Bob the Tomato: Infidel Transvestite?

Even dumber, I spent the weekend worried that one of your kids was sick or hurt because you hadn't posted all weekend. You gotta let us know when you'll be gone...

I was going to suggest marriage for the vegetables, but I see the good Professor Hamoudi covered this angle and lost. Perhaps if Bob could somehow grow a beard, or wear a convincing fake one, that passes the fist test, then maybe they could be friends.

Good heavens. I agree that if the law is as the law does, then this somehow has to be dealt with, but really. Just when I thought the jihad couldn't possibly get any stupider.

What this shows is how obsessed the Muslim mind is with sex. The reason why women are forced to wear a burka, abaya, niquab or any other covering is because women tempt men. Covering up means they aren't tempting men.

I see over the weekend that a doctor in Mesquite Texas with a name that one could assume to be Muslim in nature is being accused of molesting a grown woman patient. not the first time he's done this.

Next time I have a Muslim cashier at the grocery store I'll make sure to put the cucumber next to the tomatoes

Intellectually, I'd like to know the difference between finding prohibitions against the mixing of vegetables "batshit crazy" vs. the prohibitions against mixing two different types of fabric, planting two different crops in the same field, mixing dairy and meat --> all prohibited in Leviticus. Are parts of Leviticus batshit crazy then?

Of course, the real issue on the table is sexuality, fear of it and control of it.

Again, though, how much more batshit crazy is vegetable fear than prohibitions against women displaying their hair, mandates that men must grow a beard or must not cut their hair?

What's a reasonable boundary between batshit crazy and sound traditions?

Contrary to appearances, there is a logic to "sexing" produce. If you're squabbling about the lasciviousness of tomatoes and cucumbers, burkas and other measures don't look nearly as onerous in comparison.

"the prohibitions against mixing two different types of fabric, planting two different crops in the same field, mixing dairy and meat"

At least in theory this is about hygiene and/or differentiating themselves from neighboring tribes. Distinctiveness is part of what allowed Jews to survive as a separate people for so long.

If it were about a fear that red meat and milk together was too sexy for your dinner plate it'd be more crazy. For that matter if their explanation had been "cucumbers and tomatoes, when mixed into the same dish, can cause stomach-aches" or "tomatoes come from the Americas so are not meant for us" this might be wrong but not particularly strange.

And, of course, in today's news we have Iranian courts sentencing nine people to death by stoning for adultery.

All in the name of, a so-called religion!

Do you ever wonder why people become atheists?

"In college a friend and I speculated about food taboos and religion. I bet there had to be a religion that prohibited salad. Not sure if I'm happy about being right."

Salad bars are genocide!

People for the Ethical Treatment of All Lifeforms (PETALF)

What do they do with bananas?
--------
Actually, I am picturing this as sort of a "produce-market-as-peep-show".

Very interesting article by the Islamic law professor. The prohibition against cucumber and tomato salads and the diapers on goats sound like something that might have happened during the Victorian era, except without the threat of summary execution.

I think he's right that the men who instituted these laws actually believed they were acting in accordance with Islam. So did the Taliban.

Wow, that IS childish to the point of absurdity. Yet it ends in the most savage acts of beheading and child-killing and rape that you can possibly imagine.

I guess the only positive in this is that it is no wonder a lot of Iraqis are rejecting the Islamicists. Not only are they brutal and savage, but their ideology is ludicrous beyond all common sense and historical perspective. This is not Islamic law, this is a bunch of fourteen-year-old boys gone Lord of the Flies.

How ridiculous! You'd think that the men(not women, you notice)who made up these rules must have absolutely nothing else to do in their lives but make up stupid, unreasonable, childish rules.

"The professor's either lack of knowledge of this well known and generally accepted fact or his blithe denial of knowing the actual facts was pretty disturbing." CL

TR: I love it. "He didn't take the interpretation of the story that makes Islam look the worst, how disturbing in a Muslim."

We Christians do not go on and on about that couple who died in the Acts of the Apostles. How disturbing of us.

Lying is not normally a death penalty offense. In the New Testament people usually are given a chance to repent when they disappoint God or fail in some way. Even in the Old Testament people who lie to God don't necessarily die.

I understand the story on looking it up, but it does feel a bit odd compared to the generally forgiving/repentance nature of the New Testament. At the time I accepted it because I felt there situation was unusual and untrustworthy people were dangerous to them in a way they wouldn't be to Christians today. Other things indicate they were meant to be shown as against God in a sense, rather than merely flawed human beings who lied to God.

They never met my folks who just marginally accepted the wearing of wedding rings as ok for Christians. They wouldn't associate the redness of a tomato with a woman's lipstick. Their women wouldn't wear lipstick, that would be Jezabelesque.