Search your article here

Showing posts with label Social issues. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social issues. Show all posts

Gender dalam Keluarga

Labels:

1. Pada 5 tahun pertama dalam kehidupan seorang anak, pembentukan identitas gender menjadi sangat penting karena tahap itu adalah tahap ketika seorang anak akan mengolah informasi yang didapatnya dengan optimal dan merubahnya menjadi debuah skema yang akan diterapkan dalam kehidupannya di masa yang akan datang. Pembentukan gender yang dimaksud adalah pembentukan gender sesuai dengan kebudayaan dimana anak tersebut tinggal. Hal tersebut perlu dilakukan agar anak tersebut kelak dapat diterima di lingkungannya dengan baik. Namun, dalam proses sosialisasi peran gender tersebut, perlu pula ditekankan bahwa gender bukan merupakan kodrat yang mutlak tidak dapat diubah, gender adalah sesuatu yang bisa dipertukarkan antara laki-laki dan perempuan.

Sewaktu kecil, seingat saya, saya tidak merasa harus menjadi feminin hanya karena saya adalah seorang anak perempuan. Saya pun tidak merasa saya harus maskulin. Saya merasa tidak terbebani dengan maskulinitas dan feminitas. Saya harus berbuat benar karena memang itulah yang harus dilakukan oleh seorang anak, terlepas dari dia laki-laki atau perempuan. Saya boleh menangis ketika kesakitan atau bersedih, namun tentunya dalam batasan wajar, tidak terlalu lama dan berlebihan. Saya bisa bermain apa saja tanpa pengecualian. Saya bebas mencita-citakan profesi apapun yang saya inginkan. Saya dapat bermain dengan siapa saja tanpa membeda-bedakan jenis kelamin teman bermain saya.

Setalah semakin dewasa tentunya saya melihat, merekam, dan memahami berbagai pengalaman yang saya dapat sendiri maupun dari orang lain mengenai gender. Hal tersebut semakin meyakinkan saya bahwa sejak kecil memang saya tidak hidup di lingkungan yang bias gender, sehingga membuat saya bisa menjadi orang yang tidak bias gender dalam hidup. Kalaupun sekarang saya merasa saya cenderung dominan feminin, itu bukan karena lingkungan saya yang mengharuskan, namun karena saya yang memilihnya. Dan tingginya feminitas saya tidak membuat saya tidak berusaha konform dengan maskulintas. Saya masih berkeyakinan bahwa menjadi mandiri, tegas, berani dan memiliki kemampuan itu penting. Saya pun merasa bahwa hal itu akan membawa keuntungan bagi saya selama saya dapan mengkombinasikan feminitas dan maskulinitas saya dengan baik sesuai dengan porsinya.

2. Berdasarkan pengamatan saya, dalam masyarakat Indonesia sudah terlihat adanya gejala kohabitasi. Hal ini dapat kita lihat dalam tayangan-tayangan televisi yang dengan terang-terangan menayangkan kehidupan para artis yang tinggal serumah tanpa menikah, dan bahkan dengan bangga mengatakan mereka mempunyai anak di luar pernikahan. Misalnya, sebut saja artis bernama Andy Soraya yang tinggal serumah dengan Steve Immanuel tanpa menikah. Mereka bahkan juga mempunyai seorang anak hasil hubungan mereka. Mereka bahkan mengaku tidak akan menikah karena menurut mereka pernikahan hanya akan membawa mereka ke dalam situasi yang sifatnya mengekang dan hal itu tentu tidak menyenangkan bagi mereka. Mereka berkeyakinan bahwa mereka akan lebih bahagia jika mereka bisa saling memberi tanpa perlu adanya pengorbanan.

Contoh lain, misalnya kehidupan mahasiswa di kampus-kampus tertentu. Laki-laki dan perempuan tinggal dalam satu kamar kost. Di kampus-kampus tertentu hal ini sudah menjadi rahasia umum. Mereka tidak merasa membutuhkan suatu komitmen lebih lanjut, dalam hal ini pernikahan, karena tanpa komitmen itu pun mereka bisa hidup senang tanpa memikirkan norma dan aturan yang berlaku di masyarakat.

Dalam kohabitasi yang terjadi pada contoh-contoh kasus di atas, perilaku gender memang tidak terlalu terkesan kaku. Pasangan-pasangan tersebut tidak begitu mempersoalkan perbedaan peran antara mereka sebagai laki-laki dan perempuan. Dalam artian, mereka dapat saja dengan mudah bertukar peran antara laki-laki dan perempuan ketika memang hal itu diperlukan. Hal ini dapat jelas ketika kita melihat perilaku gender pada pasangan kohabitasi yang sudah mempunyai anak. Dalam kasus diatas, pada pasangan Andy Soraya dan Steve Immanuel, mereka sangat toleran dalam perilaku gender mereka sehari-hari. Steve Immanuel mengaku tidak keberatan jika dia memang harus mengurus anak mereka sewaktu Andy Soraya bekerja. Pola komunikasi gender yang fleksibel juga ditunjukkan oleh pasangan kohabitasi yang tidak mempunyai anak, meskipun tidak terlalu jelas. Dalam hubungan mereka, mereka tidak menganut azas patriarkhi yang biasanya dianut oleh kebanyakan pasangan menikah di Indonesia. Kecenderungan terjalinnya pola komunikasi gender yang fleksibel ini mungkin dikarenakan pasangan-pasangan yang memutuskan untuk berkohabitasi adalah pasangan-pasangan merasa modern dan menganggap aturan-aturan hanya akan menyusahkan mereka, sehingga dalam berkomunikasi gender pun mereka tidak terlalu ambil pusing dengan standar-standar perilaku sesuai dengan jenis kelamin yang dibentuk oleh masyarakat dan bahkan oleh agama.

3. Saya menggolongkan diri saya mempunyai ego boundaries yang dapat menyesuaikan dengan lingkungan tempat saya tinggal. Dengan ego boundaries yang dapat menyesuaikan lingkungan itulah saya dapat lebih mudah dalam berkomunikasi gender. Saya merasa mampu memilah dan memilih sikap, cara berbicara, isi pembicaraan tergantung siapa lawan bicara saya dan suasana yang mendukung berlangsungnya komunikasi.

Misalnya ketika saya harus berbicara dengan orang yang sedang terlihat murng, maka saya merasa harus lebih hati-hati dalam berbicara, menggunakan suara yang lembut, bersikap hangat, dan menyejukkan. Namun ketika saya berbicara dengan sahabat saya yang sudah saya kenal dengan sangat dekat, mungkin saya tidak merasa harus selembut dan sehati-hati seperti saya sedang berbicara dengan orang yang sedang murung tadi. Saya akan merasa lebih nyaman untuk bercanda dan berbicara dengan santai. Dan cara berkomunikasi pun akan lain jika saya berbicara dengan orang yang lebih tua daripada saya. Saya akan menggunakan bahasa yang sopan, ramah, menunjukkan penghargaan saya terhadap beliau tanpa bersikap berlebihan.

4. Mainan yang saya dapatkan dari oang tua saya sewaktu kecil hampir selalu boneka. Menurut saya, boneka-boneka yang diberikan oleh orang tua saya sesuai dengan identitas gender saya sebagai perempuan. Sebagai anak perempuan, saya diharapkan untuk menjadi perempuan yang lembut dan penuh kasih sayang. Boneka yang mereka berikan pada saya dapat melatih kepekaan dan mengasah rasa kasih sayang saya terhadap sesama. Karena boneka itu saya perlakukan layaknya manusia yang harus saya sayangi, saya manjakan, dan saya perlakukan hati-hati.

Namun sekali waktu, saya pernah meminta mainan mobil-mobilan yang bisa dinaiki dan dikemudikan. Orang tua saya tidak keberatan untuk membelikannya, karena menurut mereka mainan mobil-mobilan itu tidak akan menimbulkan permasalahan dalam perkembangan identitas gender saya. Meskipun saya diharapkan menjadi seorang anak perempuan yang peka terhadap sesama dan penuh kasih sayang, mungkin dengan mobil-mobilan yang mereka belikan dapat mengajarkan saya bahwa saya kelak harus jadi mandiri. Mereka dengan senang hati menemani saya yang sedang bermain seolah-olah sedang mengendarai mobil sendiri menuju suatu tempat. Mungkin dengan begitu mereka sedang mengajarkan saya untuk tidak tergantung kepada orang lain.

