For One Night, Baghdad Gets a Pink Zone

[Big Don]

[SIZE=+2]For One Night, Baghdad Gets a Pink Zone[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1] By Al Kamen[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]The Washington Post EXCERPT:
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1] Friday, May 22, 2009
[/SIZE]

Change has certainly come to Baghdad. And it appears that includes the U.S. Embassy, where they are holding what the invitation says is the first-ever U.S. Embassy Gay Pride Theme Party next Friday at Baghdaddy's, which is the embassy employee association's pub.
"Come celebrate the start of Summer with color . . . and in costume!" the May 10 invitation says. "Dress in drag or as a gay icon. All are welcome." The invitation was attached to what was called an "All Hands Alerts" e-mail.
An embassy spokesman said by way of explanation: "This is an event organized and sponsored by a group of employees.
END EXCERPT
Members of the military handing out bibles, bad, wrong and forbidden as it might offend the sensibilities of Muslims in Muslim countries.
Members of the State Department having a gay pride party in countries where they BEHEAD homosexuals, that is OK, and You (me) are a bigot, homophobe, etc for mentioning it.

 

[Big Don]

Pic of hanged homosexuals in Muslim country

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Don, I'm actually speechless here......

While I applaud the idea, it seems like it's a painting of a bullseye on anyone attending.....

I..... I'm flabbergasted.

 

[Big Don]

It certainly isn't the type of behavior that will endear us to our hosts there...

 

[Bob Hubbard]

No, I suppose not.

 

[shesulsa]

Ya know, there's a time and place for everything ... and in this case, Bagdad right now is ... neither in this case.

 

[Sukerkin]

Miracles do happen tho' - look at the panoply of posters in this thread ... who would have put money on us, who have such different views on many things, being in complete agreement on the dubious good sense of the party noted in the OP?

As Bob said, it's just making targets out of the attenedees for the regional homophobes and bigots.

Maybe they should put on some strippers and chuck a few holy books on the fires whilst they're at it?

 

[Carol]

I'm a bit horrified. Sharia law also forbids men from deliberately taking on the appearance of a woman, or vice versa. Doesn't matter whether the person is straight or gay.

This is less about a modernizing Iraq and more about a bunch of westerners thumbing their nose at the not-so-progressive culture. Too indlugent for my taste.

 

[elder999]

I'm a bit horrified. Sharia law also forbids men from deliberately taking on the appearance of a woman, or vice versa. Doesn't matter whether the person is straight or gay.

This is less about a modernizing Iraq and more about a bunch of westerners thumbing their nose at the not-so-progressive culture. Too indlugent for my taste.

Iraq isn't under Sharia law. More to the point, it was pretty progressive, culturally speaking, under Saddam. Homosexuality was legal in Iraq until 2001, when pressure from religious conservatives caused the passing of a law outlawing sodomy, making it punishable by imprisonment and repeat offenses punishable by death. Despite this, there were no known cases of Iraqi courts sentencing anyone to death for sodomy. Believe it or not, Saddam was against criminalizing homosexuality because to do so would have been against thte socialist prinicpals of the Baath party.

Homosexuality isn't currently illegal in Iraq-this is fairly explicit. Under the provisional authority, Paul Bremer ordered Iraq's reversion to the 1984 edition of their penal code, and what government there is in Iraq is still using that code. On the other hand, Shiite militias (who do endorse Sharia law, Carol) are known for kidnapping, torturing and murdering gay, lesbian and transgendered Iraqis.

Lastly, it's worth pointing out that the entire quote from the embassy spokesperson reads:"This is an event organized and sponsored by a group of employees. Given the lack of places to meet in Baghdad, the embassy allows groups to use its social facilities for events on a first-come, first-served basis." and that "Bagdhaddy's," the Embassy association pub, is presumably in the so-called "Green Zone," and not properly in Iraq, per se.

On the one hand, it doesn't strike me as particularly ........diplomatic, or in good-taste. It really doesn't make good sense, and I'm only a little less flabbergasted than the rest of you...Having met more than a few State Department functionaries of various stripes, I'll say that Carol is almost certainly spot-on about "Westerners thumbing their nose at the not-so-progressive culture."

Nits.

On the other hand,

Members of the military handing out bibles, bad, wrong and forbidden as it might offend the sensibilities of Muslims in Muslim countries

Actually, as posted many times in that thread, the military handing out Bibles was "bad, wrong, forbidden," because it is explictily against the UCMJ for members of the military to proselytize when in a foreign country-that doesn't just mean Iraq and Afghanistan,it means Japan and Germany, too. It's just plain illegal.

and, like I posted earlier in that thread, more than a few people in Iraq and Afghanistan might be pretty open to receiving a Bible in their native language, as "the book," but given the literacy rates over there, it's not very likely....the CENTCOM general order in reference to such behavior was just a reinforcement of longstanding government policy.

Members of the State Department having a gay pride party in countries where they BEHEAD homosexuals, that is OK, and You (me) are a bigot, homophobe, etc for mentioning it.

