Friday, December 19, 2014

Grandmother Assaulted For Rejecting Facebook Friend Request

Rome-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

Zurich-Facebook+Travel+Leisure
Milan-Facebook-Travel+Leisure
Paris-Facebook-Travel+Leisure



























































































Would these not be very interesting places to spend Christmas? I am glad I have my UK/EU passport.

New York Daily News: December 18

Cited

By ALEJANDRO ALBA

'Florida woman arrested for allegedly assaulting grandma who refused Facebook friend request 

Rachel Anne Hayes, of Clearwater, is accused of slapped her grandmother multiple times in the face for not accepting her friend request on Facebook.'

Cited

'Facebook can really ruin relationships.'

Cited

'Rachel Anne Hayes, of Clearwater, Fla., was arrested Thursday morning after she slapped her grandmother multiple times in the face. Hayes was upset because her 72-year-old grandmother had refused to accept her Facebook friend request. The arrest affidavit shows that Hayes, 27, was under the influence of alcohol. Clearwater deputies arrested Hayes on a felony charge of domestic battery on an elderly person.'

Cited

Hayes has been arrested three times before, according to Pinellas County Jail records.

End citations

'Rachel Anne Hayes, of Clearwater, is accused of slapped her grandmother'

I realize 'slapping' would be a better word choice, but I also admit the obvious that writers make mistakes at times. There is also a level of subjectivity in writing and language.

The danger of too much alcoholic consumption is highlighted with this story.

Assaulting one's grandmother is obviously not following the Biblical commandment to love your neighbour as you love yourself (Matthew 23 and Mark 12) as part two of loving God, with all your heart, soul and mind. To love God is consistent with loving one's brother (or sister) (I John 2).

Also to assault one's grandmother is to oppose law and order (Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2).

I noted on Facebook

'Imagine if someone blocked or deleted her...'

Very likely there were offline issues and differences that preceded the rejected Facebook friend request.

'Facebook can really ruin relationships.'

Likely an overstatement in this case as the problems were probably primarily offline.

I do however, see some difficulties with the use of Facebook and social media highlighted in this story.

I have been both blocked and deleted on Facebook. I have gained and lost friends and followers on social media sites.

It is the difficult technical philosophical nature of my sites which can also be controversial, and I try not to be particularly controversial.

Such is the state of the Western World and the Western Church, in particular. There is also lack of civility and dialogue far too often demonstrated.

Sometimes when there is open dialogue, issues can be reconciled. However, even when there is not, from a Biblical perspective, the Christian is to follow the two commandments in summary and to love the fellow Christian mentioned in 1 John and in John 15. There is also the command to forgive others such as in Mathew 18, seventy times seven.

Offline and online.

It seems troublesome that the assault in this story was caused by the Facebook rejection as if this potential online friendship and relationship was more important to the granddaughter than the offline relationship the two relatives possessed.

I view any Facebook or social media, friend or follower, that seems a true friend as a potential for a more important offline friendship and relationship that could occur.

There are of course distance issues that would need to be overcome for persons to meet in many cases.

Social media needs to be in its proper place, secondary to offline relationships (obvious mode).

And don't assault grandma...(obvious mode).

Facebook: Reads familiar...Also similar to that of A German Shepherd's Rules of Possession, minus #10 as they will chew on broken stuff.


Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Bizarre Faceless Islamic Doll

Daily Mail
Reuters





































Daily Mail December 15

Cited

''Islamic doll' for children launched in Britain with no FACE in line with strict Sharia rules on depiction of prophet and his contemporaries

Featureless doll with no eyes, nose or lips produced for Muslim children

It complies with Muslim teachings that living things should not be created

Doll took 4 years to design and is aimed at children in strict Muslim homes

Has been designed by Ridhwana B, a former Lancashire school teacher 'Deeni doll' is being sold for £25 and is marketed as 'Shariah compliant'

But academic said it was 'foolish' as Muslims are not 'frozen' in history

By CLAIRE CARTER FOR MAILONLINE'

Cited

'A doll with no facial features has been launched for Muslim children in line with Islamic rules about avoiding the depiction of faces. The featureless toy comes dressed in a hijab and red dress but has no eyes, nose or mouth. It has been designed to comply with strict Muslim teachings which rule against the representation of humans and animals in other forms, and specifically Muslim gods and their companions. However critics have dismissed the doll as 'foolish' and say it represents antiquated views of Islam teachings and fails to acknowledge that Muslim's are part of modern culture.'

Cited

''There is an Islamic ruling which forbids the depiction of facial features of any kind and that includes pictures, sculptures and, in this case, dolls,' the designer, who is known as Ridhwana B, told the Lancashire Telegraph. 'I spoke to a religious scholar in Leicester who guided me through what was and what was not permissible when producing the product. 'The Deeni Doll has no face on it whatsoever and is Shariah compliant.'

End citations

Interestingly, according to this article from the Daily Mail, to be Shariah compliant, Islamic teaching is against human and animal representation in other forms.

However, photography and imagery can be seen in the Islamic world and Islamic society for political and religious leaders when it is politically beneficial.

Theologically and philosophically would there not be a risk of persons and followers making an idol of political and religious leaders?

Or perhaps this is not a concern for Islamic leadership that wishes to maintain power and understands the obvious benefits of 'positive' images in the context of political power?

This also demonstrates the problem of being theologically and philosophically consistent within radical fundamentalism; it is philosophically difficult to always prohibit images on a practical basis and for it to always be beneficial for those making the rules.

Definitions of Idolatry

Browning writes that it is 'the cult surrounding a statue of a god or goddess'. Browning (1997: 181).

'Paul warns the Corinthian Christians about a kind of idolatry (I Cor. 10: 14) which might have been a form of civic ceremony'. Browning (1997: 181).

'Idolatry is also used metaphorically for evil desires (Col. 3:5)'. Browning (1997: 181).

P.C. Craigie defines idolatry as 'The worship of an idol or of a deity represented by an idol, usually as an image. Craigie (1997: 542).

He as did Browning acknowledges that the New Testament deals with idolatry in a more metaphorical context than the Hebrew Bible. Craigie (1996: 542).

As in one should not covet for example (Ephesians 5: 5 and Colossians 3: 5).

With these definitions, a doll made for a child, even with a face, is not by definition, by nature, an idol or idolatrous. It is not made to be worshipped as a god or God, even with the acknowledgment that all created things could theoretically become idols or idolatrous for persons.

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CRAIGIE, P.C. (1996) 'Idolatry', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

Reuters, Tehran, November 2009-Notice the image!





Google+-No snow here presently, which is helpful with long work and church commutes.