Muslim foot baths!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DelerPrius @ Aug 1 2007, 05:13 PM) [snapback]488895[/snapback]</div>

No, they're using them for hygenic reasons.

It's not a PUBLIC building. It's a University. Try checking out a book with your Public Library Card. A University is not a free-for-all.

Using your arguement, all diaper changing tables should be removed from all women's restrooms. After all, I'll bet the men's rooms don't have diaper changing tables. And I don't have any children. Plenty of women don't have children. So why should money be spent for such a small minority of the population?

They're footbaths. You was your feet in them. Until they're installed no one has any idea how many non-muslims will be using them or for what purposes besides washing feet.

I think this thread is indicative of the differences between the two political parties. One has no problem with providing and the other is all about denying. And if the denial can in some way offend the minority it is aimed at, well, there's a perk.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 1 2007, 07:13 PM) [snapback]488924[/snapback]</div>

I guess that means you're ready to put up the Christmas decorations!

You have a pretty broad definition of hygiene. I can go all day without needing to wash my feet unless I step in something.

Here's another interesting thing about the differences between political parties. CAIR's lawyer sent a letter
to the Young Americans Foundation threatening legal action if Robert Spencer is allowed to speak. CAIR apparently does not believe in free speech. CAIR's lawyer has significant Democratic party credentials. I'm sure you will not be swayed, but you can read more at http://hotair.com/archives/2007/08/01/brea...robert-spencer/

Yes, I know lawyers have a right to represent even bad cases. However, I'm sure this guy can take his pick -- and he obviously has.

 

Why would I want to DENY Christians their free expression?

Besides....if you follow the money, I'm sure retailers would be up in arms as they rely on Christmas to put them in the black.

Freedom of speech? Try yelling FIRE in a crowded movie theater. Or make bomb threats in an airport.

And you're right....I can't be swayed. Especially by a NeoCon Blog.

Even Danny prohibits spammers and trolls the freedom to post porn.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 1 2007, 08:56 PM) [snapback]488970[/snapback]</div>

What about prohibiting a speech before it happens because the speaker has criticized your group (and can back up his criticisms with facts)? That doesn't bother you at all?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(koa @ Aug 1 2007, 12:41 PM) [snapback]488696[/snapback]</div>

I was also curious but a search of The Home Depot site turned up pretty much nothing......zilch. Maybe Lowe's?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 1 2007, 11:26 AM) [snapback]488868[/snapback]</div>

I was serious when I suggested that. Here's what was said in the article:

Water often pools at his feet, he says, making it slippery to balance on one foot.


I can stand in my tile shower on one foot without a problem. It seems like if the floor wasn't slippery there would be no complaint. They can use the funds to install new tile in any bathroom that doesn't have nonslip tile. I hardly ever wear shoes, mostly rubber slippers. I have washed my feet in our kitchen sink many times and water does not "pool" at my feet. They can't keep the floor from getting wet with the sinks, why won't they get the floors wet with the footbaths?

Godiva,
Some men's restrooms do have changing tables.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Aug 1 2007, 05:26 PM) [snapback]488868[/snapback]</div>

Actually, I think Tony's just trying to get more women to bare their breasts. :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Aug 1 2007, 06:13 PM) [snapback]488924[/snapback]</div>

The mental gymnastics you are performing to argue the basins aren't for religious reasons would probably win you the gold medal at the Olympics. Tell me, where are there foot washing basins for anything other than Muslims to wash for their religious rituals? I don't have a problem with the basins being installed as long as they aren't funded by state money. As Efescu has said we make accommodations for people all the time. We just can't use state money to do it because that would violate the separation of church and state clause of the constitution. I don't want state money used because they are being put there purely for RELIGOUS practices.

So, when did the Democrats become so supportive of religious practices? Maybe the real issue here is the ultra, ultra left (Godiva) has changed their normal practice of fanatically screaming about church/state issues because the religion is Islam and not a more traditional religion. Why is that?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DelerPrius @ Aug 1 2007, 06:13 PM) [snapback]488895[/snapback]</div>

I imagine the janitors will use them for filling mop buckets. That's probably what all these foot baths are, floor basins or a bottom to a shower stall. Instead of it being hidden in a closet, it'll be out in the middle of the bathroom. $25 grand is likely cheaper than paying legal fees in the event of getting sued by someone slipping in a puddle, or hiring somebody the guard the sinks.

That said, as I understand it, Islam allows for a ritualistic dry bath in the event water is unavailable.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 2 2007, 07:03 AM) [snapback]489204[/snapback]</div>

Islam is older than Christianity, btw.
And, I see that you buy into that whole mindset that Democrats are somehow anti-religious.
Accommodation is a lot different than promoting a religion, and being inclusive enough to accommodate a (growing) number of students in a way that does not adversely affect others is just good sense.
Especially in an institution that is interested in keeping enrollments from dropping.

The screamers, I've noticed, are generally on the other side of the fence.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rae Vynn @ Aug 4 2007, 12:24 AM) [snapback]490424[/snapback]</div>

Mohammad was born in the year 570 C.E. (Common Era, or A.D. - Anno Domini - as referred to by the Christians). He founded Islam in the year 622 C.E.

Metareligion - Islam

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Aug 4 2007, 12:45 PM) [snapback]490591[/snapback]</div>

Oh, sorry... I was dating it to Ishmael... my bad.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Devil's Advocate @ Jul 31 2007, 01:54 PM) [snapback]488284[/snapback]</div>

Here is their letter to the editor:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Aug 6 2007, 04:44 PM) [snapback]491510[/snapback]</div>

1) The only reason the basins are being built is for Muslims to use in their religious rituals. How are the basins ok because they aren’t a “religious symbol or object of worship†but a microphone isn’t ok? Microphones clearly have a more generic use than foot basins, which will only be used by Muslims in the act of worshiping. The ACLU argument is inconsistent here.

2) The example of the Pope is also invalid because the Pope was not the ONLY person being kept safe. The security funds used provided for security of the Pope AND the citizens attending the event. The basins will be used ONLY by Muslims in the act of worshiping. To try and say the basins are open to everyone for any purpose is laughable. Who, besides Muslims worshiping, will use them? If there was a general use for them, why aren’t they already there?

 

A non-muslim may not use the foot bath, but being non-muslim does not prevent them from slipping in the puddle left by the muslim washing his feet in the regular sink. Or that loose sink from falling on their toe.

To prevent the possibility of someone getting hurt and then maybe being sued, the school has two options.
1) Ban foot bathing. Aside from possible public backlash, there are partical considerations. How do you enforce the ban? Honor system, guards, sercurity cameras. One of those doesn't cost anything, and it's the least likely to work.
2) Put in footbaths. Which be the cheapest solution in the long run.

This is the likely foot bath.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ShellyT @ Aug 7 2007, 10:27 AM) [snapback]491834[/snapback]</div>

Agreed, but the controversy could have been avoided simply by accepting the offer from the Muslim organization to pay for the foot baths themselves and not use student fee's (which students are required to pay) to fund them. Does anyone know why they didn't accept that offer?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Devil's Advocate @ Aug 7 2007, 11:59 AM) [snapback]491884[/snapback]</div>

The foot bath association is connected to religion. Things that advance or enable religion in public schools/universities have generally been denied because of the religious associations. If schools are prepared to let other religions have things they might want (ie, holy water at various places around the campus) then you cannot cater to one religion -- no matter who is paying for it.