The Old Politics Thread

rio · **Posted:** Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:40 pm

FrigidSymphony wrote:

Thanks for the links. Will read up. Am severely under-educated in Jewish crimes. Am too lazy to insert pronouns.

Unless you think that all Jews are complicit in them, then they aren't "Jewish crimes"... This is the problem... always thinking in terms of the blanket collective against which action must be taken.

Goat · **Posted:** Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:42 pm

rio wrote:

FrigidSymphony wrote:

Thanks for the links. Will read up. Am severely under-educated in Jewish crimes. Am too lazy to insert pronouns.

Unless you think that all Jews are complicit in them, then they aren't "Jewish crimes"... This is the problem... always thinking in terms of the blanket collective against which action must be taken.

Just about to say something similar. Crimes of certain Zionists, sure. Jewish crimes? The links I mentioned are in line with the terrorism, anyways - one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter, and so on. Some of the people involved are heroes to some.

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:42 pm

rio wrote:

FrigidSymphony wrote:

Thanks for the links. Will read up. Am severely under-educated in Jewish crimes. Am too lazy to insert pronouns.

Unless you think that all Jews are complicit in them, then they aren't "Jewish crimes"... This is the problem... always thinking in terms of the blanket collective against which action must be taken.

I intended it as "crimes done by Jews". Certain Jews. Not all Jews.

There is a difference though- saying that all Muslims are violent is obviously wrong, but saying that Islam is an ideology which raises the predisposition to violence among some of its more literal-minded followers can be defended.

rio · **Posted:** Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:46 pm

FrigidSymphony wrote:

What are you referring to? :S

And yes, when it comes to religion I have very little patience and tolerance. There is absolutely no justification for it.

The quoted passage. You seem to have this complex where everyone else is less rational than you and must have their irrationality stamped out. Society must be engineered and people prevented from acting freely, so that society can assume the form you think is rational. That to me is the hallmark of totalitarianism.

You protest against being called as such, and then within a sentence you are wondering why you should have to "tolerate" something... why tolerate something when you can legislate against it, eh?

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Mon Nov 30, 2009 10:51 pm

Sorry, you said I didn't what something "signifies". What something were you referring to?

I struggle with this as well. I despise irrationality, but I recognize the problem in stamping it out without violating human rights. The best we can do is educate people correctly.

rio · **Posted:** Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:02 pm

FrigidSymphony wrote:

Sorry, you said I didn't what something "signifies". What something were you referring to?

I struggle with this as well. I despise irrationality, but I recognize the problem in stamping it out without violating human rights. The best we can do is educate people correctly.

What, the minarets? I have no idea what they signify, but I would assume for the vast majority of Muslims they aren't a symbol of worldwide domination. You assuming they are seems like wild hyperbole.

Unfortunately if you actually want a free society then you have to entirely relinquish any idea of "stamping out irrationality". I would say one of the basic ingredients for any kind of political freedom is the recognition that no person is in a position to define what should or should not be stamped out. Again, the overwhelming majority of Muslims in no way infringe on you in any sense whatsoever. You have no business at all trying to "stamp out" anything about their beliefs, except for any incitement to actual violence. Which is hardly covered by building a few towers on a mosque.

EisenFaust · **Posted:** Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:13 pm

Oh, good old democracy. Once again you're feasting on your own flesh.

Banning the minarets is just empty symbol-politics with no real substance besides from a signal of intolerance. If anything it will lead to more radicalisation.

You sure have an ambivalent relationship with the Enlightenment, freedom rights and tolerance Frigid. Considering your general attitude around these forums, this recent fascist outburst of yours makes you come off as either someone who can't put a straight line between two points (and you call yourself rational) or a hypocrite. Is it supposed to be "rational" to be so much at the mercy of your feelings that you forget to even consider the implications of what you're saying? Stamping out the irrationals (or unbelievers or whatever group disagrees with your worldview) in any way, sounds more like the ideas of the Iranian theocracy than of a rational thinker. One mans education is another mans indoctrination. What if the christians or muslims decided that what you needed was a good and 'correct' base education in morals and creationism? But I guess it's too much to ask that your so-called rationality should be able contend with your prejudice. After all you are raised in a country that is apparently populated by a majority of xenophobic twats.

Cheers to hypocrisy and bigotry!

Thomas · **Posted:** Tue Dec 01, 2009 3:28 pm

What baffles me is how the Swiss think they actually can accomplish something with this. Aren't we trying to make the world a better place? It can be discussed back and forth if banning all religion will make that happen, but then again we all know that that won't happen in the next couple of years.

So what are they trying to accomplish? Sending a signal? Maybe, but it will only create riot and violence if anything, and I actually understand that reaction. I'm to be found on the right side of po0litics, but this is just foolishness. Nothing more, nothing less. Trying to force laws like this on the world's second biggest, if not biggest religion, will only cause trouble, and they damn well know it.

Karmakosmonaut · **Posted:** Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:00 pm

Patriotism and conservatism = fascism on these boards. Aha.

Goat · **Posted:** Tue Dec 01, 2009 4:12 pm

Karmakosmonaut wrote:

Patriotism and conservatism = fascism on these boards. Aha.

Well, patriotism = nationalism. And forcing people to be nationalist = fascism.

traptunderice · **Posted:** Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:03 pm

Goat wrote:

Karmakosmonaut wrote:

Patriotism and conservatism = fascism on these boards. Aha.

