|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
posted December 02, 2009 10:57 PM |
|
|
Quote:
As usual you make ZERO sense whatsoever. If you want to use analogies give PROPER ones.
Made my day...
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 10:58 PM |
|
|
Quote:
your point being? adhering to authority, is that correct? is that what you are advocating here? we adhere to the marvelous rulers in the western civilization?
The irony is "the marvelous rulers in the western civilization" in this case were against the ban - it was the common people who voted for it.Quote:
Example 2:
Religious dude: "Priest says you sin, and must be punished."
Homosexual: "I understand God's will and I am prepared to be punished for my sins."
he gets tortured. Perfectly ok. He gave his consent.
Let me ask you something, who are you to stop him?
It's never that simple in the real world; nobody in their right mind consents to torture. It takes generations of religious indoctrination for people to accept such things. Back on topic, give several generations of women in Saudi Arabia the right to vote, work everywhere and drive a car and see if they'd be so crazy about honoring tradition and wearing a burka. Quote:
Who are you to stop other people from suiciding? Their nanny? Do they not have the right TO THEIR OWN LIFE?
The irony is it's religion that forbids suicide, not secular laws.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:03 PM |
|
|
@angelito: it's easy to dismiss something but I even explained why his analogy made no sense (or if it did, to explain me what does "my consent" goes analogous to), unlike what you (plural) which rarely do -- you call it a waste of time, I call it not being able to refute it properly.
Quote:
The irony is "the marvelous rulers in the western civilization" in this case were against the ban - it was the common people who voted for it.
Cool for them then, I was making a point. Switzerland sucks anyway, being a direct democracy, which is another word for tyranny by majority.
Quote:
It's never that simple in the real world; nobody in their right mind consents to torture. It takes generations of religious indoctrination for people to accept such things. Back on topic, give several generations of women in Saudi Arabia the right to vote, work everywhere and drive a car and see if they'd be so crazy about honoring tradition and wearing a burka.
Possibly, but how is that relevant? They are the way they are -- it seems to me like "if it's not like me, it MUST be doing it the wrong way, therefore UNTIL it is like me, I will say we have to 'keep educating' them about it."
Quote:
The irony is it's religion that forbids suicide, not secular laws.
I don't remember I was explicitly talking about religion though; I was speaking about personal freedom in general.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
pei
Famous Hero
Fresh Air.
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:19 PM |
|
|
People are ****, no matter if they are homosexuals or hetero or something else and I always thought that these **** should behave in public and do whatever they want in non-public areas.
Laws have bases, like the morality principle, that seem unable to specify correctly how a person can harm another.
It doesnt matter what you believe is right, what matters is what the others believe is right: there are different religious beliefs & laws applied in different places of the world and it is the majority of the population of a certain area the one that dictates how things should be.
Its called culture.
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:19 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 23:20, 02 Dec 2009.
|
Quote:
give several generations of women (...) the right to (...) drive a car
Jesus Christ are you out of your mind man
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:23 PM |
|
Edited by vlaad at 23:26, 02 Dec 2009.
|
Quote:
Cool for them then, I was making a point. Switzerland sucks anyway, being a direct democracy, which is another word for tyranny by majority.
Which system do you prefer? Aside from imaginary ones, which are not the topic here. Furthermore, how would you deal with the immigration issues?
Quote:
Possibly, but how is that relevant? They are the way they are -- it seems to me like "if it's not like me, it MUST be doing it the wrong way, therefore UNTIL it is like me, I will say we have to 'keep educating' them about it."
It is relevant. First, that's the attitude the minority upholds too - they just lack the means to enforce their values. Second, you were defending personal freedom throughout the thread; it is illusionary to speak of freedom of choice if generations of women were brainwashed.Quote:
Quote:
The irony is it's religion that forbids suicide, not secular laws.
I don't remember I was explicitly talking about religion though; I was speaking about personal freedom in general.
No, see the context: that was what JJ's post you quoted was about, that's what this thread is about - Muslim religious freedom vs. Western secular laws and values.
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:29 PM |
|
|
JJ:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Now, for killing all kinds of people - even euthanasia is forbidden, so even if someone would give their consent to be killed - NADA!
Even more ridiculously breach of freedom of choice.
Off-topic.
You're the one who brought it up. 
And anti-discrimination laws like the ones you're talking about are a breach of human liberty and the freedom of association. If I own a restaurant, I'm free to serve someone, right? But I should also be free to not serve someone, if that's what I want.
Death:
Wait, since when do you support freedom?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:33 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 23:34, 02 Dec 2009.
|
Quote:
Which system do you prefer? Aside from imaginary ones, which are not the topic here. Furthermore, how would you deal with the immigration issues?
A system, democratic or not, where your constitutional rights cannot be taken away.Quote:
It is relevant. First, that's the attitude the minority upholds too - they just lack the means to enforce their values. Second, you were defending personal freedom throughout the thread; it is illusionary to speak of freedom of choice if generations of women were brainwashed.
Brainwashing is a different subject altogether, in fact, dare I say that even the other choice is brainwashing -- because even if she says that she consents it's clear that you still don't accept it and say she is brainwashed, which can only mean one thing: you don't give up until you brainwash her yourself. Many women wear burqas not because they want to be subdued but some do because they prefer "outside" men (who they don't know) to not judge her by her looks. (good or bad, they come from a different viewpoint, nothing wrong with that)Quote:
No, see the context: that was what JJ's post you quoted was about, that's what this thread is about - Muslim religious freedom vs. Western secular laws and values.
But like I said, my arguments haven't been strictly ONLY in favor of religion -- if islam was majority and they banned some atheistic signs or something, I would have used the same arguments. Yes, the context right now is about religion, but my arguments are for personal freedom, not religion. I don't hold in my arguments religion as something "special".
Quote:
Death:
Wait, since when do you support freedom?
This is personal civil freedom here, not economical freedom. I've always supported that.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:35 PM |
|
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:38 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 23:39, 02 Dec 2009.
|
Quote:
Freedom of association is also an economic freedom.
But not here, at the context at hand. Oh, and of course, I agree that people should be able to choose who to employ, however, I also think the vast majority should be public (public businesses, in other words), which doesn't discriminate. But that's getting into a socialism economic debate.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:46 PM |
|
Edited by vlaad at 01:05, 03 Dec 2009.
|
Quote:
A system, democratic or not, where your constitutional rights cannot be taken away.
Could you name a specific system or a country that deals with immigration issues in the manner you approve? Again, imaginary ones don't count.
Other than that, I'll have to pull a Shyranis and say that I have nothing more to add to what has already been said.
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted December 02, 2009 11:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Could you name a specific system or a country that deals with immigration issues in the manner you support? Again, imaginary ones don't count.
I'm pretty sure you can't change the constitution simply with votes, can you?
By the way, if it's "imaginary" (I assume it means not put in practice), it's not far-fetched. I mean, not like let's say, an utopian communism with no state.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 01:02 AM |
|
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 08:29 AM |
|
|
Quote:
JJ:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Now, for killing all kinds of people - even euthanasia is forbidden, so even if someone would give their consent to be killed - NADA!
Even more ridiculously breach of freedom of choice.
Off-topic.
You're the one who brought it up.
True, but in a different context. If someone says, it must be right to kill people when they consent, and you say, it's not even considered right everywhere when they have a good reason like excruciating pain, it makes no sense to debate that in this thread - evcen if we would agree about THAT one, it didn't have consequences. It's simple logic. let's call Euthanasia E and Death's demand D. E makes a lot more sense than D, so you can say
If Not E Then Not D. If you've had a class in logic, you know that you CANNOT make this IF E Then D.
There is no logical connection the other way round.
Or see it this way. "You should be allowed calling someone a mean, moronic snow." "You can't even call someone a moron". "You should be able to call someone a moron as well."
Debating the last point has no immediate consequences for the first one.
Quote:
And anti-discrimination laws like the ones you're talking about are a breach of human liberty and the freedom of association. If I own a restaurant, I'm free to serve someone, right? But I should also be free to not serve someone, if that's what I want.
Are you really so keen in living in a society where everyone lives out their petty biasses? Society does think, obviously, that there is no reason to GENERALLY exclude people from something, just because they belong to a certain group. "We don't serve blacks, women, Jews, New Yorker, French". Does that sound like a good thing to you? Note that a sign: "We don't serve John Hamilton anymore because he stole fork and knife and didn't pay the bill", is absolutely ok. I hope you see the difference.
I can't for the life of it imagine why you are so keen on, going into a shop, where you are not served because you are an unmarried white male aged between 20 and 30 because the shop owner believes they all just want to date her, looking for an excuse.
You surely don't want to go back further where every group has their own shops.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 08:39 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Are you really so keen in living in a society where everyone lives out their petty biasses?
Everyone is a little racist deep down inside. Imagine you're in a dark parking garage late at night, when you notice there's a guy in jeans and a t-shirt walking behind you. Now, are your thoughts different depending on whether he's white or black? (If there's no such bias against black people in your society, replace them with Turks.) You may support full equality for blacks - but you'll probably quicken your steps more if the person is black than if he's white.
And if people want to not associate with some, and not serve them, I'd disapprove of them, certainly, but I wouldn't use the coercive power of the state to force them to do what I want. If someone refused to serve me, I'd ask to speak to the manager, but, if the manager confirmed the policy, then I should have no choice but to leave.
In any case, though, it's irrelevant because discrimination is unprofitable. If you refuse to serve blacks, you're cutting off a significant source of income.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 08:41 AM |
|
|
Quote:
You may support full equality for blacks - but you'll probably quicken your steps more if the person is black than if he's white.
Umm, what?
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 09:11 AM |
|
|
You may not have such a black population in Australia, so it wouldn't work for you. Our American members probably understand what I'm talking about, though. The best way I can explain it is if you replace "black" with "Aborigine", although I'm not sure if the associations are the same.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 09:26 AM |
|
Edited by william at 09:35, 03 Dec 2009.
|
|
The association would be the same but for me, personally, it wouldn't matter if it was a dark night and I saw a white or black person just standing there. I'd quicken my steps either way.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 09:32 AM |
|
|
That's true, but I'd say most people would be more alarmed by a black than a white.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted December 03, 2009 09:34 AM |
|
Edited by william at 09:35, 03 Dec 2009.
|
|
I have my doubts about that, and even if it's true, why?
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
