[smasheroffaces]

Originally Posted by LavrentiBeria

Why? I dont get this "Western man's burden" idea that Westerners have a fundamental moral duty to bring freedom and equality to the less civilized of this world. Worry about your family and your people. Let others be.

yah i agree lets let them be. and when they come to our world from theirs leave their shit there and assimilate to our culture.

[Marsupial]

Originally Posted by natyong

So when US/USSR (different times) boycotted the Olympics they should have faced "stiff penalties for doing so?" These countries boycotted for political reasons which is contrary to the nature of the Olympics.

Yeah, but what would be the point in barring the participation of countries that have already decided to boycott? They weren't having it both ways. They had their political reasons and they didn't come out to play.
There doesn't seem any need for a follow-up punishment.

Countries like Saudi Arabia are having it both ways. They're discriminating on the grounds of gender, contrary to the IOC's own standards, and still being allowed to participate.

[muerteverde]

Originally Posted by smasheroffaces

LOL i want to see it

umm, it has already happened. The female athletes from either Pakistan or Afghanistan in the 2004 Olympics competed covered up and this woman from Afhanistan is set to compete in a track even this year:

http://fractalenlightenment.blogspot...stan-2008.html

There was a big deal made last time about new swimming suits making is possible for Muslim women to compete. The new fabric that covers the entire body actualy reduces drag -- and this is why the men are wearing more than just skimpy speedos now too (the ridges in it direct the water down the length of the body).

For a Bahrainian sprinter who competed in full hijab, look here:







She was 16 years old at the time. Here a NYT article:
SUMMER 2004 GAMES; Free at Last, Islamic Women Compete With Abandon - New York Times

[mkess101]

Originally Posted by SpiralOfSilence

Hope that helped.

Sweet. And she won!

I was kind of hoping for the real traditional muslim garb, (you know, the robe, the whole face covered except the eyes, sandals) but that's pretty damn good. And good for that muslim chick winning that race. She's having none of that "women can't participate" crap. I wonder what the mullahs in Iran would say about that picture?

[MikoMido]

The modern Islamic country of Turkey does have its issues, but I have noticed they are not trying to ban Muslim women from the Olympics.

It's not all Islamic countries that behave in this manner. It seems to be countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran that are backwards in their view and treatment of women. They refuse to evolve with the rest of society.

Also, a hijab is a personal choice and not a religious matter. (Just correcting those who relate the two. Not all Muslim women wear hijabs or are expected to wear them).

[Marsupial]

Originally Posted by MikoMido

The modern Islamic country of Turkey does have its issues, but I have noticed they are not trying to ban Muslim women from the Olympics.

The population of Turkey is overwhelmingly Muslim but the country itself is not Islamic.
It is a secular republic.

Originally Posted by MikoMido

Also, a hijab is a personal choice and not a religious matter. (Just correcting those who relate the two. Not all Muslim women wear hijabs or are expected to wear them).

In some countries women have to be veiled, even if they are not Muslims themselves.

[MikoMido]

Originally Posted by Marsupial

The population of Turkey is overwhelmingly Muslim but the country itself is not Islamic.
It is a secular republic.



In some countries women have to be veiled, even if they are not Muslims themselves.

Turkey is secular, but its populaton is Islamic, and yes, I am aware that in some countries women do have to be veiled even if they are not Muslims themselves, but that was not my point.

[DrSatanDracula]

Marsupial:

That's not how we do things anymore though, eh?
There's a lot of things we don't do like the Hellenic Greeks.

Your contention was that it was against the spirit of the Olympics. It is not against the spirit of the Olympics.

Let's break it down:

1. Banning women from the Olympics is contrary to the spirit of the Olympics (postulated to refute).

2. "Spirit" references back to the original intent of the Olympics.

3. The original Olympic games, after which the modern games are built, barred women.

4. From 2 and 3, the spirit of the Olympic games was to ban women competition.

5. 4 refutes 1.

6. Ergo, the Olympics, in order to retain their spirit, must ban women.

[CJF]

Some of you guy's are homos. I'd so watch an olympics with Allison Stokkes in an event (if she ever gets that good)

[MMAFan123]

Originally Posted by DrSatanDracula

Marsupial:



Your contention was that it was against the spirit of the Olympics. It is not against the spirit of the Olympics.

Let's break it down:

1. Banning women from the Olympics is contrary to the spirit of the Olympics (postulated to refute).

2. "Spirit" references back to the original intent of the Olympics.

3. The original Olympic games, after which the modern games are built, barred women.

4. From 2 and 3, the spirit of the Olympic games was to ban women competition.

5. 4 refutes 1.

6. Ergo, the Olympics, in order to retain their spirit, must ban women.

False logic. The spirit of the Olympics changes over time.

Same reason we don't have all athletes compete naked, even though that was the original "spirit of the Olympics".