The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Islamic riot

Islamic riot

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 85
  7. 86
  8. 87
  9. Page 88
  10. 89
  11. 90
  12. 91
  13. ...
  14. 103
  15. 104
  16. 105
  17. All
"Where did I state that "...it's all much the same one side or the other..."? "

Didn't say you did, Poirot. It was framed as a question.

And I am certainly not saying that the Enlightenment was all sweetness and light, perfect and unimproveable. Somewhere above, I suggested it was a long-term and unfinished project. I should have added that it was world-wide, with many, many societies contributing to it - that it wasn't and isn't by any means only a Western invention. After all, in what universe should only 'Western' women have equal rights with 'Western' men ? Shouldn't equality be a universal rights ? Should the impartiality of a legal system apply to all within a jurisdiction, equality before the law ?

Or do you actually believe that - in some societies, because after all, it's part of their 'culture' - women should walk five paces behind their fathers/ big brothers/ husbands, eyes cast down ? After all, it's 'cultural' ? Is that it ?

Simple questions, Poirot, not assertions, or mis-quotes.

Here's another one: Should there be a separation of church/mosque/temple and State ? Yes ? No ?

i.e. should we go back to the twelfth century ? Or should we keep working to try to remove the remnants of 'church' in the workings of the State, to the extent that there still are any ? Should we keep trying to improve the lot of our fellow-humans, male and female, by exposing reactionary philosophies where we see the, and refusing to allow them to influence our legal system, in the slightest ?

There are NO neutrals, Poirot. Which path - progress or reaction - do we choose ? It's one world, and we're all in the same boat. If you don't want to be, then stop putting your oar in. Remain an observer.

Cheers,

Joe

:)
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 7 October 2012 9:55:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"..stop putting your oar in. Remain an observer..."

So Loudmouth is the arbiter of who can or cannot contribute in whichever way they please...?

"....It was framed as a question."

No it wasn't. It was constructed as a strawman.

As is this:

"Or do you actually believe that - in some societies, because after all, it's part of their 'culture' - women should walk five paces behind their fathers/big brothers/ husbands eyes cast down ? After all, it's a cultural thing. Is that it ?"

That's quite a construction, full of disingenuous innuendo. (hint - if you're going to construct a strawman while pretending it's a question, don't make it quite so elaborate : )

And while your idealism of Enlightenment values is laudable...the reality is that places like Egypt, once drawn into the fold were taken to the cleaners by a partnership between their dictator and orgaisations such as the World Bank and the IMF. Women suffered as much as men and children by Egypt attaining the mantle of "Top Reformer" for the World Bank. The uprising and consequent disruption in that country is directly attributable to human greed, much of it emanating from "Enlightened" corporate values.
Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 7 October 2012 10:30:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Didn't say it was perfect, Poirot, simply better than whatever came a distant second. And i would include in that 'distant second', perhaps even further back still, all the various forms of revolutionary 'socialism' and Stalinism put into practice so far.

And if not Enlightenment values, what then ? Shari'a ? Feudalism ? Back to burning witches ? Suttee ? Stoning ? Every person for themselves ? Power to the strongest ? Voodoo ? What ?

No, sweetie, there are no neutrals here.

Cheers,

Joe

:)
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 7 October 2012 1:00:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
poirot: Or is it okay for whole peoples to walk five paces behind with eyes cast down deferring to their more "Enlightened" brethren?

They tell me that in the Middle East now Married women have earned some Rights. Now the husbands walk five paces behind his wives.

Isn't that great.

It has something to do with land mines, I think. ;-)
Posted by Jayb, Sunday, 7 October 2012 7:46:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Poirot,

Speaking of straw-men,

"Or is it okay for whole peoples to walk five paces behind with eyes cast down deferring to their more "Enlightened" brethren?"

they don't come much better than that one. Do you realise how appalling - and utterly misplaced - your faux indignation about the Enlightenment seems ? Do you even understand what it was about ? Do you seriously believe that the long, long struggle for human rights, for a better world, for justice and equality, was nothing, neither here nor there, worth bugger-all ? That all value-systems are 'equal' ? Because 'all cultures are equal' ? Christ, even an atheist like me has some notion that 'beat your swords into ploughshares' is a better outlook than 'behead all unbelievers'. Or a Stone Age notion of 'bash their heads in with a rock.' Some systems ARE better than others.

Seriously, if you don't have a dog in this fight - if you want to stay 'neutral', you 'don't want to take sides' - then stay out of it. If you can't see any difference between rights and no-rights, between the domination of one group, men, over others, women, rather than equality - and walking along hand-in-hand, not one behind the other - that any struggle for improving society, for painfully protecting the gains in justice and rights for oppressed groups, (including non-believers), for all people, then you have abdicated your right to stick your oar in.

Is this what sections of the Left have degenerated to ? An utterly amoral 'stance', i.e. non-stance, i.e. make no judgments whatsoever, about ideologies which would exterminate non-believers, if their adherents had half the chance ? Surely you don't really believe what you are condoning ?

'Taking no sides' indeed.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 7 October 2012 8:17:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Condone what?

I haven't stated anything about condoning anything.

I've made a few observations concerning human nature and pointed out that the Enlightenment was a wonderful thing if you happen to live in a country that calls the shots.

Sorry, Loudmouth.

You are not the arbiter of who may or may not contribute to threads, as much as you hold yourself aloft as a morality personified.

Cheers, Chaps : )
Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 7 October 2012 9:08:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 85
  7. 86
  8. 87
  9. Page 88
  10. 89
  11. 90
  12. 91
  13. ...
  14. 103
  15. 104
  16. 105
  17. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy