Last time I checked, no religion based government in the History of religion based governments has had their priorities straight…

I kind of agree with banning celebrity magazines, though.

nice post

Stop picking on Muslims for weird crap in religion.

Orthodox Jews can't take their garbage cans to the curb or double-knot their shoes on Sabbath. Not only that, but Yahweh put a specific prohibition against blended fabrics in the Torah.

Not only that, our country (if you believe the "W" party line) was founded by goofballs who wore buckles on their shoes because of their religion.

Mark your calendars, kids. I, an East coast yid-kid am going to go one step beyond Adolf:

In reaction to the whole Jeremiah Wright brou-haha, I think Congress needs to pass legislation stating that pastors, preachers, deacons, imams, and rabbis have to stick to preaching religion during their services and that such groups are not permitted to intersperse their sermons with political speech.

Debating points:

(1) Is this constitutional?
(2) Is it probable/plausible?
(3) Would it be able to be passed?
(4) Would it be able to be passed if there was an exception for Catholic priests and Southern Baptist ministers?
(5) Would you endorse such a law?
(6) What if it was a constitutional amendment?
(7) Am I being serious or ironic?

What's the official Iranian stance on Lindsay Lohan, Brittney Spears, Paris Hilton et al? 'Cause I would fully support a ban on ever hearing about any of them....

@OMG! Ponies!: Well, that's kind of a tricky point.

Here in Mexico for example, the constitution clearly establishes the separation of the State and all religions, yet numerous catholic priests, based on "freedom of speech" and their fundamental rights as citizens are pushing changes to the constitution to allow them to run for public office, the Governor of Jalisco is donating shitloads of money (from tax payers, obviously) to the Catholic church so they can build a huge temple, and the former president kisses the Pope's hand when he comes to visit.

The laws are there, at least in this country (I'm not familiar with laws in the U.S. but I assume you have something like this). The problem it's that those laws are not enforced because most people see nothing wrong with priests sticking their noses in political affairs.

I definitely share your thoughts, but I think it's highly unlikely that such legislations would pass and be enforced.

@Mandatory_Field: If that's a world wide ban you're talking about, I'm all for it.

Wha?

@Mandatory_Field: Do you realize how big of an industry celebrity gossip is? Some people genuinely enjoy reading about other people's lives, and hundreds of people make their living photographing the rich+famous. It's an ethically questionable industry, but if you don't like it, just ignore it.

May god spread the love...

Yes, "until the Islamic Revolution in 1979" Iran was one of the most progressive states in the Islamic world.
Until.
That, Addy, is a very large and sharp "until".
It's on the same order as "until his car entered Dealey Plaza, President Kennedy was having a really nice time in Dallas".

Didn't they give us the number zero as well?

Yeah we all have our wacky stuff we do.
For instance I'm gonna spend the rest of the day doing yard work, followed by priming our bathrooms and getting drunk.

It's tough but I think I have a stable itinerary worked out at this point so I'm going for it.

(My wife is the awesomest bartender)

at least iran has laws. iraqis aren't supposed to drink, but i have to restrain at least 2 drunk iraqis a night. and these are the same people shooting RPGs and AKs at me everyday. jerks.

by the way, LG is HUGE in iraq too. except for the govt.-placed billboards, LG is like the only company with real ads around baquba.

Hmmm. So Iran was a "progressive" country under the Shah, a dictator we placed in power to replace their democratically elected leader, Mossadegh? Where the hell do you get your history? Ask any Iranis what they think about the progressive nature of SAVAK. Iran now ain't no picnic, but the Shah's torture methods were quite innovative, and not particularly interested in progressive politics, even if they allowed barbies and irobots.

I say if Religious Fanatics continues to infiltrate and stick their noses in politics there will be no progress.

@OMG! Ponies!

1. I'm pretty sure the article is criticizing official STATE legislation, not the religion of Islam.
2. Criticizing Jews is a good way of making a point about Islam.
3. Sarcasm sometimes gets a point across to those who are smart enough to understand it (see point number 2)
4. About your "brou-haha" [sic], there ARE laws that say that Rev. Wright cannot use his pulpit for political purposes. It's called "terms for achieving nonprofit status." In order for something to be a nonprofit, it can't do political work or preach politics.

It's always so much easier to argue a point when you don't have these little "distractions" called truths.

@strider_mt2k: "Didn't they give us the number zero as well?" Almost, but the Babylonian placeholder was not a true zero because it was not used alone. Nor was it used at the end of a number. Ptolemy, influenced by Hipparchus and the Babylonians, was using a symbol for zero (a small circle with a long overbar) within a sexagesimal numeral system otherwise using alphabetic Greek numerals. Because it was used alone, not just as a placeholder, this Hellenistic zero was perhaps the first documented use of a number zero in the Old World. - Wikipedia

@OMG! Ponies!: "Stop picking on Muslims for weird crap in religion." I have no problem with Muslims. Nor do I have any problem with Christians, Hindus, Jews, or any one else.

