Elsewhere on the internet...

The League of Reason has some social media accounts! You can find us on Facebook or on Twitter for some interesting links and things.

Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 5
 [ 89 posts ] 
Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?
Author Message
Dogma's DemisePosts: 576Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 2:23 am

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Prolescum wrote:You can say what you like about a specific aspect of someone else's culture, customs, traditions, idioms or whatever, but that view is coloured by your own culture and therefore, the view is relative. Your perspective on that particular facet may not be the same coming from another cultural reference point.


Well yeah, if you discard rationality, medical implications etc. sure you could say a cultural practice like FGM is "relative".

See why I don't buy into it now?

Also, you defend Sharia arbitration, and that does discriminate against women, so UK is now accommodating 7th century practices. Who's next and when will it stop?

Is it within the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt's four freedoms that governments legislate what you can and cannot wear?


Look, I honestly don't care what people wear, you can wear an entire SWAT team uniform for all I care (without the official inscriptions of course), but inside a bank (or any other place of business really) the owner may have certain dress codes or may require you to show your face. And religious freedom shouldn't make them exempt from that.

It's not "islamophobic", to not want people wearing disguises in your shop.

Prolescum wrote:So following this train of thought (that values aren't relative), where do you draw the line between values and morals?
Are morals relative?


Look, my entire moral philosophy is based on the idea that pain/suffering is inherently bad and pleasure/happiness is inherently good. It's an axiom, you could even say I take it on faith as much as I take that the Universe is real, not a computer simulation. :lol:

I cannot accept morality as relative because that would mean complete chaos in society.

Values, morals, well values are more general concepts, like gender equality or individual liberty. Morals more specific statements like "it's wrong to drive at 200mph".

What makes something "first world" or "third world" is a dribble from the mouth of a chap who uses risibly anachronistic terminology.


How so?
"I have no religion, and at times I wish all religions at the bottom of the sea. He is a weak ruler who needs religion to uphold his government" - Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
Mon Jul 02, 2012 3:20 pm
)O( Hytegia )O(League LegendUser avatarPosts: 3135Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:27 pm Gender: Cake

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Dogma's Demise wrote:
Prolescum wrote:So following this train of thought (that values aren't relative), where do you draw the line between values and morals?
Are morals relative?


Look, my entire moral philosophy is based on the idea that pain/suffering is inherently bad and pleasure/happiness is inherently good. It's an axiom, you could even say I take it on faith as much as I take that the Universe is real, not a computer simulation. :lol:


Values, morals, well values are more general concepts, like gender equality or individual liberty. Morals more specific statements like "it's wrong to drive at 200mph".


I'm about to blow your mind, man.
Driving a vehicle ridiculously fast (in the 150-200 mph range) is a fun, pleasurable activity.

If you say otherwise then you obviously have never done it or your own morals are relative, since they are based on sheer relative and wavering standards.
Some would insinuate that being drunk at 9 in the morning to be signs of serious issues.
Me? I'd insinuate it as signs of no plans and a refrigerator full of Whiskey and Guinness.
Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:21 pm
ProlescumWebhamsterUser avatarPosts: 5007Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:41 pmLocation: Peptone-upon-Sores

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Dogma's Demise wrote:
Prolescum wrote:You can say what you like about a specific aspect of someone else's culture, customs, traditions, idioms or whatever, but that view is coloured by your own culture and therefore, the view is relative. Your perspective on that particular facet may not be the same coming from another cultural reference point.



Well yeah, if you discard rationality, medical implications etc. sure you could say a cultural practice like FGM is "relative".


Me: Your cultural viewpoint is relative
Dog: I don't know what that means, but here's an example of a thing you don't support but suits my rhetoric and casts subtle aspersions upon my detractors.


Listen pumpkin, saying that culture is relative does not imply acceptance of any and all cultural practice. Get your head out of your arse, the methane is having a seriously deleterious effect on your mind.

See why I don't buy into it now?


Yes, you're like those people who bought The Celestine Prophecy and suddenly became practitioners of Reiki. I pity you. I really do.

Also, you defend Sharia arbitration


No, I dismissed it as irrelevant. Look, I know English isn't your first language, and I give you some leeway, but for fuck's sake, at least try to keep abreast of the general gist.

This mindset you have I'm against X, he's against my views of X, therefore he's for X, is fucking ridiculous. Get a fucking grip.

and that does discriminate against women, so UK is now accommodating 7th century practices.


I'm not going to explain arbitration to you again. Spew your fact-free whargarble somewhere else please.

Who's next and when will it stop?


THINK OF THE CHILDREN! Kindly keep your logical fallacies to a minimum, I'm getting tired of all this laughing.

Nice of you to avoid those questions (Is it legal, or is it likely to become legal, for Muslims to discriminate against women because it's their culture? and Is it legal, or is it likely to become legal, for Muslims marry multiple women in the west?), seeing as they are the two items you're using to appeal to my emotions.

Dishonesty should be expected, I suppose. That's the problem with being an optimist; you're always disappointed.

Dogma's Demise wrote:
Prolescum wrote:Is it within the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt's four freedoms that governments legislate what you can and cannot wear?


Look, I honestly don't care what people wear, you can wear an entire SWAT team uniform for all I care (without the official inscriptions of course), but inside a bank (or any other place of business really) the owner may have certain dress codes or may require you to show your face. And religious freedom shouldn't make them exempt from that.


So, do you have the numbers of Muslims in western countries who mask their face? Let's make it easier: how many are there in, say, France where they definitely have figures? This may be the first in a series of questions.

