Message boards :
Politics :
Against ALL women - Infanticide, Slavery, Rape, Trafficking... (#3)
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 18 · 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 . . . 42 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30673 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Orthodox Jews and Saudi's would; and as has been said all opinions are .... Since each group is attempting to force compliance with its beliefs, but only one through government institutions ... should government institutions be used to force compliance with beliefs? Yes, England is a state religion, I know that. I think sometimes the English forget that or desperately want to forget it. In England the schools are funded by the government. They take public money. To then say they will turn away students from their doors who are dropped off by their mothers is not their business is just daft. Even by American standards, the public schools cannot do stuff like that. In the USA the government does not support religious schools, so actually they would be free to do that. Queue quote from Constitution. So again, I am not really sure what your point is. Point being you have one group attempting to force another to go against their beliefs. If that is allowed, assume your group is no longer in power and are now the hated ones, what will you be forced to do against your wishes? Actually as a feminist you know that, so you are validating the control measures of a patriarchal society in arguing for a feminist view. Catch 22. [We could mention what Canada did to their Native Americans as an example, but that might be over the top.] There is an out, but it wasn't taken. The out being, simply telling the school it has done this violation of public policy, so it no longer gets any taxpayer money, but they are still free to prohibit women drivers of the students. BTW I'm a bit surprised the Church of England is in the business of running Orthodox Jewish schools. |
Мишель Send message Joined: 26 Nov 13 Posts: 3073 Credit: 87,868 RAC: 0 |
Point being you have one group attempting to force another to go against their beliefs. You mean their recently added beliefs? Because up until a short while ago women were allowed to drive to drop their kids off at school. Lets not pretend that this is some ancient, deeply held belief. If that is allowed, assume your group is no longer in power and are now the hated ones, what will you be forced to do against your wishes? Actually as a feminist you know that, so you are validating the control measures of a patriarchal society in arguing for a feminist view. Catch 22. [We could mention what Canada did to their Native Americans as an example, but that might be over the top.] When in Rome, do what the Romans do. If they want to ban women from driving to school, thats their business if they did it in a country where they are the majority. But as long as they are in the UK, there are limits in how far they can go with implementing their belief structure. And again, its not like they are being banned from following their religion. For the most part, they are free to do whatever they want to do. No one is forcing them to convert to a different religion, or eat pork, etc. Indeed, I can only hope that if Ultra Orthodox Jews ever take over the West they will give non Jews the freedom of religion that we have given them. There is an out, but it wasn't taken. The out being, simply telling the school it has done this violation of public policy, so it no longer gets any taxpayer money, but they are still free to prohibit women drivers of the students. Thats not an out if your public policy is to create an integrated society, rather than a society consisting of a bunch of isolated cultures that don't interact with each other. Ultra Orthodox Jews are already problematic in this regard, given how non involved they tend to be except when it concerns them directly (even in Israel). Just giving them what they want while taking away their funding is sending the message that you don't care about how they treat their women, you just wont pay them for it. |
Sirius B Send message Joined: 26 Dec 00 Posts: 24879 Credit: 3,081,182 RAC: 7 |
The past 2 weeks I personally feel has been hellish. What I have witnessed & learnt is nothing short of despicable, made much worse by those within the justice system. There is nothing wrong with the justice system as 9/10 it works the way it should do. The problem is an issue that I have stated many times in life as well as on these boards: - There is nothing wrong with any organisation as an entity, the problem lies with those within those organisations! The trial itself ended at 15:45 Thursday when the jury retired for their deliberations, unfortunately the jury needs direction on count 3 & as it was 15:45 on a Friday evening, the judge & counsel did not want to put pressure on the jury, so all parties have to return on Monday morning, which means I cannot post my views until the case is over. However, while outside the courthouse during lunch, the BBC was there (not for our case). Got chatting to the cameraman. during the course of that conversation, he texted the reporter who then questioned me. She got nowhere & detected from my tone of voice to disappear quickly. The BBC was there to report on a shocking case (those in the UK may have seen it yesterday). A young mother left her child unattended in the bath. Fortunately the paramedics revived the child & reported the matter. To see the woman in question in the court cafeteria & to hear what she was spouting... ...Also 8 months pregnant. All I can say is God help those children & from what I've heard & seen these past two weeks, I've come to the conclusion that sometimes women are their own worst enemies! |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30673 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Thats not an out if your public policy is to create an integrated society, rather than a society consisting of a bunch of isolated cultures that don't interact with each other. Ultra Orthodox Jews are already problematic in this regard, given how non involved they tend to be except when it concerns them directly (even in Israel). Just giving them what they want while taking away their funding is sending the message that you don't care about how they treat their women, you just wont pay them for it. What an incredibly racist view. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Thats not an out if your public policy is to create an integrated society, rather than a society consisting of a bunch of isolated cultures that don't interact with each other. Ultra Orthodox Jews are already problematic in this regard, given how non involved they tend to be except when it concerns them directly (even in Israel). Just giving them what they want while taking away their funding is sending the message that you don't care about how they treat their women, you just wont pay them for it. Welcome to the concept of intersectionality. Fun isn't it? So where do we we draw the line between respecting cultures even if those cultures are sexist and hateful? Personally I think we draw the line when the people in those cultures no longer have a choice. For example, the women can chose not to drive their kids to school, but the moment there are 'punishments' or 'sanctions' against those that choose to do it, then it is government's job to step in and protect them. For someone who is so for 'freedom of choice' I would have thought you would understand this concept. You seem to think it is ok for people to force these women not to drive and you seem to have missed the point that no one is forcing them to drive if they don't want to. Reality Internet Personality |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30673 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Punishment? Like atone for your sins? Make a special donation? Confess and say a few special prayers? Or assault and battery? OBW since apparently allowing your children to walk anywhere is prohibited, it would force the dads to drive. |
Мишель Send message Joined: 26 Nov 13 Posts: 3073 Credit: 87,868 RAC: 0 |
Thats not an out if your public policy is to create an integrated society, rather than a society consisting of a bunch of isolated cultures that don't interact with each other. Ultra Orthodox Jews are already problematic in this regard, given how non involved they tend to be except when it concerns them directly (even in Israel). Just giving them what they want while taking away their funding is sending the message that you don't care about how they treat their women, you just wont pay them for it. Riiiiighhhttttt... Do explain how that is racist. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Punishment? Like atone for your sins? Make a special donation? Confess and say a few special prayers? Or assault and battery? Again. Please read the article. At least pretend to be somewhat engaged in this discussion. Children who are droppped off at school in a car by their mothers will be turned away. It is obvious to me that you have never been a parent as you would understand that no, the fathers would not necessarily be forced the drive. If they have arranged the childcare such that the wife is taking care of the children, he probably has other commitments. The mothers would be forced to walk or take the bus. Especially if the "culture" is as sexist as it appears to be. So they can "choose" to leave. So you are then suggesting that in a religion that has already shown to be sexist, the father would allow the children to be moved to another school? So what should the mother do? I suppose she can "choose" to leave her husband, break up her family, fight an expensive custody battle over the children, end up in poverty, be cast out from her family, or she can not drive anywhere. I wonder which one she will "choose". Its funny how complacent you are when its not your gender. How would you feel about people passing a rule that men aren't allowed to drive? Wouldn't a part of you feel very uncomfortable at the thought? I am getting the very strong impression from you that its only women and you don't know what the fuss is about. Reality Internet Personality |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Why the patriarchy is bad for men: (warning, there is strong language, but the article is definitely a must read for all the fellas here) Masculinity Is Killing Men: The Roots of Men and Trauma Reality Internet Personality |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30673 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Punishment? Like atone for your sins? Make a special donation? Confess and say a few special prayers? Or assault and battery? Scream and moan, because your religion of mommy drive isn't being enforced upon all. [I'm rather sure you will be reincarnated under sharia law, if there is balance in the universe.] What makes you think she would even want to drive? Remember she has been indoctrinated into this religion since birth. I'm sure it is a mortal sin to oppose the rabbi. You seem to want to pick and choose what religious practice you will allow others to engage in. Do you want to ban any religion except your own? Are you so sure that your own thinking is superior that you will force it upon others? Isn't that a two way street, that others should be able to enforce their thinking upon you? You don't get freedom, do you? Or is it principals you don't get? Or both? Also you might just go back to my first post on this and find the word repugnant in it and then look that word up in a dictionary. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
Scream and moan, because your religion of mommy drive isn't being enforced upon all. [I'm rather sure you will be reincarnated under sharia law, if there is balance in the universe.] So, we finally see the truth of who Gary is. I think you are being disingenious because you know full well the difference between forcing someone to drive (which is not happening) and forcing them not to drive (which is happening). For a libertarian you really like to pick and choose what you think freedom is. What makes you think she would even want to drive? Remember she has been indoctrinated into this religion since birth. I'm sure it is a mortal sin to oppose the rabbi. If she doesn't, why would the school feel the need to impost sanctions? You seem to want to pick and choose what religious practice you will allow others to engage in. Do you want to ban any religion except your own? Are you so sure that your own thinking is superior that you will force it upon others? Isn't that a two way street, that others should be able to enforce their thinking upon you? The fact that you think equal rights is a religion says so much about you, Gary. That you would even think to frame protection for women who are not equal and therefore not free to choose as a religion is really quite disturbing. You don't get freedom, do you? Or is it principals you don't get? Or both? Freedom for who Gary? For the men in charge? Because you are doing your damnedest to protect them. I don't think you understand the concept of freedom and that it just doesn't magically appear when you leave things alone. Also you might just go back to my first post on this and find the word repugnant in it and then look that word up in a dictionary. Oh, I don't need to. You've given me quite the example with your post. Reality Internet Personality |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30673 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Scream and moan, because your religion of mommy drive isn't being enforced upon all. [I'm rather sure you will be reincarnated under sharia law, if there is balance in the universe.] ES, you have no idea how to allow others to be free, or what doing so entails. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
