Should Anti-Discrimination Laws Apply to Religious Entities?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Actually yes you should (as long as you don't desecrate it lol). Monotheists aren't banned from visiting Makkah. Saudi is crazy, they do crazy stuff.

Well then like I said earlier, have the women dress modestly and have the men behave.

Please explain.

The monks aren't worried about sexual assault, crime is practically non-existent on Athos, what they're worried about is several-fold. The biggest worry is that monks will be distracted during worship (let's not pretend that people in ordinary church services aren't distracted by members of the opposite sex), and a lesser one is that monks could come to regret their vows. And while monks are allowed to leave Athos, the monks don't want to second-guess themselves if they meet someone.

Why not separate the monastery into a men's side and women's side? So now women can visit/pray there and men won't be distracted.

The monks worry that if women are on the peninsula, they would receive attention that should be given to the Theotokos and Christ.

Oh ok.

[Conserative Morality]

They have had court cases and battles to resolve issues like this historically. That sounds a lot like insisting.

Excellent. So like I said - no need for me to insist to them. The matter is settled. I give as much a shit about their opinions on my presence as I do as to the opinions of Wiccans on an essay about the death of paganism in pre-modern Europe.

That attitude is more than a little chauvinistic, you know? As a guest, you ought to defer to a community's rules and conventions to a reasonable extent. We ask our guests to do the same generally.

If it's not their property, I'm not their guest. They're dickwaving to try to impose their rules on land they have no claim to.

Courtesy, tolerance, and mutual respect between a host and guest.

That presumes I respect them, or am their guest.

[Telconi]

Should I be allowed to visit the Sacred Mosque in Mecca? What reason do the Saudis have to prevent me from strolling there?

Actually yes you should (as long as you don't desecrate it lol). Monotheists aren't banned from visiting Makkah. Saudi is crazy, they do crazy stuff.

It's less of a religious reason and more than the monks think women would distract young monks.

Well then like I said earlier, have the women dress modestly and have the men behave. Or separate either the monastery itself or the plot of land tye monastery owns into a men's side and women's side.

There is a religious reason in that the monks believe the peninsula was gifted to the Theotokos, and thus it would be wrong to venerate any other woman on the peninsula.

Please explain.

So you believe people should be excluded from Mecca if not monotheistic?

[United Muscovite Nations]

The monks aren't worried about sexual assault, crime is practically non-existent on Athos, what they're worried about is several-fold. The biggest worry is that monks will be distracted during worship (let's not pretend that people in ordinary church services aren't distracted by members of the opposite sex), and a lesser one is that monks could come to regret their vows. And while monks are allowed to leave Athos, the monks don't want to second-guess themselves if they meet someone.

Why not separate the monastery into a men's side and women's side? So now women can visit/pray there and men won't be distracted.

The monks worry that if women are on the peninsula, they would receive attention that should be given to the Theotokos and Christ.

Oh ok.

Because there aren't nuns there.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Actually yes you should (as long as you don't desecrate it lol). Monotheists aren't banned from visiting Makkah. Saudi is crazy, they do crazy stuff.

The sources I've found state that non-Muslims aren't even allowed to visit Mecca, much less the sacred sites present in the city.

We're these sources citing Saudi law or Islamic Law? If the latter, please show me.

This arguably extends to other Islamic Holy Sites given that there were riots when Ariel Sharon forced his way into the Dome of the Rock.

>Looks him up
Well yes, he's part of the Zionist gov, he should be forced out.

Actually yes you should (as long as you don't desecrate it lol). Monotheists aren't banned from visiting Makkah. Saudi is crazy, they do crazy stuff.

Well then like I said earlier, have the women dress modestly and have the men behave. Or separate either the monastery itself or the plot of land tye monastery owns into a men's side and women's side.

Please explain.

So you believe people should be excluded from Mecca if not monotheistic?

I was actually wrong about that, astaghfirullah. the Holy Qur'an says that mushrikoon can't go to the Ka'aba, not that they can't enter Makkah.

