Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 0:22:54 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2017 0:24:49 GMT -5
I suspect she was more posturing for conservatives back in France than making a feminist stance. But then, I am a cynic. I guess that's possible, but I don't really get why they had to have a meeting in a religious building (assuming that was the case, of course). If this was just posturing, the Lebanese were dopey to give her such an opportunity, IMO. Regardless, I'm sure this is going to play awesomely with her base. Which is sad. I don't get why she had to meet with a religious leader, but she was certainly doing that.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Feb 22, 2017 0:39:49 GMT -5
^ Maybe she's a secret Muslim?
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Feb 22, 2017 7:01:06 GMT -5
^ Maybe she's a secret Muslim? Just because she was born in Kenya?
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Feb 22, 2017 7:38:58 GMT -5
It might be a religious building. An edict is a word for a religious decree, and she was going to meet with the Grand Mufti, the highest official of religious law. This would make a difference to me. Meeting a leader of a country to descuss secular stuff is a bit different from agreeing to meet with a religious leader in a religious building. Two things: 1) Per my first post, the nature of the building does matter imo. But it seems to me--having read a number of articles now on this incident--that the building is essentially the offices of the Grand Mufti. That's a far cry from a mosque, imo. And the sense I'm getting is that she was supposed to wear the scarf because of the who, not because of the where. 2) She claims she informed the Grand Mufti on the day before that she would not wear the scarf. No one said that was a deal breaker, so she showed up and then his aides tried to press her into wearing one. Frankly, I don't know who to believe on this point. I can see it both ways, why both sides would scramble the truth in this regard. Regardless of the other details, I think this is still correct.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on Feb 22, 2017 9:20:57 GMT -5
1) Per my first post, the nature of the building does matter imo. But it seems to me--having read a number of articles now on this incident--that the building is essentially the offices of the Grand Mufti. That's a far cry from a mosque, imo. And the sense I'm getting is that she was supposed to wear the scarf because of the who, not because of the where. Surely a lesser Mufti would never swagger with so much self-importance.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Feb 22, 2017 10:05:51 GMT -5
Let me check my Monster Manual for its attributes...
|
|