The burka-clad woman believed to be the first woman suicide bomber in Pakistan blew herself up near a Christian missionary school on Tuesday, officials said.
-
(Photo: AP Images / Mohammad Zubair)Pakistani army troops cordon off the area of a suicide bombing near a military post in Peshawar, Pakistan on Tuesday, Dec. 4, 2007. A female suicide bomber, apparently aiming to attack a military post, blew herself up near a Christian school in the northwestern city of Peshawar, officials said, in Pakistan's first known case of a suicide attack by a woman.
Though initial media reports could not confirm whether the woman intended to plant the bomb or planned to kill herself with it, along with other people, the chief of police in the city where the explosion happened told the New York Times the woman was definitely a suicide bomber given that a belt was strapped to her.
“We have found pieces of the belt used in the bombing, which shows that she was a suicide bomber,” said Peshawar Police Chief Tanveerul Haq Sipra.
The target is believed to have been the military checkpoint she was approaching, given that pro-Taliban militants the day before had captured six Pakistani security officials and blew up their checkpoint.
Recently, there has been an upsurge in violence within the Muslim-majority country as the Pakistani military launched a fierce clampdown on Taliban-sympathizers, especially in the volatile northwest region, where the latest incident occurred.
No casualties were reported following Tuesday’s explosion.
Comments
gavulav -
Look, everyone makes their own choices. I'm not saying you can't raise good kids with 2 working parents. I'm saying one person is only one person, and you can't be 100% at any given thing when you are stretched that thin - something has to give. My best chance of raising up my children to know the Lord, to see His love in action, to model His precepts, to provide knowledge to counteract what these kids learn in the public schools, etc., is to give my devoted attention to doing just that - raising them up, not leaving them to the system.
Maranatha's original point was staying at home "if possible". And I agree with her.
gavulav -
First, I think we should back up a little. I'm not referring to families who need both breadwinners to buy food, clothing, etc., the real necessities. When I talk about the things we DON'T need, I am referring to cable TV, cell phones, big screen TV's, new cars (multiple), name brand jeans and tennies, and on and on. Used to be a bedroom was 9x10 and had 2 kids in a bunkbed, now each child has to have a room 16x16 with a computer, tv, dvd, super stereo, iPod, and the list goes on. Why? We tell them not to be enthralled by the world, and then we enthrall them in the world. This makes no sense.
Maybe you know of some stay-at-home moms that do the things you listed, but that's not in my list of what one should be. To have the time and money to do those things I would think maybe money isn't the issue in the home in the first place.
Look, I've been both a single mom and a stay-at-home mom, so I have a lot of experience with making ends meet when the next gallon of milk came out of the penny jar. Staying at home also meant budgeting ver-r-r-r-r-y carefully, but when that choice became available we didn't hesitate. I took no naps, never went to the hairdresser, all those other things you mentioned (except for home cooked meals!) just weren't there.
And would my work-worn husband rather have a home cooked meal than a nuked pizza? He says definitely yes! :)
They are both very athletic and my son plays competitive soccer which he loves and excels at. But it isn't cheap. And we couldn't have given him that opportunity if we were a one-income family. And my daughter will be playing competitive soccer next year too. I never had those options, as my mom was a stay at home mom. As much as I enjoyed that, i wonder where I would be if i had been given more opportunities.
Not all of us men have the capabilities or opportunities to become a wealthy entrepenuer or whatever. Some of us are lowly truck drivers. But we still want the best for our children. And our children know that they are they are deeply cherished and loved.
If I may put a married man's perspective on this. I agree that the ultimate role for a mom is to stay home and raise children (if they choose to have children). Children need that. But in today's world, that is a very rare privilege. True, most women could stay home, in theory. But what kind of lifestyle would they have? When my wife and I were expecting our first child 14 years ago, i had gotten laid off, and my wife was making $9 an hour. We lived survived...and that was about it. We were on foodstamps, WIC, and living in a small crappy duplex with snakes coming up the toilet and shower. And our car was no better. As much as I enjoyed my time at home with my newborn son, i knew what kind of future he had. No options!
Today, my wife and I both work. Our children know we love them, and we support them and cherish every moment with them. But because we both work, they have the opportunities that they wouldn't have had otherwise.
GMG...another point [3]
3. A woman's ability to provide a safe and secure home for her family has little to do with what she does for a living and everything to do with her committment to her family's welfare and happiness.
GMG....sorry, pressed something by mistake...
2. You also say that children and husbands need mothers more than money. Again I would have to disagree. Millions of women are out there working, and millions more would work if they had the opportunity, so that they could put food on the table, shoes on their children's feet and help their husbands keep a roof over their heads. We need "things" because we are still on Planet Earth!
3. You also say that stay-at-home moms can provide safe and secure homes for their families. Again I would have to disagree. I do not believe that these stay-at-home moms have a monopoly of this ability, in fact I would bet my last dollar that some of these moms have boosted the statistics on divorce and broken homes in the great USA.
4. And about your quip that there is no such thing as....SUPERMOMs.... I meet them all the time...at work, at leadership seminars, at high-powered conferences, at political rallies, at church, at church bazaars, at their children's schools and football games, at romantic nights out with their husbands, at the beach with their families, at night classes....in fact everywhere their God-given talents take them!