What I do have a problem with is when a particular religion runs the state government, such is the case with Iran.

I think Europe endured a similar rule in the past. It was called the "Dark Ages".

Thank God for Age of Reason.

It's almost as bad as Cuba...

I believe Iraq was the most progressive Islamic country in the course of history, way before Iran.

The tie thing has been around for a while and they pretty much carry that rule to every country they go. Imagine wearing a suit without a tie. It just feels wrong.

Breastless Mannequins. Subversive fashion dolls.
Rolls my eyes and goes back to doing/saying/wearing anything I damn well want.
Thank you, constitution.

"Stop picking on Muslims for weird crap in religion."

Just as soon as they stop running theocracies, no problem.

Ok, this article is crap. Barbie may be traditional in the United States but it sure as hell is not healthy.

The only thing you are getting out of Barbie is a prepubescent girl with size 36DD breasts. Then again, that must be what you Gizmodo's are into.

@FY9: And that affects you how exactly?

I don't agree with theocracies either, but it's really not my problem.

Gotta love the timing of your Iran-bashing. Just happens to correspond
so well (in timing and method) with Iran becoming the target of a propaganda campaign--buildup
for another bush (mis)adventure. You even go further and cite some very
faulty history. I give this post an A+ for neocon BS!!!

@doccutter: While the Shah was known to react extremely to descent the country was very progressive in social and economic terms. He was one of the primary forces behind OPEC and used it to get the fair amount for the oil that the West was essentially fleecing from Iran for decades. Women were encouraged to be educated and to not wear head coverings (like modern France). I'm not saying that the Shah was great especially considering he was initially a puppet installed by the US, but he was a godsend compared to what they have today.

Great post Addy.

"And that affects you how exactly?"

So you only oppose that which affects you personally? Very principled position there, Adolf. You must have a ton of friends.

If they've got a problem with Barbie, I'd hate to see what they think of Bratz.

Every country in the world is moving forward and they want to stop due to moral purity? They are suppose to educate their people not forbid them of knowledge. Might as well live in a zoo while they are at it.

I've been to Iran twice. Once in the 80's and once in the 90's. The thing to remember is it is a democracy, an Islamic Democracy. They are treading new ground and evolving. I can tell you the Iran of today is not the Iran of the late 70's.

The government is elected and with an 80% turn out on elections, looks to me the majority is happy with its government.

I wouldn't want an Islamic republic for the west but I'm fine with it for Iran because that is what the majority of Iranians want.

As far as broadband goes I think they do have adsl.

My Sister that lives there has a Razor phone with a camera. So I'm not sure about the no camera phones.

I get tired of reading about people and columnist blasting Iran. Yea it's a different culture, different religion, and yea they hate Israel, but if you want the truth go over and check it out and quit it with the propaganda. It's more safer than Canada. I don't want to live there but I don't mind and have a good time every time I visit.

So these Muslim smarty Clerics low their plygamous families, marry girls when they are 12 years old, but feel that Barbie is obscene. It figures.

@doccutter, @=opportunityfanboy

When I first read "one that until the Islamic Revolution in 1979 was the most progressive states in the Islamic world" I thought, "Wow, they really need to clarify what they mean by progressive!"

As a state, Iran in the '70s was anything but progressive - politically or economically. The Shah may have fought fo a better oil price, but the benefit went almost exclusively to him, his family, and his cronies.

A better way of putting it may have been "one of the most [liberal|secular] societies in the Muslim world," but even that's complicated, since much of that was the product of top-down legislative control of culture - which is decidedly illiberal and non-progressive, unless by "progressive" you mean "totalitarian."

I'd rather be ruled by robot vacuums than either Iranian regime.

Yeah, Iran has been behind and close minded.

"Stop picking on Muslims for weird crap in religion."

And I don't believe they're/we're picking on Muslims. Because not ALL Muslim countries follow these "rules"

Saudi / Egypt / Syria / Jordan / Lebanon / Indonesia

Iran is the only one that is moving backwards. A TIE?! Come on...

Back from Iron Man. First of all, no, Iron Man is not the greatest superhero movie of all time. It's as good as Spiderman, better than Spiderman 2, on par with Superman, better than Batman, but not as good as Batman Begins.

And yes, theocracies - and countries with special rules for the super-religious - are a source of a lot of misery.

Muslim theocracies are bad. So is Israel's system of exempting the ultra-Orthodox from taxes and military service. It's easy to start wars when you neither fund them nor serve in them.

As for America - there's a whole lot of special people who don't deserve to be treated so special. Like the Catholic Church. Maybe a group that rich should pay some tax on what they got and what they get. And maybe the priests that abuse adolescents shouldn't be treated with kid gloves. Nor should those who protect them.

