Muslims to get floor sinks at airport by fall

Anybody else think this is just going a little too far?
Where are the Holy Water fonts?

indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080404/LOCAL1804/804040462/1195/LOCAL18

Well I don’t know about you but I would rather they have the foot sink than continue to wash their feet in the same sink that I have to wash my hands in. Also, I don’t have a problem with it because the Muslims did not request this. From what I understand some airports have individual chapels for Catholics/Orthodox and other Christians to pray in.

I agree it is better to have the foot sinks, rather than wash in the hand sink.

But I cannot see an airport in an Arab country doing anything to accomodate Christians. In fact, it is my understanding that one cannot enter an Islamic country with a Christian sign or symbol with them or on their person.

While I can sympathize with the prayer reqirements of one’s faith, it is unsanitary to bath one’s feet in a public sink. If that is the case, it should be against some law . This is not being anti muslim, this is being fair. This is about damaging property by trying to bathe in a public area.

Agreed. They should have been stopped before the structural damage occurred.

If the taxi drivers felt they “must” wash, they could carry jugs of water and a towel with them.

Or have one of the Muslim organizations install them. Or with 180 drivers, pitch in and pay for them themselves.

But no, tax payers and users of the airport are paying.

I’m perfectly ok with this. It does stand to reason that a fair amount of Muslim passengers would be traveling through an airport as well, so I think the feature would get a lot of use. Just as many airports have chapels and even Catholic Masses now, I don’t see this as being unreasonable, given the function of the building.

It seems like a good idea. Obviously, as far as sanitation goes, it is. I admire those Muslims who, despite the lack of accommodation, still manage to ritually wash and pray as their faith asks. The least these airports could do would be to take this common practice into account. It’s not even as if they had the “nerve” to ask. Someone just caught on…

Like I said, it’d be a nice gesture and ultimately be doing everyone a favor.

The baths are not located in the airport terminal per se. They are to be installed at a small separate building that is only used by the cab drivers.

Now after they are installed, there may be signs directing travelers to the facility. I haven’t heard of any plans to do this.

At first glance it seems a bit weird, but from a practical perspective I’d say it’s a good idea and not only for the Muslim taxi drivers. It should be also provided for the ordinary passengers. I used to witness other guys (who weren’t Muslims) washing their feet at the petrol station in a normal sink. Just because they felt weary after a long trip. Washing your hands in such a sink afterwards is not the most pleasant experience. So why not making it more hygienic if the lack of the special sinks doesn’t prevent people from washing their feet in public toilets anyway?

Doesn’t really bother me…especially since it really benefits everyone…Muslim or not. I rather equate it to installing baby changing tables in ALL public restrooms. Sure beats changing your kid on the floor…or on a bench outside the restroom. But it’s amazing how many places…even “family friendly” establishments don’t have them.

If there is a legitimate need–and it sounds like there is–then what’s the big deal?

I grew up during a time when mainline Protestantism was practically the “state religion”. We got a reading from the KJV at least weekly in public school and Protestant preachers openly proselytized in student assemblies. Membership in Protestant youth groups was openly advertised on the PA system. It was just part of the landscape, so I didn’t think too much of it at the time, Catholic though I was.

I see people wanting to incorporate prayer and religious expression in public schools as part of the landscape again. I can understand that. It’s resisted, of course, by some pretty repugnant organizations like the ACLU. But as much as I hate to agree with anything the ACLU says or does, and am suspicious of its motivations, I am beginning to see some merit in it. There is something about Islamic faith expression that goes beyond what the mainline Protestants used to consider their right. At least they didn’t demand the direct expenditure of public funds or infrastructure changes. And, they drew back at a point. Their very relativism, it seemed, formed the boundary beyond which they would not go.