I'm know that numerous Christian services take place regularly within the Green Zone, Don, and, despite Christianity not being against the law, Christians are also persecuted, and BEHEADED in Iraq, and I don't see how that's any different, culturally speaking.

 

[Sukerkin]

Thanks for the extra detailing and insights, Elder.

 

[Empty Hands]

members of the State Department having a gay pride party in countries where they BEHEAD homosexuals, that is OK, and You (me) are a bigot, homophobe, etc for mentioning it.

You have no credibility here. Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that this bothers you because it might cause problems in Iraq? Of course not. It's just another dishonest "gotcha" moment you can latch on to.

 

[Big Don]

You have no credibility here. Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that this bothers you because it might cause problems in Iraq? Of course not. It's just another dishonest "gotcha" moment you can latch on to.

Oh, celebrating something Islam terms abhorrent in a country where the majority are Islamic isn't going to cause problems? Really?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Guys, I gotta side with Don here, and you all know my position supporting gay rights.

 

[shesulsa]

Yup. Me too.

 

[elder999]

Guys, I gotta side with Don here, and you all know my position supporting gay rights.

On the one hand, sure, it's in poor taste, and hardly diplomatic, as I said. It just doesn't show good common sense. On the other hand, Don said:

Members of the military handing out bibles, bad, wrong and forbidden as it might offend the sensibilities of Muslims in Muslim countries.
Members of the State Department having a gay pride party in countries where they BEHEAD homosexuals, that is OK, and You (me) are a bigot, homophobe, etc for mentioning it.

Which, for the reasons I posted earlier, doesn't quite fly as a comparison. Additionally, I don't see any protestation or condemnation of the numerous Christian services offered in the Green Zone and the rest of Bagdhad for Americans-in a country where the majority is Islamic, Chrisitianity is condemned, Christians are persecuted and beheaded.

Here's a story on Assyrian Christians found beheaded in Iraq.

And yet, Here's a story by a Mormon about going to church in Iraq.

and, here's a story about a military chaplain in Iraq.

and, here's a story on Iraqi resentment of the "Green Zone", that outlines the many services available that the Iraqis resent: electricity, medical care, recreational facilities, Internet cafes, mosques and churches.

Yet I don't see the same kind of outrage at the cultural insensitivity of having church services in "a majority Islamic country where Christians are beheaded," yet-to me, anyway-they're the same thing.

I have to wonder why someone who says this:

It certainly isn't the type of behavior that will endear us to our hosts there...

and this:

Oh, celebrating something Islam terms abhorrent in a country where the majority are Islamic isn't going to cause problems? Really?

Hasn't expressed-or, at least, adressed=the same concern about Christian, Mormon, and Jewish services being conducted in that same country, given how I concluded my previous post.

As for myself, <sarasm mode "on"> I am simply outraged, outraged I say! Having "church services" in a majority Islamic country? How dare they?! <sarasm mode "off">

And you all know my position on religious freedom.:lol:

(Not to mention the eating of pork, U.S. servicewomen swimming in bikinis, the consumption of alchoholic beverages, satellite TV programs that portray degenerate western ways, and all the other things we've imported into what was, under Saddam, a secular country-one of only three in "the Arab world" where you could still legally buy a drink......)

 

[Big Don]

There's no difference in your mind between religious freedom and sexual proclivities?
Wow, that is screwed up.

 

[elder999]

There's no difference in your mind between religious freedom and sexual proclivities?
Wow, that is screwed up.

There's no difference in my mind between the cultural sensitivities required around the differences in both things.

If they shouldn't have a "gay pride" celebration in Iraq, becuase gay people get BEHEADED by NGOs, they shouldn't be celebrating Mass, either, and for the same reason.........

 

[Big Don]

There's no difference in my mind between the cultural sensitivities required around the differences in both things.

If they shouldn't have a "gay pride" celebration in Iraq, becuase gay people get BEHEADED by NGOs, they shouldn't be celebrating Mass, either, and for the same reason.........

It is still apples and oranges, a gay pride celebration is different in intent and purpose from religious ceremonies.

 

[elder999]

It is still apples and oranges, a gay pride celebration is different in intent and purpose from religious ceremonies.

But the reasoning behind not having either of them is exactly the same: they're offensive to the host culture to the point where adherents to either are targets of homicide by extremists, therefore, they have the same degree of cultural sensitivity.

While I'll agree that having a gay pride celebration is culturally insensitive, and displays a lack of common sense, I'll maintain that the same could and should be said about having non-Islamic religious services.

Or are you saying that it's culturally insenstive to have a gay pride celebration in an Islamic country with rampant extremism, but perfectly acceptable to have reliigious services other than Islamic ones in the same country? Because I'm fairly certain the imams and ayatollahs that foster such extremism would pretty much disagree with you-and those are the people you're worrying about offending with "gay pride"," BTW.

On the other hand, I'm not entirely certain that burning Bibles pleased them.....

 

[Empty Hands]

Oh, celebrating something Islam terms abhorrent in a country where the majority are Islamic isn't going to cause problems? Really?

The Point.................................................You.