5. Model maskulinitas dan feminitas yang diajarkan orang tua saya ditunjukkan dengan contoh-contoh perilaku sehari-hari mereka di rumah. Feminitas yang diperlihatkan oleh Ibu saya berupa sikap perhatian kepada anak-anak dan suaminya, lemah lembut, penyayang, selalu bersedia dijadikan tempat mengadu oleh anggota keluarga yang lain, bersahabat, tulus, menyejukkan. Sedangkan siakp maskulin yang ditunjukkan oleh Ayah berupa sikap tegas , dominan, kuat, mandiri, dan memimpin. Namun demikian, hal-hal tersebut tidak menghalangi Ayah dan Ibu bersikap sebaliknya. Dalam artian, Ibu dapat saja bersikap tegas ketika memang saya melakukan kesalahan dan beliau merasa perlu menegur, dan Ayah juga dalam situasi tertentu sangat dapat bersikap bersahabat dan mesra misalnya seperti memberikan kecupan selamat tidur kepada anak-anaknya.

Hal tersebut menurut saya sangat bermuatan genser namun tidak menimbulkan bias. Saya menjadi tahu apa yang biasanya dan sepatutnya dilakukan oleh seorang Ibu atau Ayah, namun semua hal itu tidak bersifat mutlak. Mereka pun dalam memberikan pendidikan secara langsung kepada anak-anaknya tidak berbias gender. Misalnya, mereka melarang saya bangun siang bukan karena saya anak perempuan tapi karena memang seharusnya semua orang bangun pagi dan melakukan hal berguna. Contoh lain, mereka mengharuskan saya bersikap sopan karena memang sudah sepatutnya semua orang, baik laki-laki maupun perempuan berlaku sopan kepada orang yang lebih tua.

6. Menjadi laki-laki dan perempuan pada masa ini sebenarnya tidak jauh berbeda dengan menjadi laki-laki dan perempuan pada masa sebelumnya. Perbedan justru terlihat dari persepsi masyarakat mengenai gender. Dewasa ini jumlah masyarakat yang memahami gender sudah meningkat dari masa sebelumnya, setidaknya masyarakat mejadi tahu bahwa gender ini berbeda dengan kodrat. Sebagian masyarakat sudah mengetahui bahwa gender hanyalah merupakan identitas yang dibentuk dan ditempelkan masyarakat pada masing-masing jenis kelamin. Peningkatan pengetahuan itulah yang dapat mempermudah seseorang dalam menentukan perilaku gender. Sekarang sudah hampir dapat dikatakan tidak ada lagi pengekangan hak perempuan untuk menuntut ilmu setinggi-tingginya, tidak ada lagi batasan jenis kelamin untuk profesi tertentu. Bahkan perempuan pun bebas bekerja seharian penuh di luar rumah untuk menambah penghasilan keluarga dan menyerahkan pengasuhan anaknya kepada orang lain, misalnya kepada pembantu, seorang laki-laki tidak lagi tabu berlenggak-lenggok di catwalk sebagai pragawan, berkreasi sebagai designer, dll. Pada masa ini, menurut saya seorang perempuan atau laki-laki dapat menentukan pilihan mereka sendiri. Budaya yang dianut masyarakat dewasa ini juga masih memegang peranan dalam penentuan sikap sebagai laki-laki atau perempuan, namun pada masa kini hal itu tidak lagi menjadi penentu utama. Karena masyarakat pun sudah semakin terbiasa dengan hal-hal seperti itu. Laki-laki dan perempuan dipandang setara dengan berbagai karakteristik yang berbeda untuk dapat saling melengkapi dalam hidupnya.

Namun, tidak semua masyarakat yang hidup di zaman sekarang sudah berpikiran terbuka mengenai gender. Masih ada juga masyarakat yang buta gender dan masih menganggap gender sebagai suatu hal yang absolut. Laki-laki dan perempuan masih dipandang tidak sejajar, dimana laki-laki harus selalu menjadi panutan yang absolut, kuat, asertif, mandiri, pemimpin, dan dominan. Sedangkan perempuan seolah-olah diposisikan di bawah, lebih rendah daripada laki-laki, harus selalu mengabdi dan melayani suami apapun yang terjadi. Demikian kuatnya bias gender yang ditanamkan dalam kehidupan sebagian masyarakat ini, sampai-sampai mereka masih mempertahankan budaya bias gender pada masa ini.

Hal-hal yang tidak saya sukai tentang menjadi perempuan adalah ketika berada diantara orang-orang yang masih berbias gender. Tentunya berada di tengah-tengah orang-orang semacam itu akan membuat saya merasa diremehkan dan dianggap lemah, bahkan merasa dilecehkan. Selebihnya saya suka menjadi seorang perempuan.

