Not only in Tennessee...

[Theophylact]

...dogs aren't safe in Jordan, either (though the reasons may be different).

[mdroth]

"don't kill the messenger"
poor pooch

A dog trained to carry messages between two Jordanian lovers has been stoned to death after his secret mission was discovered.
The three-year-old German Shepherd, named Big Joe, was carrying a marriage proposal when he was intercepted by the girl's brother last week.

I'd love to hear this justified..

[OuTpaTienT]

That story is a little misleading. Initially it says the dog was "stoned to death". But in reality it seems the dog was killed by a single person with one big rock to the head.

That doesn't justify the dog's death in any way, and I'd truly love to put a couple bricks to that a**hole's head. But the term "stoned to death" is a specific term with a specific meaning, most especially when talking about middle eastern countries...and that's not what happened to the dog. I have no doubt at all the writer of the article intentially misused the term. That's irritating.

...and that's not what happened to the dog. I have no doubt at all the writer of the article intentially misused the term. That's irritating.

You bring up a very good point Out.
Now that I think of it, the whole article was rather inflamitory. But on the other hand I also don't think this is a totaly isolated type of situation.
And what the caption About 24 Jordanian women die every year in honour killings
has to do with this story would be an interesting point to know...

[ClubMed]

Although I don't approve in any way of honor killings or the slaying of dogs I hope you begin to understand why it is hard for Arabs and Muslims to agree with westerners about the problems in their part of the world when there is always hidden mockery, inflammatory and degrading comments most of the time.

If someone said to me 'Hey look I think there is a problem in your part of the world what do you say?'
I would say yes I agree.

But if they said 'Hey look because you guys are Muslims and because you are stupid you have these problems what do you say?'
I would say f**** off thanks.

And usually it's the latter situation, so I am often telling people to f**** off unfortunately. But I would rather say ‘Yes I agree, and lets discuss it’.

[Theophylact]

ClubMed, the same story could have come from Corsica, or China, or perhaps even (not so very long ago) Kentucky. Violent, repressive behavior is not the exclusive property of any nation, religion or race. Dowry murder is as big a problem in India as honor killings are in Jordan.

[Knothead]

.....a specific term with a specific meaning, most especially when talking about middle eastern countries...and that's not what happened to the dog. I have no doubt at all the writer of the article intentially misused the term. That's irritating.---OuTpaTienT

Very, VERY interesting point...I would have missed it.

Yes, we do get accustomed to having a built-in bias in there, don't we?

....it is hard for Arabs and Muslims to agree with westerners about the problems in their part of the world when there is always hidden mockery, inflammatory and degrading comments most of the time.---ClubMed

Like identifying religious affiliation more loudly than nationality, in these little news stories. Okay.

[no1_vern]

Originally posted by Knothead


Like identifying religious affiliation more loudly than nationality, in these little news stories. Okay.

Um , Like the discussion we have in this forum about whether to vote for a "non-christian" president ?

[glohworm]

Go ahead and pooh, pooh this little post of mine, but I think one of the major prerequisits of a presidential candidate is that he should be an Agnostic (like myself), or at the very least, a non-practicing believer in any religious faith. I think this has been a fundamental flaw in our system of checks and balances in the past. We have the judicial branch, the legislative branch, and the executive branch, right. The executive branch is "one man", and he is the sum of all his past experiences, his weaknesses and his strengths, and his world view of life, as he sees it through his religious upbringing.

The point is, as an Agnostic, I happen to believe in a woman's right of choice, as it relates to abortion. I can easily see how a President, who is a devout Christian, would see it the other way. What I'm trying to say, (poorly I might add), is that a man/woman who finds themselves in the seat of power would make far better decisions, unencumbered by their religious mindset. Just think about it, to be able to make decisions for 280 million Americans with the objectivity that's required, on all matter subjects. To be unfettered with the chains of old thinking/non-thinking, would be a breath of fresh air! Alas, this will never happen. Jeez, I really babbled this time!