lanes. Why, in a country that is predominantly Muslim, would the infidel minority get two lanes while the dominant religious group get only one? Traffic control can be a serious problem at the time of the Hajj.
I'm sorry, but I'm having a little bit of trouble understanding the reason for saying this. The assertion that you seem to be disputing is that non-Muslims are not allowed in Mecca. You reply with a) a technical nit-pick about non-Muslims being allowed into Mecca, just not Arafat Makkah, and what seems to be a complaint about traffic problems during the Hajj. I, and everyone who gets a full inbox of this stuff would, I think, appreciate every byte of the message to be full of meaningful information that is apropos to the topic.
To answer point (a) above, would you still object if the statement was that non-Muslims are not allowed into "Arafat Makkah". With this statement, Oldak Quill's point is still valid -- the comparison to Apratheid is better made with the Saudis than with Israel.
The Latter Day Saints do not allow non-Mormons into their inner temple in Salt Lake City, and I find no reason to be upset about that.
This is a bad analogy for two reasons:
- Two wrongs do not make a right -- just because the Latter Day
Saints go around prohibiting people from entering their inner temple doesn't give me moral grounds on which to do the same thing.
- The reason I'm not (being a non-Mormon) allowed into the temple of
the Latter Day Saints has to do with it being private property, giving them the right to arbitrarily refuse entrance to anyone they choose, much like my home. The reason I'm not (being a non-Muslim) allowed to enter Arafat Makkah is because the government of Saudi Arabia has passed a law forbidding it.
The photo adds no commentary, and is accompanied by a misleading title. Looking further into the website gives me the impression that it is run by fundamentalist hate mongers.
However much you may object to the website housing the photo, you have nto yet offered a shred of evidence to negate the assertion that non-Muslims are not allowed into Arafat Makkah. If you really need a more neutrally captioned photo, see
http://www.theraptureisathand.com/blog/index.php/2006/12/13/mecca-youre-not-...
(though this site might be considered that of religious hate mongers as
well)
Sincerely, Silas Snider
Ec
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l