7. Keluarga dapat berperan dalam merubah steroetipi sosialisasi nilai-nilai gender terhadap anak-anak mereka. Keluarga idealnya menjadi faktor utama dalam perkembangan seorang anak, termasuk di dalamnya membentuk identitas gender seorang anak. Tahapan terpenting dalam pengolahan informasi menjadi sebuah skema yang akan diterapkan seorang anak adalah pada 5 tahun pertama kehidupannya, dan pada umumnya 5 tahun pertama seorang anak akan dihabiskan bersama keluarganya. Anak-anak dapat juga berhubungan dengan orang lain di luar lingkungan keluarga, namun tetap yang menjadi panutan utama mereka adalah keluarga. Oleh karena itu peran keluarga dalam mensosialisasikan gender sangatlah penting, sehingga keluarga menjadi sangat penting dalam merubah sosialisasi nilai-nilai gender terhadap anak-anak.

Cara yang harus dilakukan pertama kali adalah dengan merubah semua cara mendidik anak yang bias gender, dan menerapkan didikan yang berbasis gender dengan tepat. Dengan menerapkan didikan bahwa gender itu dapat dipertukarkan. Misalnya, dengan tidak lagi melarang anak laki-laki menangis jika kesakitan, tidak melarang anak perempuan bercita-cita sebagai pilot, menerapkan disiplin yang sama antara anak laki-laki dan perempuan, tidak hanya mendidi anak laki-laki untuk jadi kuat dan mandiri, tetapi juga mendidik anak perempuan agar dapat mandiri dan tidak cengeng, dsb.





Online Dating Services - Precautions to be taken

Labels:

Many men and women are left high and dry without a soul to share their feelings. The nuclear family has resulted in many elderly people left as singles. The increase in the frequency of divorce has created a vacuum in the lives of many a people. The online dating services has come in handy for these needy people to find out their soul mates. Of late the online dating sites have acquired a prominent place among the internet activities.

Online dating can be a fun. Searching through thousands and thousands of dating profiles is really an interesting aspect. The search has all its emotions and anxieties. But don't neglect the safety aspect of online dating. Apply common sense when you try to hook up with a mate. There are some precautions to be taken before starting to find out your perfect match

Computer Safety

Bombarding your computer with virus infected files while browsing is a common problem now. The real intention of your dating partner may not be for a relationship. The date mate might be nursing some other sinister intentions. You need to have a firewall and antivirus protection for your email and computer. These computer protection services are offered at free of cost.

Protect yourself.

Not all dating sites are a secured place to interact online. Protect your self by choosing the perfect dating sites which are functioning on high ethical notes. How to choose a reputable dating site? The referrals you can get from your friends and colleagues will help you to zero in on the correct dating site. Don't choose the sight on mere recommendations. After having a list of two or three online dating sites, which are mostly recommended by your friends, start your own analyses. Browse through the sites and take note of their URLs, the regulations, the fee structure, complete contact information and privacy assurance. Compare the sites. Try only those dating sites which you feel, will be safer for online interaction.

Protection To be Taken While Interacting

Hastiness should be avoided in selecting the online relationship. Enough time should be given to find out your soul mate and to grow the online relationship. Frequent interactions before fixing the virtual meeting, help to know each other well. It will enhance the understanding and trust. Arrange for a virtual meeting only when you feel it is time to have it. Avoiding the virtual meetings can be considered as an abuse. Because it involves one's self respect. If this basic courtesy is not followed then it is time to move on. On the other side , the virtual meeting should not be pushed through. Understanding each other and creation of mutual trust will take some time. So pushing for a virtual meeting by one of you will create bad vibes. Take time to build the relationship.

Respecting Privacy

The sharing phase takes a center stage after developing your online relationship to a confident level. You may share your email ID and photos. Enter this sharing stage after carefully evolving your partners integrity. As online dating relationship is built on mutual trust, sharing personal information with others is a big abuse. If your partner is of not good intentions, it will lead to unnecessary troubles. Respecting each other's privacy is a must and there should not be any compromise in this count.


