Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Pluralism or Non-Pluralism?

It has recently come to my attention by a friend of mine from Egypt, that often more and more  Muslims around the world, but more so in Europe are getting the short end of the stick.  Recently, the French government has attempted to ban burkas based on the theory that it's "offensive and demoralizing to women".  Now I want you my dear readers to stop and think about that statement.  Just stop and think about it and list in your mind the reasons why you would agree with this statement.  Now let me point out that you who have agreed with this statement has placed your own ethnocentrism on a culture of people who do not subscribe to our way of thinking.

President Nicolas Sarkozy says full veil is "not welcome" in France and that this is an issue about women's freedom and dignity and not religion.

Take a moment to place yourself in the shoes of those who wear these burkas as a religious piety like our nuns or monks.  Their bible may not say anything about burkas and covering from head to toe, but then again neither did the Bible say that women couldn't be involved in the early churches because they were inferior.  In fact Christ pushed for the movement of women in his ministry.

What I don't get dear readers, is why is Europe deciding what is and is not oppressive to women?   I may find being a nun repressive and contrary to a woman's rights, but does that mean I go to the steps of my congress and push to pass a bill banning the role of nuns in the church?  No, because while I may not like the idea of a nunnery for myself, that doesn't mean that someone out there doesn't find a closer sense of spirituality by being a nun.

This school of thought that seems to suppress everyone in Europe is that of non-pluralism.  The need for everyone to be the same and so help you if you are a smidgen off.  Many Europeans do not like foreigners and do appreciate the ideals of America, with it's pluralistic society.  In America we believe that we can create laws to keep everyone safe without infringing on the basic rights of every citizen despite religious background or ethnicity.  However it is evident that France and Europe doesn't care about this kind of approach.

It just makes me laugh that these countries are trying to place a ban on a item that has religious significance in a culture that's been around long than the French President's family line.  France you sit there and say we Americans have our noses up our butts and aren't taking time to look at the world around us?  Well I point back to you with this whole piece of steaming you know what.  This culture has been around longer than your country has ever been a country.  You can't take western ideals, morals, and values, and place them on a distinctly eastern culture, and expect it to fly well. 

Some women out for a stroll with their kids.

Now I understand the fact that the full veil can pose many security issues.  However, I think that a law could be passed that would require burka wearers to expose their faces and potentially their bodies in certain security areas or check points.  Like in an airport, burga wearers could be asked to please not wear the burka for the duration of their flight and within or on the premises of the airport property.  Or like when they go to the bank, have them fully expose their faces for proper identification.  If a police officer sees a burka wearer acting strange like, they could have the right to search the burka wearer and even ask them to remove it.  Do I think the burkas need to be banned based on how oppressive it is to women and how it insults the dignity of women?  Absolutely not.  I think this has everything to do with religion Mr. French President, and nothing to with your supposed concern for a woman's dignity.  Please France just do what you do best and surrender.

Viva La France anyone?

(a quick side note:  I do not hate the French.  I do not hate any country, just disagree with some of their decisions)

And that was my rant for today...

Friday, April 16, 2010

An Open Letter

Dear Apple,

I must say thank you for your developments in the field of technology.  I could reasonably argue that Apple the company has helped to project the world into many newer and brighter decades.  When the iPod came out it was revolutionary and still to this day is the top seller of it's field.  However I must raise my voice over one thing.  For nine years the Apple iPod has been released to the public.  For nine years you have made PC users lives miserable with your oh so undesirable iTunes software.  Now I realize that without this software I would have no legal means to be able to access my iPod.  However, after nine years of having dealt with this crappy software and it's beyond ridiculious updates that just seem to make it crappier and crappier, I'm seriously considering moving toward less than legal means to run and operate my iPod. 

I would be ashamed if I was you Apple.  For being a billion dollar company and then putting out that crap?  I would hide my head in shame.  It baffles me how your genius programmers can't seem to make a program that can run on a brand new computer without screwing everything up by merely click one button that takes you to another tab option.  I could make a better functioning program that than and I only had two semesters of programming under my belt. 

I know this is just a ploy by Apple in hopes that you will get fed up enough and switch to a Mac compatible system, but I hate to break it to you Apple, I'm not buying one of your computers.  Call me old fashioned, but I figure if I can find a Windows operated laptop that can do just as much and more than your Mac laptops I'm going to go with it rather than you, because well it'll be about $500 or more cheaper than yours.  Your laptops start at $999.99.  START AT.  That's too much money in my opinion.  I'm operating off of an HP Touchsmart TX2 laptop.  It's a tablet and a laptop, which none of your computers are, and please don't anyone respond with "well the iPad is both of those" cause it's not.  It don't have enough RAM and Memory to be operated as if it was an actual computer.  It was originally meant to be an e-reader because Apple wanted to own that branch too.  And don't get me start with the line from Steve Jobs, "holding the internet in your hands, it's an amazing feeling isn't it?" Ph-leaze!  I've been able to hold the internet in my hands since I got my new laptop.  It's not revolutionary, it's just that your behind curve for once Apple.

I must ask the question why Apple?  Why have you alienated over 50% of your customer base by giving us crappy software that is barely compatible with our systems?  If you worked on something that was as great as Windows 7 (with their backwards capability and their Mac compatibility) you might not be considered the 90's version of McAfee/Norton of '10.  There are more PC users currently than there are Mac users.  Granted the number is growing, but there is more Windows users out there.

I am a loyal customer.  Have been for years, but I'm getting pretty fed up with my iTunes freezing every time I attempt to scroll down a page!  Or how about it taking two minutes for it load on my system? Or how about the fact that every time I try and load anything onto my iPod Touch that it temporarily freezes for short burst of a few seconds?  How about the faulty sync application? Hmmm?  All the Windows users are asking for is a Windows version of iTunes that is compatible with Macs.  Not that much to ask for if you consider it. 

And that was my rant for today....