[Fahran]

Excellent. So like I said - no need for me to insist to them. The matter is settled. I give as much a shit about their opinions on my presence as I do as to the opinions of Wiccans on an essay about the death of paganism in pre-modern Europe.

You're having the government impose your will on them by force. Someone is insisting, clearly.

If it's not their property, I'm not their guest. They're dickwaving to try to impose their rules on land they have no claim to.

A libertarian or property-based approach to such matters poses inherent problems, especially when we're discussing communities that historically have much looser paradigms regarding property or that are predicated on wholly different values. It draws rather close to the line of rationalizing certain types of colonialism.

That presumes I respect them, or am their guest.

I don't think disrespecting other people as a default is a good place to begin interactions.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Why not separate the monastery into a men's side and women's side? So now women can visit/pray there and men won't be distracted.

Oh ok.

Because there aren't nuns there.

And can they not make it so that there are?

[The United Neptumousian Empire]

The monks aren't worried about sexual assault, crime is practically non-existent on Athos, what they're worried about is several-fold. The biggest worry is that monks will be distracted during worship (let's not pretend that people in ordinary church services aren't distracted by members of the opposite sex), and a lesser one is that monks could come to regret their vows. And while monks are allowed to leave Athos, the monks don't want to second-guess themselves if they meet someone.

The monks worry that if women are on the peninsula, they would receive attention that should be given to the Theotokos and Christ.

there is no reason a woman should distract a monk any more than a man would. it is their responsibility not to be distracted, not the woman's. placing the burden on the women is misogynistic.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Because there aren't nuns there.

And can they not make it so that there are?

Why would they?

[United Muscovite Nations]

The monks aren't worried about sexual assault, crime is practically non-existent on Athos, what they're worried about is several-fold. The biggest worry is that monks will be distracted during worship (let's not pretend that people in ordinary church services aren't distracted by members of the opposite sex), and a lesser one is that monks could come to regret their vows. And while monks are allowed to leave Athos, the monks don't want to second-guess themselves if they meet someone.

The monks worry that if women are on the peninsula, they would receive attention that should be given to the Theotokos and Christ.

there is no reason a woman should distract a monk any more than a man would. it is their responsibility not to be distracted, not the woman's. placing the burden on the women is misogynistic.

They're not placing burden on women, they don't want to have to place a burden on young monks, especially ones that might have second thoughts about the whole celibacy thing.

[ShakaZuli]

Personally not. What we should do is to allow every demographic (be it white people, Muslims or Jews) to have some parts of the country where they can be an ultimate majority, and where they can model the law as much they like. Muslim could have sharia law, whites can have a semi-autonomous state within the US and so on. Also, re-create a milet system within a democratic framework.

[Conserative Morality]

You're having the government impose your will on them by force. Someone is insisting, clearly.

The government imposes its will on all of its charges at all times when the law is being obeyed. Am I to sit at the intersection and sob at the red light because the big mean goberment is imposing their will on me by force?

A libertarian or property-based approach to such matters poses inherent problems, especially when we're discussing communities that historically have much looser paradigms regarding property or that are predicated on wholly different values.

My society is not predicated on those values, and my moral code is not based on them either.

It draws rather close to the line of rationalizing certain types of colonialism.

Here, I'll cross over the line: vae victis.

I don't think disrespecting other people as a default is a good place to begin interactions.

I don't think respect is a hand-me-out to make people feel better. If you're respected, there's a reason for that. And if you're not, there's a reason for that too. "I-I respect you automatically" is the worst kind of participation trophy bullshit.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

And can they not make it so that there are?

Why would they?

Idk, seems like a nice compromise to me.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Personally not. What we should do is to allow every demographic (be it white people, Muslims or Jews) to have some parts of the country where they can be an ultimate majority, and where they can model the law as much they like. Muslim could have sharia law, whites can have a semi-autonomous state within the US and so on. Also, re-create a milet system within a democratic framework.