It's not "islamophobic", to not want people wearing disguises in your shop.


No, it's Islamophobic to use three hundred posts to spread half-truths and propaganda, omit that which disputes your assertions, and mix it all up with spurious reasoning and as many fallacies as you can fit in a TARDIS, all while pretending it's in the name of secularism, all directed solely at Muslims.

It's such comically typical Islamophobic behaviour, I will be using you as an example for years. Everywhere.

Dogma's Demise wrote:
Prolescum wrote:So following this train of thought (that values aren't relative), where do you draw the line between values and morals?
Are morals relative?


Look, my entire moral philosophy is based on the idea that pain/suffering is inherently bad and pleasure/happiness is inherently good. It's an axiom, you could even say I take it on faith as much as I take that the Universe is real, not a computer simulation. :lol:


...and here we have yet another "I'm not so bad... see, I like kittens!" as if that somehow softens the rest of your rhetoric. Once again, utterly laughable.

Dogma's Demise wrote:I cannot accept morality as relative because that would mean complete chaos in society.


So which morals are objective? A complete list, please.

Values, morals, well values are more general concepts, like gender equality or individual liberty. Morals more specific statements like "it's wrong to drive at 200mph".


Oh lordy. Where's my Doctor Who facepalm smiley?

Never mind, this one's bigger.

Image


Dogma's Demise wrote:
Prolescum wrote:What makes something "first world" or "third world" is a dribble from the mouth of a chap who uses risibly anachronistic terminology.


How so?



Go and read a book that isn't about Muslims, I'm not paid to teach you history.
if constructive debate is allowed to progress, better ideas will ultimately supplant worse ideas.

Comment is free, but facts are sacred
Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:36 pm
EpiquinnUser avatarPosts: 93Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 8:54 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Can someone explain what it really means that "cultures are relative"?
Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:39 pm
ProlescumWebhamsterUser avatarPosts: 5007Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:41 pmLocation: Peptone-upon-Sores

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Epiquinn wrote:Can someone explain what it really means that "cultures are relative"?


http://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction ... relative_2

being judged or measured in comparison with something else
if constructive debate is allowed to progress, better ideas will ultimately supplant worse ideas.

Comment is free, but facts are sacred
Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:42 pm
EpiquinnUser avatarPosts: 93Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 8:54 pm Gender: Male

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Ok, so when we "judge or measure" things in cultures, what is it that we compare them with?
Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:50 pm
)O( Hytegia )O(League LegendUser avatarPosts: 3135Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:27 pm Gender: Cake

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Epiquinn wrote:Can someone explain what it really means that "cultures are relative"?


That cultures have different practices, customs, traditions, tastes, and so on that are alien to anyone who would look from outside in to view.
An example is that I would bow from the hip in Japan as a professional greeting, and call everyone by their last names even in informal stances - it's just part of the culture. In India or many places in the Middle East it's offensive to offer your left hand to shake because you wipe your ass with your left hand (or you're supposed to).
There's several cultures that have a child tattooed with a tribal symbol as a passage of manhood.

Many things in those cultures cannot be adequately spoken on by people from other cultures due to the fact that the people raised within those cultures would willingly submit to their own culture's practices and traditions of their own free will and understanding of these traditions and practices.

However, just because someone can say that cultures are relative doesn't mean they advocate the occurrences within them. I don't support FGM, but I understand that it's a cultural thing that can't be handled forcefully - doing so would be a direct attack on the people whom hold those values, and it would be antagonistic towards certain goals.
Some would insinuate that being drunk at 9 in the morning to be signs of serious issues.
Me? I'd insinuate it as signs of no plans and a refrigerator full of Whiskey and Guinness.
Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:54 pm
ProlescumWebhamsterUser avatarPosts: 5007Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:41 pmLocation: Peptone-upon-Sores

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

Epiquinn wrote:Ok, so when we "judge or measure" things in cultures, what is it that we compare them with?


Usually our own. An example might be the descriptions of Native American tribes as savages in literature of or describing the time of westward expansion. We built houses while they lived in tents. It didn't occur to them that those tribes moved with the seasonal migrations of the wildlife, or if it did, it suited their position to describe them that way.

Houses are better in some respects, sure, but are they better for a travelling population? We (not you and I) thought they were just far below us on the cultural sophistication scale.
if constructive debate is allowed to progress, better ideas will ultimately supplant worse ideas.

Comment is free, but facts are sacred
Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:13 pm
Dogma's DemisePosts: 576Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 2:23 am

Post Re: Criticizing Islam now illegal in Finland?

)O( Hytegia )O( wrote:However, just because someone can say that cultures are relative doesn't mean they advocate the occurrences within them. I don't support FGM, but I understand that it's a cultural thing that can't be handled forcefully - doing so would be a direct attack on the people whom hold those values, and it would be antagonistic towards certain goals.


This is where I think we are going to have fundamentally irreconcilable differences.

No, it should be handled forcefully when possible (i.e. when it's happening on your own soil) It's one of the most despicable forms of sexual assault against a minor, akin to chopping half of a penis.

(Not to be confused with male circumcision, which isn't as extreme as FGM. Although I would say I'm against the practice, I think there's some room for debate here.)
"I have no religion, and at times I wish all religions at the bottom of the sea. He is a weak ruler who needs religion to uphold his government" - Mustafa Kemal Atatürk
Mon Jul 02, 2012 5:16 pm
Previous
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 5 of 5
 [ 89 posts ] 
Return to Politics & Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Akamia, Tree and 3 guests