Watching the Olympics, I’ve seen two crazy religious traditions on display.
First, New Zealand women’s basketball players Charmian Purcell and Nonila Wharemate decided that playing on Sundays is against the principles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which mandates that Sunday is a day of rest (but feel free to attend endless services). Interestingly, Natalie Purcell, Charmian’s sister, elected to play in a Sunday game against the United States. Note to Mormons: God — if he exists — doesn’t care if His followers compete in the Olympics on Sunday. Use your common sense.
Second, Bahrain’s Ruqaya Al Ghasara, a devout Muslim, ran the 200-meters (very fast) while wearing a full body suit and hijab. If you Muslims think God demands that women cover themselves totally while competing in the Olympics, I don’t know quite what to say. “Nuts” comes to mind. No wonder there are no great Islamic marathoners or swimmers.
The Latest on Faith and Doubt
23 responses so far ↓
1 Wil // Aug 21, 2008 at 10:39 am
I think she’s covered up like that because it’s really a dude under there and he didn’t want to get disqualified - HOLY COW!
2 Tah // Aug 21, 2008 at 12:24 pm
So when you watched Chariots of Fire did you say this is dumb and get up and leave. If one want to honor the Sabbeth and they can get their country’s approval good for them.
Tah
3 Tom // Aug 21, 2008 at 9:11 pm
cmon guys, didnt you see how fast she was running? It’s clearly done for aerodynamics. How long before everyone is getting suitied up the same, even the mens?!
4 Iron Pol // Aug 21, 2008 at 9:58 pm
I guess my response would be that if it’s okay for another runner, say the one in lane 5, to wear whatever she desires, what’s wrong with Al Ghasara wearing what she wants, regardless of reasoning?
So long as it doesn’t violate a reasonable rule regarding outside or mechanical assistance, or present a safety concern, who cares?
5 Thranil // Aug 22, 2008 at 12:45 am
I think the point, Iron Pol, is that it is nonsensical to compete in a race dressed like that. Clearly there’s no rule about it, and I couldn’t care less what people wear when competing… but it does point out just how religion can make people do the silliest things without any good reason.
6 Iron Pol // Aug 22, 2008 at 12:54 am
“without any good reason.”
A very subjective statement.
If she chose to race like that to make a statement to the effect that she believes our young people are becoming more and more “oversexed” at younger and younger ages, would that be okay? Or just “without any good reason.”
If she chose to race like that as a statement about human bondage in her country, would tat be okay? Or just “without any good reason.”
7 Cassi // Aug 22, 2008 at 2:39 am
I was impressed that Al Ghasara didn’t let her beliefs about covering up stop her from competing at the highest level of her sport. She acted in accordance with her beliefs AND ran really, really fast. On top of that, she did it by dressing in a way that she must have known would expose her to some ridicule. I’m not sure I would be so brave.
8 Tim Stroud // Aug 22, 2008 at 3:28 am
Let’s list all the “Dumb Religious Traditions”.
I”ll go first.
1. Christmas
Next?
9 Iron Pol // Aug 22, 2008 at 4:58 am
Here’s an equally silly situation (though I’m afraid I can’t find the original story). A story a short while back related the situation faced by a person of similar faith.
She wanted to run with her school’s cross country team, but needed to cover up similar to the girl shown here. She paid for a suit much like what is shown here, though I believe hers was more flesh colored. She could then wear her school’s CC outfit over that.
She wasn’t allowed to participate. I don’t remember the reasoning, but when I read it, I remember thinking, “Wow, that’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.” Which is worse, this lady wearing this outfit to participate, or someone saying she CAN’T participate because she wants to wear it?
10 Iron Pol // Aug 22, 2008 at 5:03 am
Neat when I get to correct myself. I found the story. Two color unitard she had worn for several years. She happened to have some of the fastest times in the distances she runs. She was disqualified from participation because track uniforms have to be “a single color.”
Yet the refs told her if she put a plain t-shirt over the unitard, plus her uniform she could compete. Sounds a bit arbitrary, to me.
11 Thranil // Aug 22, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Iron Pol,
I think one of the major disconnects you and I seem to have is that, from what I can tell, you view all ideas as deserving equal respect whereas I view any idea which are presented in a dogmatic fashion (even non-religious ideas) as unworthy of respect.
If someone does something just because some dogmatic belief system dictates that they do… well that’s just a very juvenile reason to do anything really. My three children have all questioned why we do things or why we have certain rules… all before the entered kindergarten! They follow rules because they see the benefit of doing so… not because some arbitrary authority figure (even me) tells them to do so. They also question rules that they see as unjustifiable… I couldn’t be more proud.
So yeah, when I see a grown woman covering up her body in an arena where doing so is very unusual for a reason that is no better than ’so-and-so told me to’… yep, I tend to find that pretty ridiculous. Do I think that this person should be mocked? Absolutely no. Do I think that this person should be prevented from competing? No! Do I think they’re being ridiculous? Absolutely!
12 Iron Pol // Aug 23, 2008 at 2:12 am
But it goes to the root question. Who made you the grand arbiter of what is unjustified.
A great many people believe the open display of human anatomy is unacceptable. There are varying degrees of that belief, and varying reasons for the belief.
If one of your kids grows up and sees very logical reasons for doing something you see as extremely odd or pointless, who’s logic wins?
And I agree with you. We do have a disconnect on how we view things. I don’t believe all ideas deserve equal respect. What I do believe is that each person has an equal right to believe and follow whatever doctrine they choose (yourself and the doctrine of “no god” included).
I might not respect the logic, beliefs, or actions. But I respect the person and their right to do as they choose.
If and when that respect is lost, things progress from spiritual belief to zealotry, regardless of the belief. Muslims who lose respect for others become fanatics who think it’s okay to chop someone’s head off. Baptists who lose respect for others become lunatics who protest funerals proclaiming God wants the person dead. Catholics who lost respect for others went on crusades to “convert” the masses. Atheists who lose respect for others dedicate their lives to the belief the Constitution guarantees freedom FROM religion.
The question is this. Which is better? To disagree with but accept someones religious expression, whether dogmatic or not, or to be intolerant of their choices because they are viewed as “ridiculous?”
13 Thranil // Aug 23, 2008 at 2:40 am
Wow, you went a long way from me saying something is ridiculous to claiming that somehow I am being intolerant.
“I might not respect the logic, beliefs, or actions. But I respect the person and their right to do as they choose.”
I have said nothing to the contrary to this statement. Where do you get off on saying that I have? Just because I found something ridiculous? Get over your self.
14 Iron Pol // Aug 23, 2008 at 4:44 am
“I view any idea which are presented in a dogmatic fashion (even non-religious ideas) as unworthy of respect.”
“but it does point out just how religion can make people do the silliest things without any good reason.”
Perhaps we disagree on the definition of tolerance. I will give you that you said you could care less. But you really don’t SEEM to care less. In fact, you seem to care a lot.
I can’t think of the last time I spent considerable time debating something about which I had no concern. (Okay, yes I can. It was with my best friend, and we were shoveling snow arguing about something stupid.)
I asked a simple question. Why does her attire matter. You proceeded to explain why it matters. When I questioned who gets to decide “reasonable,” you seem to care a lot.
You say you’ve said nothing to the contrary regarding respect. I disagree. When you belittle someone’s choices, you do not respect them. Calling their choices unworthy of respect and silly is hardly tolerant.
You’re right, I don’t know you. The only thing I have to judge are your comments. And as you did, I apologize for any response that inaccurately portrays you.
15 Jenny // Aug 26, 2008 at 6:31 am
IronPol, you won this round.
16 Iron Pol // Aug 26, 2008 at 9:40 pm
While Thranil and I seem go back and forth, I’m unsure “winner” is a term that can be used. I can no more prove God exists then he can prove the opposite.
Mostly what we can do is attempt to raise questions about beliefs.
17 Iron Pol // Aug 26, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Thanks for the vote, though.
18 Thranil // Aug 26, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Iron Pol only wins at the fact that he distorts my arguments into pale shadows of what the original intent was. He argues semantics instead of actual content. He also regularly ignores many points that I raise in favor of focusing on far less important word choice type of concerns.
So if he wins because it’s futile to attempt to have a conversation with him, then so be it. That just happens to be a ‘competition’ that I have no interest in participating in.
19 Iron Pol // Aug 27, 2008 at 4:49 am
And I’m a lot nicer about it. It’s because I don’t take myself too seriously.
20 Thranil // Aug 27, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Sorry if the truth is ‘mean’.
21 Iron Pol // Aug 28, 2008 at 12:39 am
It isn’t the content. It’s the presentation.
And it was really a joke (sarcasm is fairly hard in written form). That’s why my writing isn’t putting food on my table.
22 Jerry // Aug 28, 2008 at 9:08 am
Can someone please tell me how a country that censors its people and murders its dissidents and whose policies lead to 10,000 murdered babies a year came to be the toast of the world for two weeks?
23 Iron Pol // Aug 28, 2008 at 9:12 pm
4 billion people.
Leave a Comment