Author Information:Share your fun times and your likes and dislikes. Send greeting cards on special occasions. There are great online sources to share your photos and videos. As said earlier don't rush through in selecting your online dating partner. Never pretend to be bold in your selection of online date and trap yourself into avoidable troubles. Online dating is a fun as well as an emotional one. Make your dating days happier with a relationship which is built on mutual respect and trust
Online Dating Sites



Why An Atheist Can Believe In God

Labels:

Contrary to what many believe, many atheist - if not most - would never say "God doesn't exist." Unfortunately, many dictionaries also have definitions like "Denial of the existence of God," which is a misrepresentation. In fact, if once you understand what atheism really means, you'll see why an atheist can believe in God. Here are the three basic beliefs that lead one to be an atheist:

1. Evidence and experience should be the basis for any belief.

2. An assertion should be proven by the person or persons who make it.

3. The case for God has not been proven.

With no experience to convince me, and no proof of the existence of God, I don't have a reason to believe in the existence of he or she or it. But I can't say he doesn't exist, since I can't prove this belief either. In fact, why would an atheist waste his time trying to prove a concept as nebulous as God can't or doesn't exist? Suppose I told you that a blue snake in the sky ruled the universe. If all I had for evidence was a some speculative story-book, you wouldn't believe me would you? No?

That would make you an "aserpentist," by the way. Now, would you start gathering evidence to "prove" that no invisible blue snake was up there? No. As the maker of the assertion, I would have the obligation to prove it did exist. You would be entirely justified in dropping and ignoring the whole matter until given some reason to look at it again.

Atheism is simply non-belief due to unconvincing evidence.

Where does this leave agnostics then? An honest classification would be as a type of atheist, right? If a person won't say he believes in God, he is atheistic. Although there is confusion in the terms, sometimes those who call themselves agnostics are just afraid of the other "A" word label. "Agnostics" are more accepted in society after all.

Now, since words refer to something - even if it is only to ideas - we can say that God exists as an idea, and a powerful one. Perhaps some atheists even like various versions of this idea (I like "the force" from the movie "Star Wars.") The various concepts of gods are often the cause of wars and horrible crimes, but they can also be uplifting concepts, or at least useful in some way.

I refer to these ideas as "useful lies." Regardless of their truth or falsity, some ideas can be beneficial as "operating principles" or "guides to life." Consider the idea that everything happens for a reason, for example. It doesn't have to be true to be useful, since it certainly can get you looking for the lessons and other values to be found in bad scenarios.

An atheist could say then, that a god exists as a common belief, or "useful lie," and that as such, he may even do some good. But more than that, since an atheist simply hasn't been convinced, he can believe in a God in heaven too. For this, he just needs God to come down and shakes his hand, or otherwise make his presence known.






Why I Believe Abortion Should Be Legal, Safe, and Rare

Labels:

I have always been a supporter of a woman's right to choose. It is not simply that I am a supporter of abortion. I have never had an abortion and don't think I could. However, I should have the right to make that decision myself -- not have it forced on me. My position on abortion is really very simple -- it should be legal, safe and rare.

The most important reason for my belief that abortion should be legal and safe is very closely tied to women's rights. A society that controls and shackles women's freedom cannot be wholly free. I do believe the issue is one of power and control -- of domination -- over women. If men could become pregnant abortion would not even be an issue. Pregnancy and child care have long been ways that men have controlled and dominated women as well as restricted their education and professional lives. When abortion is outlawed or restricted by laws then it becomes even more of an issue of control and discrimination -- aimed at the lower classes. We know that abortion will never disappear entirely, at least until universal fail-safe birth control exists, and that people of means will be able to obtain a safe abortion here or abroad. Outlawing abortion simply ensures that the poor and disadvantaged will have no safe alternative.

I have never understood why so many people put so much time, money and effort into outlawing abortion when spending that same time, money and effort on helping women without choices and helping the many abused and neglected children we already have would do far more to prevent abortions than any law ever could. Contrary to many abortion foes belief, I don't believe abortion is an easy choice for most women -- and for those it is an easy choice it is probably better they not be given responsibility for the health and welfare of a fetus or child. Many women who choose to have an abortion feel they have no alternative. Why not work to truly help those women so they do have choices and options? Until our society truly takes its responsibility to the children already born so we have no child suffering starvation, poverty, neglect, and abuse -- and all our children are given every opportunity for a quality education and future then I don't want to see time and resources devoted to the prevention of abortion. Think of helping these disadvantaged women and children as preventing the abortions of tomorrow. Simply outlawing abortion will not solve the root problem, instead it will drive those in need of an abortion into back alleys, but if you can solve the problems of abuse and poverty then there will be fewer unwanted pregnancies and fewer abortions.

