I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

pupmom

The shorter ones and tweedy ones were very nice. I could wear a couple of them. But it has been 20 years since I've worn a really short skirt. I favor the Hillary Clinton style, all pants all the time. 

Momine

I stopped wearing skirts and sleeveless at 30, because I did not like the shape of my legs and arms after pregnancy. Now that the lack of estrogen has eradicated the odd fat deposits I had on my knees and arms, and I am old enough to wear some kind of stockings, I have started wearing skirts again (as well as sleeveless things). Funny how these things change.

bluedahlia

pupmom

Oh wait, I be retired! 

alexandria58

Funny, but this is the first collection that i could actually see myself wearing, at least the longer styles, even the busy first two.  Remind me a lot of my youth.

RetiredLibby

Lassie,



We should be so lucky to be annexed by Canada!



L

1Athena1

Poor Canadians if that happened - lol!

QuinnCat

I wish my parents were alive so I could understand, fully, why they left Canada in the 40's.  The only story I ever heard was that during the war, it was for better professional job opportunities.  At one point, they moved from Montana to California, "for the weather."  They certainly claimed their grubstake in California, but those days have mostly passed, for our generation, and Canada has set itself up, far better, as a government, better equiped to provide healthcare and infrastructure to it's citizens.  We spend far too much on items than yield nothing productive...like unnecessary war, unnecessary weapons, CEO salaries.  Our higher tax brackets have been flattened so much over the years, they are too low for the services we have grown to expect...good roads, good schools, clean air, etc., etc..

I remember hearing George Romney (Mitt's father) once say, as CEO of GM, he drew a salary of $1 million dollars.  After $1 million, he was taxed 90%, so he refused any additional salary.  He said it was better for GM's future to put that money back into the company than pay him.  More for the workers, more for R&D.  Likewise, had he taken the extra money, that would be returned to the greater good.  Income inequality is a real problem in this country.

Wabbit

What I read of the Sharia law was pretty much what I would expect from laws based on Biblical teachings.  It's what would happen with any theocracy IMO.  Which is why I totally oppose giving any religion a say in making this country's laws or running government.  It was not, however, as radical as I expected.  I did not expect women to have any property rights, or the right to initiate a divorce, or that it would say they had to agree to a marriage.    

Does the fundamentalist far right not understand that this mirrors their stated wish to let religion influence law and government here?  Can their fear and distrust of Sharia law help them understand our fear and distrust of any kind of law based on Biblical teachings and religion?  I hope so. 

pupmom

Wabbit, unfortunately, I doubt it. Their brains are wired to be incredibly simplistic: I, and MY religion are right and righteous, YOURS, not so much.

1Athena1

That's the problem. They don't see that there is NO DAYLIGHT between fundamentalist Islam and fundamentalist Christianity. They both preach intolerance and the subversion of a modern, secular society. We've had fundamentalists run for office with platforms that would take away human rights (especially those of women) and institute religion as a deciding factor. Two that come to mind are Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum. Hell, we've had candidates that condone rape.

Sharia is, apparently, practiced and observed to very different degrees depending on how orthodox the person is. So a more secular Muslim would not observe laws limiting women's educational rights, while nutsos like the Taliban would. But even the most orthodox of sharia followers couldn't be much worse than some of the jokers that have run under the republican banner in this country. Or their minions, who blame natural disasters on political opponents.

If it is allowable to condone rape (whether via ultrasound or b forbidding rape victims to abort) then what could possibly be so bad about sharia.

Simple answer: the sharia lot will generally have darker skin pigmentation and not a US passport.

The underbelly of this is all the same, folks. Jingoism.  

Chickadee

I hope I haven't got my history too confused but I remember reading in James Mitcheners "Chesapeake" how the Protestants in Virginia were in sometimes deadly conflict with the Papists or Catholics who settled in Maryland.



The Amish/Mennonites sought refuge in Pennsylvania initially. The Mormons got hounded out of Illinois at the point of a gun.



In my fathers little Pa hometown there was a Polish Catholic Church at the bottom of the hill and an Irish Catholic Church at the top.....they didn't like each other.



God help the Jewish people's who sought a new life in America. Or each different human who came to these shores.



Within each religion is intolerance and angry retribution if you stray from someone's idea of how you should act. We are still tribal in nature and that can lead to conflict.



I have little use for man's idea of religion. I do think the lessons of the life of Christ is worthy of emulation and there are other amazing humans throughout history deserving of our admiration and study.

Belinda44

Well said, Athena.

Reminds me, I remember seeing this meme at the Daily Kos after the election:

Belinda44

Chickadee, I like your last sentence about Jesus.

pupmom

Belinda, love it!

pupmom

ROFL, teabags sending out mass emails with Karl Rove in Nazi uniform!