One of these groups is not like the others.

[Fahran]

We're these sources citing Saudi law or Islamic Law? If the latter, please show me.

Saudi law is partially based on a strict interpretation of Islamic law. In this case, it's an extrapolation from the Quran, namely the verse you cited prohibiting polytheists/idolaters from approaching the Ka'aba. The people living in the area believe this to be a legitimate interpretation and thus enforce it.

>Looks him up
Well yes, he's part of the Zionist gov, he should be forced out.

So what standards are religious institutions allowed to set on denying people entry to religious sites?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Why would they?

Idk, seems like a nice compromise to me.

With whom?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Idk, seems like a nice compromise to me.

With whom?

Between the women and the monks. The women can visit/pray and the monks don't get distracted.

[Conserative Morality]

there is no reason a woman should distract a monk any more than a man would. it is their responsibility not to be distracted, not the woman's. placing the burden on the women is misogynistic.

idk man, I'm a proponent of "Most people are probably bi" but I still think that there's a strong majority of people for whom opposite sex attraction is stronger than same-sex attraction.

Anyway, it's no more a burden on women than a shut-in ordering his food from Amazon to avoid human contact is a burden on society.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

We're these sources citing Saudi law or Islamic Law? If the latter, please show me.

Saudi law is partially based on a strict interpretation of Islamic law. In this case, it's an extrapolation from the Quran, namely the verse you cited prohibiting polytheists/idolaters from approaching the Ka'aba. The people living in the area believe this to be a legitimate interpretation and thus enforce it.

Iirc, Jews aren't polytheists/idolaters. And doesn't really answer my question. Where in the Holy Qur'an and/or Sunnah does it say Jews are banned from coming to Makkah?

So what standards are religious institutions allowed to set on denying people entry to religious sites?

Well in the Zionist's case it's because he's the enemy, you don't let the enemy walk over you.

[United Muscovite Nations]

With whom?

Between the women and the monks. The women can visit/pray and the monks don't get distracted.

I don't think there's really a big clamoring of women who want to enter. Most women who aren't Orthodox probably don't even know the place exists, and most Orthodox women probably don't want to disturb the monks.

[Erythrean Thebes]

The important principle in these cases is ownership. A person owns their body, as well as anything they have purchased, and anything which is their property. Aside from the fundamental restrictions on perpetuating injury against others, the individual should have total control of these things including the right to revoke or withhold them for any reason. I understand that many people believe otherwise, but that viewpoint - that there is some kind of intrinsic imperative to be open and forcibly permit traffic with any others - requires some kind of satisfactory justification since it is not self-evident but, actually, in its nature seemingly contradictory to basic personal freedom.

[ShakaZuli]

Personally not. What we should do is to allow every demographic (be it white people, Muslims or Jews) to have some parts of the country where they can be an ultimate majority, and where they can model the law as much they like. Muslim could have sharia law, whites can have a semi-autonomous state within the US and so on. Also, re-create a milet system within a democratic framework.

One of these groups is not like the others.

Yes, I get it. They are an indentifiable groups on racial and religious line. This is a better model than having people to force to live to each other, which creates racial and religious tensions.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Between the women and the monks. The women can visit/pray and the monks don't get distracted.

I don't think there's really a big clamoring of women who want to enter. Most women who aren't Orthodox probably don't even know the place exists, and most Orthodox women probably don't want to disturb the monks.

Well then if there's little to no problem, what's all the fuss about?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

One of these groups is not like the others.

Yes, I get it. They are an indentifiable groups on racial and religious line. This is a better model than having people to force to live to each other, which creates racial and religious tensions.

I have no problem living in my majority white town.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I don't think there's really a big clamoring of women who want to enter. Most women who aren't Orthodox probably don't even know the place exists, and most Orthodox women probably don't want to disturb the monks.

Well then if there's little to no problem, what's all the fuss about?

It's mostly just bureaucratic activism in the EU, but also some non-Orthodox women who have snuck in to deliberately disturb the monks.