Another important reason I believe the choice should be left up to the woman in question is that I believe the decision to reproduce has to be made willingly and only by the person involved. Pregnancy and child birth is a physical ordeal that can have a lifelong impact on a woman's mental and physical health and well being. In addition, the decision to raise a child has tremendous personal, professional, and financial repercussions. While it takes two to make a baby, all too often in the case of an unplanned pregnancy it is the woman who is left to cope alone. It is really quite simple. I believe that if I am going to undergo a process that effects my physical and mental well being as well as my financial and professional future then I should be able to make the decision myself. I am a mother and I love my child more than anything, but my pregnancy and child birth were difficult and life threatening. I am not sure if I could have survived either without the support of my husband, family, friends, and co-workers. I know this group has been even more important to me while raising my child. I am an educated professional with a good job and a good support system. I cannot imagine how people with fewer resources do it. We are failing as a society when we force so many to do so.

If we want a society that is truly free and truly responsible for all its members then abortion must be legal and safe. If abortion foes truly want to stop abortions then they should work on addressing the root causes of abortion -- poverty, abuse, and lack of opportunity. The more we do to give women freedom of choice and control over their lives then the rarer abortion will be. Then everyone wins.



Society and Culture: It Is Better to Give Than Receive—No Really!

Labels:

As the Roman calendar welcomes 2008, appeals for charitable contributions abound. Churches, charities and civic causes dependent on donors will build their budgets and project their programs for the year ahead based on the generosity of givers within our society and culture.

Some would simply suggest that this is the season for giving, but few can explain the reason for giving. Have you ever wondered who gives, who doesn’t and why the difference? If so, you’ll be interested to know that Professor Brooks, has, as they say, done the math!

Arthur C. Brooks, professor of public administration at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs has studied donor demographics for over a decade. His book, Who Really Cares, published in December 2006, presents empirical evidence of traits that predict and promote philanthropy.

Brooks defines charity broadly as “voluntary, beneficial, ‘affectionate’ acts that have the ability to transform the giver and receiver in unique and important ways.” Generosity, he declares, is mutually beneficial for the needy and the nurturing.

He readily acknowledges that the United States is a remarkably charitable nation by all reasonable standards. “The Giving U.S.A. Foundation estimates that Americans donated nearly $300 billion to charity in 2006—more than the gross domestic product (the annualized value of goods and services produced within a nation) of all but 33 countries in the world.”

However, he has discovered that giving is a way of life for some and woefully absent among others in our society and culture. He describes two distinct Americas—Charitable America and Selfish America. The givers of Charitable America are more likely to give both formally and informally to sacred and secular causes, volunteer their time for church and charitable institutions, donate blood, etc., than their nongiving neighbors.

“Although 225 million Americans give away money each year, the other 75 million never give to any causes, charities, or churches. Further, 130 million Americans never volunteer their time.”

Professor Brooks explains that race, gender, ethnicity and age are unable to help us understand the causes of charitable giving. These innate characteristics don’t address the reasons why people in our society either give or choose not to give of their time and money. Even income and wealth do not tell the whole story. Reminiscent of how Jesus was impressed by the willingness of the widow to offer her meager mite, Brooks calls our attention to the generous giving of the working poor families in America.

“The difference between givers and nongivers is found in their beliefs and behaviors. Four distinct forces emerge from the evidence that appear primarily responsible for making people charitable. These forces are religion, skepticism about the government in economic life, strong families, and personal entrepreneurism.”

If you actively attend a house of worship, believe that you and not the government are your brother’s keeper, have grown up in a home watching your parents volunteer and give to church and community and work for a living, then you are part of Charitable America. Remove any one of these characteristics common to givers, and you start the process of relocating to a residence in Selfish America.

Giving is good for those getting the helping hand, but does giving benefit the benefactor? Citing a correlation between charity and concepts of personal well-being, Brooks concludes, “. . . happiness, health, and income coexist in a self-reinforcing cycle with charity: Happy, healthy, successful, opportunity-oriented people are most likely to give and to volunteer. At the same time, charitable people are more likely than uncharitable people to be happy, healthy, and financially prosperous. Yes, prosperous people are more likely to give to charity—but charity can also make them prosperous and more likely to make even more charitable contributions.”

An ancient adage of the Judeo-Christian ethic advises that “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). Professor Brook’s synthesis of the latest social surveys provides powerful support for this premise. Social science and sacred Scripture coalesce to confirm the tangible benefits to a compassionate community that makes a genuine and generous effort to collectively “love one’s neighbor as oneself.”

