Yeah I'm reading BOZO. Your usual rambling dirge replete with the usual punctuation, capitals, biblical and YouTube references.

Just save time and put the same into doc's and c/p it for each post. Nobody would know the difference.

Alternatively, you could just slam your face shut, padlock it , and throw the key away...........

This discussion is pointless because it presupposes that the word WOMAN has the same human connotation in Islam as in the rest of the modern world.

According to their Prophet, a woman is deficient both intellectually and in all religious matters – simply because her testimony in court is worth half that of a man and that she menstuates (unclean) one week every month.

A woman is viewed as an object or goods of commerce – to be handed (sold) by her father to a husband in marriage (contract of sale).

After all women in Islam were only created for men’s pleasure and to do housework and raise children. Men can simply discard them by divorce when they stop satisfying their needs.

Their prophet also said that there are three things that spoil a man’s prayer: a passing dog, a donkey or a woman.

Women are an OBSCENITY that must be covered from society. She is the sum total of major obscenities (breasts, vagina, etc) and minor obscenities like her face, hands, feet…

Girls as young as 5 and much less are regularly being sold in marriage in the Muslim world.

Lest we forget that their prophet married a 6 year old child when he was in his fifties.

But I agree that covering is very much a political statement – a way to gain acceptance by the general public becoming more accustomed and less shocked by seeing walking tents everyday and everywhere.

Corporations run with a hierachial structure, so do universities, armies, organized crime syndicates and countries. This works to help carve up the division of labour but also, so that someone, somewhere in the chain is held responsible. I don’t want to waste my whole post on private enterprise theory, I’m hoping that others can at least see the efficiency of “headship” and the idea of a “labour contract”.

As a Christian woman, it is my duty to build up and support Christian men in leadership roles. When Christian men take the burden (not privilege) of responsibility, then naturally, I am encouraging. That doesn’t make me an acolyte of BD, goodthief, runner (assuming they are all male) or others, but a woman accountable to God.

Fractelle: There are other accountabilities. When Christian men abuse their position, they will be asked to leave, as scripture insists, after the appropriate warnings. If BD was really not walking the walk, then I (goodthief etc) would spot it a mile away.

I’m trying to open a doorway into not just scripture for you, but a Christ-centered life. Is this really pontificating or theorizing? After 38 years pursuing wisdom and knowledge in the world, on a fairly typical path (undergrad, postgrad, work, travel, study, marriage, work, undergrad again, motherhood, work, motherhood), I know that it is not found there.

Conversion aside (which accounts for the last 4 years), as a product of the Australian education system, a student of history and an interested citizen, BD’s posts just plain make sense to me.

Billy C, on the other hand, is an absolute product of apologetics. But let’s call that for what it is: lying. Taqquia. Historical revisionism. For the sake of Dawah. As authorized by the Qu’ran.

Ginx: already noted that Muslim women want to wear Muslim dress by choice. See stickman’s definition of hijab, and the relation to Islamic philosophy, for starters.

In a country such as Australia, as a male I think it is highly offensive that women cover themselves up like that so as not to tempt us. If their own men are so untrustworthy and scary fair enough, but do not introduce these divisive gender attitudes here, please. And WTF is this "no hand-shaking" business?

Billy C

Your points about cultural influence are entirely valid. And I can understand in a society where the norm is to be covered from head to foot, that any stare from a man would be very unsettling. In an egalitarian society men are expected to take responsibility for their behaviour, such as we have here in Australia. However, in the M.E. countries attire is cultural, religious and political. Very difficult for women to change even if they want to.

On the topic of culture, I have never found the Indian sari as particularly demeaning to women, in fact I think it is very flattering, where as the burqa just looks like a tent; it is cumbersome and restrictive. Repressive and crippling fashion such as foot-binding is now in the past - hopefully the burqa will fade into history too.

Restriction and objectification of women through fashion in Western culture are stiletto shoes - damaging to feet and posture as well. The only way to wear high heels is seated or lying down, and are more appropriate for the boudoir than anywhere else. I'm a Doc Martens kind of woman.

Being a liberal by nature, I cannot condone banning either hijab or burqa, banning never works and simply reinforces an ideology. But I don't have to like it either, all I can do is remain optimistic, that as the 21st century progresses more women will receive higher levels of education and learn not to fear nor be ashamed of the fact that they just happened to be born women.

Katie0, I have learned from your posts, that you take the bible as literally as Boaz, therefore I would never expect you take issue with Boaz. However, there are plenty of Christians who see the bible more in terms of parables and philosophy as I used to when I was a child. However, since then, I have found the real world a more enlightening and exciting place to be without the constraints, dogma and bigotry that accompanies ALL religions.

KatieO said: "I’m trying to open a doorway into not just scripture for you, but a Christ-centered life. Is this really pontificating or theorizing? After 38 years pursuing wisdom and knowledge in the world, on a fairly typical path (undergrad, postgrad, work, travel, study, marriage, work, undergrad again, motherhood, work, motherhood), I know that it is not found there."

Katie - I think what you meant to say, is that YOU couldn't find it there. Plenty of others have, and will continue to. I am happy that you have found whatever it is that was lacking from your life in the arms of Christianity, but not everyone is in that boat.