Well, patriotism = nationalism. And forcing people to be nationalist = fascism.

Damn that's what I was going to say. We, liberals, are such a flock. Right, k-naut?

When does conservatism equal banning religious symbols? Conservatism in the realm of liberalism and democracy shouldn't equal intolerance towards a group and their architecture or am I doing it wrong? Under capitalism isn't it basically if I got the money I can do whatever the hell I want with it? Or wait does capitalism go hand in hand with infringing on rights!? No way.

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Tue Dec 01, 2009 6:23 pm

The Progress Report wrote:

RADICAL RIGHT -- PASTOR RICK WARREN REFUSES TO CONDEMN UGANDAN LAW MAKING HOMOSEXUAL ACTS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH: The Ugandan parliament is currently considering an "Anti-Homosexuality Bill," under which any person "convicted of gay sex is liable to life imprisonment." If that person is HIV positive or has sex with a minor or a person with a disability, he or she would be guilty of "aggravated homosexuality" and face the death penalty. The bill also proposes up to three years of imprisonment for anyone who "fails to report within 24 hours the identities of everyone they know who is lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender, or who supports human rights for people who are." There are approximately 500,000 gay men and women living in Uganda. The author of the bill is Ugandan Parliamentarian David Bahati, who organizes the Ugandan National Prayer Breakfast and has been embraced by the far right in the United States. Journalist Jeff Sharlet, who has chronicled the secretive international Christian organization known as "The Family," says Bahati is "a core member" of the group, which has links to prominent U.S. politicians. Pastor Rick Warren -- whom President Obama controversially chose to deliver the invocation at his inauguration -- is now refusing to condemn Bahati's bill, which has been endorsed by Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa. Ssempa has been welcomed by Warren's family and made appearances at his church. Newsweek reports that although Warren has distanced himself from Ssempa's views, he won't come out against the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. "[I]t is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations," said Warren. Both UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper have publicly condemned the Ugandan bill. Yesterday, on the eve of World AIDS Day, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton "made the strongest statement yet by an administration official that the United States will not tolerate efforts to criminalize homosexuality among countries that receive U.S. funding to combat HIV/AIDS."

Gahh.

Wintermute · **Posted:** Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:42 am

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:37 pm

In response to the Swiss minaret ban, Ghedaffi has issued a ban on the further construction of church spires in Libia.
:lol:

Kathaarian · **Posted:** Thu Dec 03, 2009 2:52 pm

Way to top Libya on bigotry Switzerland.

crast · **Joined:** Thu Feb 09, 2006 1:29 pm **Posts:** 1502

FrigidSymphony wrote:

The Progress Report wrote:

RADICAL RIGHT -- PASTOR RICK WARREN REFUSES TO CONDEMN UGANDAN LAW MAKING HOMOSEXUAL ACTS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH: The Ugandan parliament is currently considering an "Anti-Homosexuality Bill," under which any person "convicted of gay sex is liable to life imprisonment." If that person is HIV positive or has sex with a minor or a person with a disability, he or she would be guilty of "aggravated homosexuality" and face the death penalty. The bill also proposes up to three years of imprisonment for anyone who "fails to report within 24 hours the identities of everyone they know who is lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender, or who supports human rights for people who are." There are approximately 500,000 gay men and women living in Uganda. The author of the bill is Ugandan Parliamentarian David Bahati, who organizes the Ugandan National Prayer Breakfast and has been embraced by the far right in the United States. Journalist Jeff Sharlet, who has chronicled the secretive international Christian organization known as "The Family," says Bahati is "a core member" of the group, which has links to prominent U.S. politicians. Pastor Rick Warren -- whom President Obama controversially chose to deliver the invocation at his inauguration -- is now refusing to condemn Bahati's bill, which has been endorsed by Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa. Ssempa has been welcomed by Warren's family and made appearances at his church. Newsweek reports that although Warren has distanced himself from Ssempa's views, he won't come out against the Anti-Homosexuality Bill. "[I]t is not my personal calling as a pastor in America to comment or interfere in the political process of other nations," said Warren. Both UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper have publicly condemned the Ugandan bill. Yesterday, on the eve of World AIDS Day, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton "made the strongest statement yet by an administration official that the United States will not tolerate efforts to criminalize homosexuality among countries that receive U.S. funding to combat HIV/AIDS."

Gahh.

lulz at "aggravated Homosexuality"

They need to listen to Louis CK.. Especially 1:40 and forward!

:lol:

.:crast:.

Goat · **Posted:** Thu Dec 03, 2009 3:40 pm

Apparently Murdoch wants to bring Fox News-style reporting over here.

rio · **Posted:** Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:37 pm

To be fair our tabloids taught FOX everything it knows in the first place... what a tosser Murdoch is. Can't believe he got his son to have a go at the BBC.

Goat · **Posted:** Sun Dec 06, 2009 2:14 pm

Christ, Question Time was a fuck this week. Even Margaret Beckett came off better than that Allsopp cow.

Speedyjx · **Posted:** Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:38 pm

Goat wrote:

Christ, Question Time was a fuck this week. Even Margaret Beckett came off better than that Allsopp cow.

I've not caught up with it yet, what happened?

Metal Reviews

The Old Politics Thread

Who is online