From: seyyed@wuee1.wustl.edu (Seyyed Mahdavian)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian
Subject: Re: Seyyed and the Politics of Difference
Keywords: Politics, Difference
Date: 5 Nov 92 04:31:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: wuecl.1992Nov5.043107.19477
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis Mo.

In article <1992Nov4.225218.27839@athena.mit.edu> lking@athena.mit.edu (Loren King) writes:

>Well, you're saying: "God is telling them, and I know what God thinks."
>I don't see much difference once the religious rhetoric is carved away.

No! You presented another idea incompatible with the law of God, and I just
proved that your idea doesn't work. I didn't try to prove God's law. In fact,
contrary to what you say above, I even don't know whether I perfectly
understand the rationale behind that law or not. I just TRY to understand
it, and the more I think about it, the more I find it logical and correct. 
 
>I didn't say "understand".  I said "recognition", implying a respect of the
>inherent dignity and autonomy of all rational individuals, regardless of
>sex. 

But I did say understand! Recognition, as you define it, if accompanied with
misunderstanding, is just a formality and has little value.

>I contend that claims about "the law of God" are thinly veiled exercises
>of power.  You will recall that, in all historical rhetoric, God always
>seems to be on the side with the most powerr.  In this case that happens 
>to be the males who dominate legal and governing institutions.

It's true that the name of God has been abused by a lot of people, but you
cannot deduce from this, that everybody who claims to apply God's law, is
like those who abused it. In fact many people established power in the
name of God, and were just and right. Prophet King David (a) was one of
them. Isn't it true that nowadays a lot of people are abusing the names
"justice", "human rights", "freedom", ... ? Isn't it true that those
claims are thinly veiled exercises of exploitation and colonization?
Just look at your own country! You go to Iraq, kill thousands of innocent
people in the name of justice, and when it comes to Somalia, you are as
mute as a dead body!
Anyway, we are not talking about those who CLAIM to apply the law of God
or freedom, human rights, ... We are talking about the law itself.

>God can't tell us what to do.  We must tell ourselves, and avoid the illusion
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>that our self-governance, our beliefs, are better, truer than others.

Why is that? God who CREATED us is unable to tell us what the way of life is?!
I would appreciate if you said: "I don't believe that what you say is the law
of God". But you are claiming something beyond your understandings!

>Appeals to "God's law" provide just this sort of illusion to generality, and
>it is inconsistent with your previous appeal to particularity.

I am not trying to confuse you by apealing to generalities. On the contrary,
I am very specific. Very simple, clear and specific statements: 

1) God says that women should wear hejab.
2) God has created us, therefore knows better about our own benefit.
3) God is kind to us and wants our good and prosperity.
4) We should seek our good and prosperity.
5) Therefore we should obey God, and his order about hejab.

You see how simple and clear it is? Now if you believe in statements 1) through
4), you have to accept statement 5) (if you are logical). If you don't believe
in statements 1) through 4), then you have another problem that is not probably
going to be solved through such a discussion.

>Loren king

Seyyed.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian