• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Iran: Thou shalt not love dogs!

D

Double Trouble

Elite Member
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...ranian-commandment-thou-shalt-not-love-dogs/1

WTF is wrong with these people? If you don't like dogs, that's fine.... but to make some sort of religious edict that nobody is to love dogs? Sounds like someone who's been loving his camel each night and doesn't want people to be tempted to do the same with dogs.

How do societies get to the point where they let morons like this one make the rules for everyone?

Theocracy FTL.
 
I could make a goat or sheep reference....


Na.

😛

The things these people come up with. They'd be perfectly at home in DC coming up with completely irrelevant crap.
 
Anything that comes out of Iran is not really a surprise.

And apparently, a handful of clerics have been railing against dogs for years --- but a segment of the Iranian population ignores them.

Point your googler to ""Iran dogs"" --- one noted it was a way of keeping people distracted so they don't think about bigger problems in Iran.




--
 
It's no less ridiculous than the commonly held (albeit not officially decreed) notion in the US that it's wrong to eat horses or dolphins.
 
Jaskalas said:
.....petting fido is not equal to eating fido, what?
Click to expand...
Pretending there is some kind of quantitative scale for ridiculous irrationality is... ridiculous. They are all irrational taboos based on sentimentality masquerading as morality. Frankly I don't give a shit is they are "the same" in any finer sense than the simple fact that they are all idiotic notions to cling to. I don't split hairs over morons.
 
nonlnear said:
It's no less ridiculous than the commonly held (albeit not officially decreed) notion in the US that it's wrong to eat horses or dolphins.
Click to expand...

No, the critical difference is that as a society we might think eating something (like horse) is disgusting, there is no decree from some pastor that makes it illegal to do so. Bad comparison, try harder next time.
 
Double Trouble said:
No, the critical difference is that as a society we might think eating something (like horse) is disgusting, there is no decree from some pastor that makes it illegal to do so. Bad comparison, try harder next time.
Click to expand...
I wasn't equivocating the social mechanisms, only observing the irrational sentimentality. Bad criticism, try harder next time.
 
nonlnear said:
I wasn't equivocating the social mechanisms, only observing the irrational sentimentality. Bad criticism, try harder next time.
Click to expand...

The OP referenced theocracies and letting morons make the rules for everyone, there was nothing about whether liking dogs or not is ridiculous. Try reading and comprehension next time 😉 No need to quibble about semantics though, I understand what you're saying.
 
Double Trouble said:
The OP referenced theocracies and letting morons make the rules for everyone, there was nothing about whether liking dogs or not is ridiculous. Try reading and comprehension next time 😉 No need to quibble about semantics though, I understand what you're saying.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but if you want to discuss the question of whether Iran is peculiar in legislating silly sentimental notions about which animals are fit for human companionship and which ones aren't you need look no further than the sometimes arbitrary rules about which animals are allowed to be kept in urban areas, or the totally irrational difference in how cats and dogs are regulated. The USA is not all that different, except that we don't predicate our silliness on religion - most of the time.
 
The cleric is really just reiterating what has been in the Koran for ages (canines being unclean) in an attempt to stem the trend of younger Iranians adopting aspects of Western culture.

This is nothing new for narrow minded and xenophobic religious figures, regardless of location.

I actually have Islam to thank for my own dogs being so awesome (I own a pair of Anatolian Shepherds) as hundreds of years of the dogs having to see to themselves made them extremely hardy and excellent guardians. They chase off moose, yotes, and bear with no problems, and the female has even bagged a few skunks without getting sprayed. No idea how she pulls that off, but I'll take it!
 
nonlnear said:
Fair enough, but if you want to discuss the question of whether Iran is peculiar in legislating silly sentimental notions about which animals are fit for human companionship and which ones aren't you need look no further than the sometimes arbitrary rules about which animals are allowed to be kept in urban areas, or the totally irrational difference in how cats and dogs are regulated. The USA is not all that different, except that we don't predicate our silliness on religion - most of the time.
Click to expand...

Hey, one google for crazy laws in the US returns lots and lots of absurd stuff, no arguing that.

I'm just amazed that citizens in these countries allow every aspect of their lives, down to what animal they might like to be determined by some cook cleric. Not just a suggestion or moral judgment ("you'll burn in hell if you love dogs!"), but to have whatever the idiot cleric deems to be the law be a mandate to everyone. Amazing.

Personally, I value dogs much more highly than I do many of those Iranian nutjobs, but that's just me.
 
Teddy_Welsh_Corgi_01.jpg


this is the face of Western evil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top