Do you agree with this column?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/maggiegallagher/2002/11/13/164904.html

The column is quite old, but this appears to be the right's latest talking point, to be apologists for Islamic repression, arguing its not a big issue. Same talking points they use to defend the Islamist regime in Iraq now.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

They're not westerners so who gives a sh**t about them?

[angus]

I do.

Well, if I'm quite sure what you're asking I'd say I do.  For example, I agree with Hashem Aghajari when he states that each generation has a right to read and interpret the Koran without fear.  But I'd not want to get into a fight with jmfcst, for example, so I usually don't comment that inspired texts are open to interpretation.  I also agree with Maureen Dowd that Iran seems bizarre to me.  But I also agree that many Americans, yourself and myself included, are peurile and provincial.  (Brits are like that too, I've noticed.  Maybe it's an anglophone thing.)  For example, I used the phrase "doped, or impregnated, semiconductors" in class the other day, in order to contrast n-type and p-type semiconductors with intrinsic semiconductors and about half those girls giggled at the mere mention of the words "doped" and "impregnated"  Truth be told, I generally giggle at such utterances too.  I agree that India is a "developing democracy" and that censoring certain acts in Bollywood hasn't inhibited its development.  Moreover, I agree that a woman dressed from head to toe, with only one finger exposed, pointing at soldiers, can look just fine.  In fact, it's rare that I find an article with which I agree completely, but I agree with every sentence in this one.