“But the value of charity is not limited to those who receive the services that giving makes possible,” he says. “The evidence in this book shows that charity unleashes enormous benefits not only to the givers themselves but also to their families, communities, and the nation. Everyone understands that charitable organizations created value by providing for the needy. What many organizations misunderstand is who the “needy” truly are. In addition to those in need of food, shelter, education, the needy are also those who need to give to attain their full potential in happiness, health, and material prosperity—which is every one of us.”

Perhaps it is better to give than receive—no, really!



Kill the Murder and do not take Compensation in Bible versus Quran

Labels:

By Dr. Ibrahim Khalil [ 03/02/2008 ]
[ viewed 27 times ]


Kill the murder in the Bible
And Never Ever take compensation
The Lord commands to kill the murder in ten verses in the Bible. In verse, Numbers 35:31, the Lord Forbids to take any compensation or satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.
On the contrary, taking compensation is allowed in the Noble Quran!
---------------------------------------
Kill the murder in the Bible:

Leviticus 24:17, 21 (King James Version)

17 And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.
21 And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death.

Leviticus 27:29 (King James Version)

29 None devoted, which shall be devoted of men, shall be redeemed; but shall surely be put to death.
Numbers 35:16-19, 21 and 30 (King James Version)
16 And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
17And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
18Or if he smite him with an hand weapon of wood, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
19The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him.
21 Or in enmity smite him with his hand, that he die: he that smote him shall surely be put to death; for he is a murderer: the revenger of blood shall slay the murderer, when he meeteth him.
30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.
--------------------
Kill the murder and do not take compensation:

Numbers 35:31
31 Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.

=====================================

Kill the murder in the Noble Quran
And you can take compensation

Verse 2:178 says that:

O you who believe
Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered ones;
The freeman for the freeman, a freeman who premeditatedly kills another freeman, and the slave for the slave, a slave who premeditatedly kills another,
And the female for the female, a female who premeditatedly kills another,
And for him who is forgiven somewhat by his brother,
Whoever forgives the killing and takes instead blood money,
Prosecution according to usage
Allah commands the person who asks for blood money to claim this money according to practiced usage:
And payment unto him, the person who is required to pay blood money is commanded to give the custodians of the murdered person what is due to them, in kindness without the need to go to court or making it difficult for them.
This pardon is alleviation, appeasement and a mercy from your Lord towards the killer such that he is not killed.
He who transgresses after this, after taking the blood money and kills the murderer will have a painful doom; he shall be killed and will not be forgiven or allowed to pay blood money.
===================

Verse 2:178 in different translations:

QARIB:
Believers, retaliation are decreed for you concerning the killed. A free (man) for a free (man), a slave for a slave, and a female for a female. He who is pardoned by his brother, let the ensuing be with kindness, and let the payment be with generosity. This is alleviation from your lord and mercy. He who transgresses thereafter shall have a painful punishment.

SHAKIR:
O you who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the slain, the free for the free, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female, but if any remission is made to any one by his (aggrieved) brother, then prosecution (for the blood wit) should be made according to usage, and payment should be made to him in a good manner; this is an alleviation from your lord and a mercy; so whoever exceeds the limit after this he shall have a painful chastisement

PICKTHAL:
O ye who believe! retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. and for him who is forgiven somewhat by his (injured) brother, prosecution according to usage and payment unto him in kindness. this is an alleviation and a mercy from your lord. he who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom.

YUSUFALI:
O ye who believe! the law of equality is prescribed to you in cases of murder: the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the woman for the woman. But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude, this is a concession and a mercy from your lord. After this whoever exceeds the limits shall be in grave penalty.
-------------------------------

What if the Quran was the Book which commands to kill all of these many kinds of people? Also, the Lord in the Bible forbids taking compensation from the murder to save his life and insists to kill the murder. On the other hand, the Noble Quran allows taking compensation from the murder to save his life!
What the Western Media would have to say in such case?
=========

Back to the main issue of my series of articles; this is my question to you smart readers: "Is the Quran quoted from the Bible?"

About the author:
Professor Dr. Ibrahim Khalil
Prof. of Clinical and Chemical Pathology,
Head of Clinical Microbiology and Infection Control Unit,
Ain-Shams University., Egypt.
And, President of The Egyptian Society of Inventors.
Member of the Egyptian union of Writers


Article Source: http://www.Free-Articles-Zone.com