And maybe we shouldn't be all down on homosexuality just because some people said that an invisible man in the clouds said that being gay is a sin. Or maybe we shouldn't let someone's take on said religion govern the way we teach science or show teenagers how to be responsible when they have sex. And yes, teenagers will have sex.

As you can see, the Muslims aren't the only ones that have let religion totally bollix up their society.

I'm just saying.

@daniel: I have to engage you on several points.

First, the House of Saud is notorious for its debauchery. They just don't engage in the nasty stuff in Saudi Arabia. They go to other countries when they want to have sex with adolescent boys.

Ask a Copt about how life under Muslim rule is. And Syria has been making nicey-nice to the Muslim Brotherhood for some time.

But that's not my main gripe with you. Some suits do feel wrong without a tie. However, what with summer coming, keep this in mind. A nice linen suit, when worn with a lightweight cotton oxford shirt and a pair of leather loafers would just be ruined by the addition of a tie.

More sartorial suggestions, courtesy of OMG! Ponies!

Addy my dear:

"-one that until the Islamic Revolution in 1979 was the most progressive states in the Islamic world-"

That is just so wrong in more then 1 ways, you know it. You know if everything was tip-top there would not be a Revolution, revolutions are made by people, so the ppl were not happy before the revolution, probably because of all the foreign influence to their country.

We also had a lot of progress in Turkiye, women had electoral rights way before Europe here, but we got there step by step, the "progress" in Iran was dictated from the top, that always fails...

my 10 cents:

All religions suck ass.
lets just be good people to ourselves and the people and places around us.

@=opportunityfanboy:

you see, you can send "Jesus" but if it`s sent from the US it is never "Godsent" and it will never be, for any country around the world...

"Saudi / Egypt / Syria / Jordan / Lebanon / Indonesia"

Oh goody. The countries on this list without sharia law are ruled by dictator strongmen. Quite a recommendation.

Google "Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice" for kicks.

@EnochLight: Iran =/= Babylon. That would be Iraq. Iran was once Persia.

@OMG! Ponies!: Different strokes. To me, Spider-Man 2 is the best comic book superhero movie of all time, far superior to an also very good Spider-Man 1. Batman Begins was top notch, but I don't consider it the best. I thought X-Men 2 was better. I haven't seen Iron Man yet (will soon).

@Barion: Iraq was at one stage a part of the Persian empire.

@maztec: "The only thing you are getting out of Barbie is a prepubescent girl with size 36DD breasts. Then again, that must be what you Gizmodo's are into.
"

You bring up a good question. While I do not consider my self 'a Gizmodo', perhaps a Gizmodian or a Gizmodan? What's the prefered nomenclature for us?

@Gann: Gizmodoid.

I have the ultimeate solution, a "modest proposal," if you will: Kill every member of every religion.

Problem solved.

@FY9: No, I oppose what affects me or the people I care for.

It's not a lack of principles, I simply don't have a reason to oppose something like that, especially when there's a hughe population affected by it that aren't doing anything to change the situation. I assume that they're happy with the way things are for them or don't really give a damn. Either way, it's not up to me to do anything about it. That's why people have something called "freedom".

@Barion: @EnochLight: "Iran =/= Babylon. That would be Iraq. Iran was once Persia."

I'm sorry - I'm missing your point?

@EnochLight: I was responding to what you said. "'Didn't they give us the number zero as well?' Almost, but the Babylonian placeholder was not a true zero because it was not used alone. Nor was it used at the end of a number. Ptolemy, influenced by Hipparchus and the Babylonians, was using a symbol for zero (a small circle with a long overbar) within a sexagesimal numeral system otherwise using alphabetic Greek numerals. Because it was used alone, not just as a placeholder, this Hellenistic zero was perhaps the first documented use of a number zero in the Old World. - Wikipedia"

The previous poster was asking if Iran had given us the number zero and you responded with a post about the Babylonian placeholder, which is a non sequitur answer if you specifically meant Babylon, which is not Persia. It would be like me asking if the Greeks invented pasta and you responding that while a lot of people think the Italians invented it, pasta really came from China. It does not follow from the original question.

@MeeM: That may be the case, but they have always been two distinct peoples. Both Persians and Iraqis were also once part of the Ottoman Empire, but we don't attribute the cultural and scientific advancements that occurred previously or after Ottoman rule to the Turks.

@Barion: Oh I see now. Thanks for clarifying.

@FY9:
I don't need to Google it. I know what a "mutawa" is.
I visited Saudi, was out in plain sight during prayer time. Never gotten questioned, or harassed. Went to stores, went to restaurants. Nothing whatso ever.

As for the dictatorship regimes.
Egypt / Jordan / Lebanon / Indonesia
Here's the updated list without Dictatorship.