Judging by what one sees in Islamic countries, there is no reciprocation when it comes to religious accommodation. Now, that might be governmental only. But because it’s so pervasive in those countries, one is tempted to be concerned that it’s inherent to Islam. I have to say that I now oppose any kind of public support of religion, and further oppose any kind of state accommodation of it. Foot washing stations in airports are no big thing. But I would prefer the chapels also be removed than that our public arena be gradually Islamized. It isn’t the religion, per se, but the aggressiveness and intolerance of the religion that troubles me. Public funds are expended for foot washing stations, and the secularists are fine with it. The Ten Commandments on a courthouse lawn? Oh no. Those who are so adamant about re-introducing Christianity into the public arena really need to think long and hard about where it can all end up. Islam is not relativistic, and does not revere “church/state separation” the way the old mainline protestants did.

I personally favored evenhandedness on the part of the state in support for faith-based schools. I now no longer do. Seeing the harm madrassas have done in the Islamic world, I do not wish to support them here. And I fear that’s what will eventually happen if Catholic schools or Evangelical schools are supported by the state.

While I can see your point, I personally wouldn’t mind some sort of voucher system (as was discussed for a time) which would allow a more middle class family, like my own to enroll their children in Catholic school. Heaven knows that’s the only way I’d ever be able to afford it.

(Just learned that to enroll four children will run me $1800 per month!!!)

An alternative, of course, would be to increase the tax deduction for children. I recall reading, a few years ago (no doubt it’s more now) that if the deduction was equivalent to what it was in Truman’s time, it would now be $20,000 per child. That would take a lot of parents off the tax rolls altogether. To me, that’s a better answer than vouchers which are, after all, direct state aid to a religious organization. The principle, anymore, makes me nervous.

No, no. It is not true. Muslims consider washing their feet a religious ritual. If you are not Muslims, you should stay out of it. They don’t want no infidels touching their holy stuff. First, they might say, oh the foot wash is for everybody. After the installation, don’t be surprised to see a sign that says “Muslim only.”

When I worked and lived in Saudi Arabia, we were constantly not to use their foot wash. Once you give into their request, it is all over. That’s how they are. They bug the heck out of you until you give in as like trying to get the monkey off your back or something.

originally posted by Indyann
If the taxi drivers felt they “must” wash, they could carry jugs of water and a towel with them.

They are to be installed at a small separate building that is only used by the cab drivers.

They should not install foot baths. Sinks are put there to wash your hands and neither should they be using them for their feet. Disgusting.

This is solely their problem and they have to figure out how to wash. Carry jugs of water and wash.

I’d like a bathroom for little children like some children’s museum have installed so I wouldn’t have to hold them above the toilet, never know what is on an adult toilet, but that is not going to happen so I deal with it.

originally posted** by Ridgerunner**
But I would prefer the chapels also be removed than that our public arena be gradually Islamized.

Chapels don’t have to removed, nor do the ten commandment. These are historical, placed there many years ago and that is the difference. I would agree that you can’t add new ones or everyone is entitled to add new ones.

I stilll think the Mayflower’s flag with the cross should be put back on the Mayflower as it originally was when it came to the America. That is simply history.

It actually makes sense to have it, especially if many muslims require it.

:smiley:

True, however, thankfully, we do not follow the leads of Theocracies.

This is a perfectly senseable thing for the airport to do. Their economey depends on these cab drivers, who are Muslim, why woulen’t thy try to accomidate them?

It’s the picking and choosing who they accommodate is the problem.

If Catholics or Protestants made a similar request for accommodation, watch the ACLU scream, “Separation of Church and State!” :mad:

originally posted** by IvanKaramozov**
This is a perfectly senseable thing for the airport to do. Their economey depends on these cab drivers, who are Muslim, why woulen’t thy try to accomidate them?

Economy doesn’t depend on Muslim Cab drivers. I am sure there are a lots of Christian from other countries who would like a job.

No foot baths. How disgusting that they have no regard for people washing their hands and children’s hands in a sink!

I also see them as private Muslim only. If someone that was non-Muslim just wanted to wash their feet I believe they would not have access to the facility.

There were a few times when my children vomited or had potty accidents and it would have been nice to have a low place to hose them off. As anyone with small children knows this does sometimes happen. But, again I don’t think this would be allowed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.