Momine

Athena, the problem is not the Sharia. It is also true that fundy Islam, Christianity and Judaism are more alike than any of them usually like to admit. When you are dealing with the fundy element of any of those stripes, the main argument is whose version of fundy rightousness gets to win.

However, where the Sharia does get problematic is in its intertwining of secular and religious law. Christians do have the principle of "give unto Ceasar." The fundies may not be very wedded to it, but the principle nonetheless is there. Theocracy is not inherent in Christianity.

Ultimately the goal of Islam is for the state to be Islamic. There is in Islam the principle of dhimmitude, which means that people of the book, i.e. Jews and Christians, are entitled to protection and free exercise of their religion. This protection does, however, also bring with it what amounts to a second class status in various ways, including legally. 

So both secularism and tolerance of other religions is fraught with various problems in relation to Islam, as we can see playing out right now in Syria, for example.

In other words, although it makes sense to consider fundy strains of all the Abrahamic religions as similar, I do not think it is intellectually honest to relativize to the point of saying that Christianity is no different than Islam.

At the same time, I find the current hysteria in the West about Sharia and Islam to be overwrought. I simply don't see how such a small minority is supposed to impose its religious ideology on all the rest of us if we don't want it. I have enough faith in our institutions, for now anyway, that I think we can perfectly well tolerate a Muslim minority in our midst without any harm befalling us.

1Athena1

Momine, I'm not making a statement about what beliefs or religions are but about in who is complaining about what. Sharia appears to be adopted with varying degres depending on the circumstance/country etc... So does Chrstianity. Then there are a zillion theological differences. What is NO different is the intolerance and double-standards applied by right wingers who protest sharia while welcom9ing the intolerance they profess to deplore - the professed horror of sharia by those who would support methods of orthodoxy/biblical reading/wishful thinking equally repressive to what they selectively read as existing in others. I am no theologian - I could never make an argument about what is and is not stated. I do think religion is a man made concept which humans apply rather opportunistically. This is one such case. 

IllinoisLady

I must say you have all summed up my feelings to a tee.  I always find it hard to run up against the don't do as I do, do as I say crowd.  If I live to be a hundred I think I still won't understand why it is so hard to acknowledge that we are in this together.  Black,yellow, white, religion, no religion or somewhere in between.  

It would seem to me that the current group in the Senate/White House, along with a fair number of their predecessors were and have been itching for a fight they are losing.  To that end it seems only one person or party is now running the country.  Well, that is not by choice -- the other party has to participate with more than obstructionism.  I'm sure there will be the normal rt. handed pundit 'fuel' parcelled out. In part, that is how we got this far.  I think of the adage of :  if you keep doing what you've have always done ( certainly in the last four yrs. ) you'll keep getting what you've always got.   If the Republicans would like to have a say so......then they need to quit obstructing.  They are choosing not to play so to speak, and crying about the outcome. 

I kept hoping that there would be a turn-around, but you have to want what is best for people, all of them.  It is not so far-fetched that our country could be in the black.  It wasn't all that terribly long ago that it was.

Jackie

bluedahlia

This sums it up..............Wiser words never spoken!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty0369VwpzY

bluedahlia

Somee people who call other people morons should firstly make sure they are home, then secondly, they should turn on the lights and thirdly, look in the mirror!

bluedahlia

bluedahlia

bluedahlia

Chickadee

Holy crappoli, with 10 laps to go Ms Danica Patrick is in the top five. Caution out, it'll be a shoot out!



Go Girl!

bluedahlia

Chickadee

WooHoo she took the eighth spot in the last minute scramble. Fantastic for a rookie! Ok bubba is going back in her shack. I might have to watch more races this year.

Anonymous

Wabbit, Chick, Belinda - I'm been STOMPING on my "LIKE" button after reading your posts..

Fundamentalism moving into local politics in many US states - school boards, local rulings, terrifying.  Dictating what will be considered "science" in school text books, haven't seen CLC ( Claire) posting in a long time, hope she's well, she'd have something to say about the effect of theocracy in education in USA.

Something about generations of individuals who are members of theocratic organizations which sent ( and still do) people to "missionize" all over the world, now feeling "threatened" by others trying to do the same thing....kinda makes me smile...and of course shown so perfectly in Blue's link....evangelicism in any form seems inappropriate....

On to really IMPORTANT matters - what are the women going to be wearing on the "red carpet" - my favorite part of the Oscars...also the jewelry, oooooh, love the jewelry...

Chickadee

I give thanks for the small pleasure of seeing jewels sparkle in high def! Even old B&W movies, the dazzle is remarkable.



Some fun escapism.

Belinda44

Always love seeing the gowns on the red carpet.  So far I'm liking Jennifer Lawrence's gown (Dior) and Amy Adam's (Oscar de la Renta)