... So you are saying that you want to give people the freedom to be oppressed? I'm sorry, Gary. You are just not making sense. Reality Internet Personality |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
Here here Es . Gary it's you Americans that don't get what freedom is mate So here is what it is . It's a set of rules all in the country abide buy and agree to live by . Freedom in a nutshell got it ! Americans are so free you need a licence to drive or you can end up in jail . American are so free you have no choice but to pay taxes or the I.R.S come after you and you go to jail It's a set of rules you all agree to live buy full stop . |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30673 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
... You can't step back from your microscope can you? You grant your government the right to dictate how a religion shall be practiced. English hegemony. All shall follow or else. What an incredibly oppressive state you seek. Totally repugnant. In actuality no different than what ISIL seeks. You don't know freedom, nor can you allow others to have it. Freedom is not telling others how to run their life. Freedom isn't making moral judgements for others. Freedom isn't imposing your morals on others. But you insist on doing all of these and more. Try and step back, open your hermetic seal, and see what you argue for. Or is your position that it is impossible to consent to live by the rules of a religion? If so, you haven't been saying anything like that. Nor have you been saying that if you violate rules that there should not be consequences. Nor have you been saying that Orthodox Jewish women have been kidnapped and forced into the life. Nor have you been saying it is impossible to leave, hard maybe, impossible no. ES, it is their religion. They get to decide their rules. You can't seem to accept that. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30673 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Here here Es . Yes Glenn, rule agreed to, we don't tell you haw to practice your religion. |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
... I think you are losing the plot Gary. To compare asking for protection for women to setting up an ISIL state is a little bit out there, even from you. You don't know freedom, nor can you allow others to have it. Freedom is not telling others how to run their life. Freedom isn't making moral judgements for others. Freedom isn't imposing your morals on others. But you insist on doing all of these and more. What are you not understanding about the idea of needing to protect those freedoms? People try to force women not to drive by imposing sanctions against them. This is not freedom. Protecting the right for women to chose whether to driver or not to drive. That is freedom. The freedom you are trying to protect is the freedom of men to oppress women, which really makes me wonder who you think is entitled to freedom. Try and step back, open your hermetic seal, and see what you argue for. I am really not the zealot here, Gary, you've already expressed the wish that I be reincarnated in Saudi Arabia, which to be honest is a rather vile and horrible thing to say to a woman. It is certainly a reflection of your "libertarian" zeal...of course your libetarian ideals seem to only apply to those who can enforce their wishes by money or strength. Ick. Or is your position that it is impossible to consent to live by the rules of a religion? If so, you haven't been saying anything like that. Nor have you been saying that if you violate rules that there should not be consequences. Nor have you been saying that Orthodox Jewish women have been kidnapped and forced into the life. Nor have you been saying it is impossible to leave, hard maybe, impossible no. Oh Gary, you are so ignorant as to why women stay in abusive situations and how they end up there. So ignorant. ES, it is their religion. They get to decide their rules. You can't seem to accept that. They can decide what rules they want, and people should be allowed to decide whether to follow them. Rabbi says "women shouldn't drive" women can chose to listen or not to listen. The minute you start to enforce those rules with sanctions that have real and quite negative consequences for those affected you are not protecting freedoms, you are protecting someone's freedom to abuse. It sounds to me like you are the one who wants to see Saudi Arabia style law in the UK in the name of "freedom" and you are the one who can't see how insane that is. Reality Internet Personality |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
So you support beheadings by ISIL then? Reality Internet Personality |
Darth Beaver Send message Joined: 20 Aug 99 Posts: 6728 Credit: 21,443,075 RAC: 3 |
So you support beheadings by ISIL then? No . I'm agreeing with you . In England there is no law that i know of that says a woman should not be allowed to drive so you are correct a Rabbi that makes up there own rules outside of what the whole country has agreed to is wrong In the case of Isil they do have the right to agree to any laws they wish and still call it freedom , however there may be very bad consequences for having the wrong rules if those rules are at odds with the rest of the world . |
Es99 Send message Joined: 23 Aug 05 Posts: 10874 Credit: 350,402 RAC: 0 |
So you support beheadings by ISIL then? My reply was to Gary who seems to think religious freedom trumps all other freedoms. Reality Internet Personality |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.