GMG
four issues.......please bear with me
1. You say that being a stay-at-home mom is not a luxury nor is it restful. I disagree. These very fortunate women are their own bosses, plan and unplan their day, eat home-cooked meals whenever they want, take naps between tasks, stay in bed when they think they have a headache, go to the hairdresser's any time, have afternoon coffee with the girls, and.....the icing on the cake..... spend all the time they need with their children and husbands. Working women only fantasize about this kind of freedom!
2.
gavulav - you said "2. You think it is a good idea for mothers to stay home and look after their families. My unlearned response is that as much as working mothers would love to throw in the towel and just go home and rest awhile, and be a wife and mother for the rest of their lives, they love their children and work-worn husbands too much to give themselves that kind of luxury. Working mothers are not at work simply to "fulfill" themselves; they make that kind of sacrifice for the families they love. Their families understand this."
There is no luxury nor rest to staying at home and being a mother and wife. If I am to "raise up a child the way he should go..." then I need to raise him up, not leave him to the world to raise and hope for the best.
Money is not what kids nor "work worn" husbands need. It's amazing all the "things" in this world that we don't need. What money can't buy nor substitue for is a wife and mother that supports her family by providing a safe, secure, stable home. God given talents? Have you ever read any of those articles that list all the things a wife/mother need to be good at? Not to mention the money it would cost to replace all her services?
As it is, that mother goes to work, comes home and tries to do the basics on top of it, and she and her family lose. There is no such thing as a super mom - something gets lost in the transition, and it's usually those children and that work worn husband, not to mention that mom that just can't be all she needs to be.
Being a fulltime mom and wife is no luxury, it is a very time consuming 24/7 job that requires all her skills and ability.
there better be only one of me!
maranatha
two issues....
1. You asked where Adam was when Eve was being tempted. My theory is that he was sleeping on the job! [What? jester is not the only " jester" in the King's Court].
2. You think it is a good idea for mothers to stay home and look after their families. My unlearned response is that as much as working mothers would love to throw in the towel and just go home and rest awhile, and be a wife and mother for the rest of their lives, they love their children and work-worn husbands too much to give themselves that kind of luxury. Working mothers are not at work simply to "fulfill" themselves; they make that kind of sacrifice for the families they love. Their families understand this.
And do you really think that our intelligent Creator would have given women the same talents given to men if he intended for women to just stay at home? Would he not return one day and demand what women have done with all the talents he gave them? I wonder if he will be okay if we tell him that we were scared to do anything with our talents and so we decided not to do anything about them!
I want to add something here which may not be received very well, if at all. I believe strongly in my heart that children need their mothers at home if it's at all possible. I realize there are situations where women have to work, but I have heard mothers make any number of excuses for leaving their children with strangers while "fulfilling themselves". Titus 2 is clear that mothers are to be home with their children, and this is definitely the optimum enviroment for children. As a teacher, I see a world of difference between children who are secure in their parents' love and children who are neglected and emotionally abandoned in order for their parents to seek more and more material goods. This requires real unselfishness on the part of parents, but they will reap tremendous rewards in every way if they honor the Lord on this.
As I said, I'm sure someone may very well rail at me about this, but it IS Biblical, and it does make all the difference for children.
Brief correction: I meant to say, "If husbands and wives will take God at His Word and obey His instructions, God's blessing will rest upon them and their home, and they will accurately REFLECT His great love for His own bride to a lost and unbelieving world."
gavulav, Adam and Eve's "orders" may not have been very specific due to the fact that they started out perfect, without sin, walking in perfect harmony. Even so, I do believe that Adam was to be her protector, and I've often heard people question where he was when Satan was deceiving her by asking, "Hath God said...?"
The rest of the Bible, however, is filled with more specific instructions for man and wife. I have always thought it intriguing that God commanded Adam and Eve to "leave their homes and cleave to each other" when they had not come from any homes! :-) I do believe that was for our benefit, that we might know an extremely important foundational truth regarding how to ensure the success of a marriage from God's POV. We know that the NT is filled with specific instructions for husbands and wives, and it's all good. If husbands and wives will take God at His Word and obey His instructions, God's blessing will rest upon them and their home, and they will accurately His great love for His own bride to a lost and unbelieving world.
gav-
yes, and i believe the man is the head of the family/house as spoken in the New Testament. That in no way even implies that a woman is to be a doormat or slave. Paul told husbands to love their wives...even as Jesus loves the Church. He laid down his life in both servitude and death for us. And husbands should be willing to do the same. Paul also tells the wives to respect their husbands.
Women seek love and men seek respect...notice how that ties in with what Paul said? If a man loves his wife, she will respect him. And if a woman respects her husband, he will love her. It's a God created circle of love and respect.
jester, RBB and maranatha...
I was away for two days, how are you?
That incident about the lady who dropped out of a carpentry class because her male classmates taunted her about "doing a man's job" is really a very common occurence even in enlightened societies. Men are lovable but they can be strange when it comes to protecting what they consider to be their turf. It's good for men to be protective, but they must be intelligent about it. I think our societies are poorer because men's attitude about women doing "men's jobs" inhibits millions of women from making significant contributions to their societies and also prevents them from realising their full God-given potential!
back to the Garden.....
God was not very specific about Eve's job description when he created her to be a companion and a helper for Adam. I like to believe that he expected them to make an intelligent assessment of their situation after the fall and to realise that if they wanted to subdue the earth and make it livable, they needed to work hand in hand and side by side in every aspect of their life so that together they could make the earth yield forth its hidden treasures.