Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread
Old 11-13-2014, 06:48 PM   #73771
HillaryClitTounge
Hillary Clittongue
 
HillaryClitTounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
Just because a muslim emigrating to Europe would have to acknowledge the right of others to eat ham, it doesn't mean he can't eat whatever he wants.
S why are you selecting a harmless part of the Muslim religion and not the 'they beat their wives' part I just brought up? Because when you consider harmful aspects of cultures, multiculturalism doesn't make any sense. Your entire argument rests on talking people's ears off about easter eggs, MLK and Ghandi, to distract from the many downsides of multiculturalism.

Quote:
I'm not sure wifebeating is "specifically demanded" by Islam, but even if it is it doesn't follow that prohibiting it precludes a genuinely multicultural society.
Yes it is demanded by the Quran, maybe if you weren't so worried about your my typos and grammar you would know that.

Yes it does preclude a genuinely multicultural society if you don't let a culture practice what the culture believes will keep them from hell. Get a grip Smokey. 'Come one, come all, to our magical land of multiculturalism. Just leave those asinine fucking sacred beliefs of yours at the door friend!'

Quote:
I've never said multiculturalism means "acceding to every conceivable cultural demand no matter how repugnant to your own views".
When beating your wife is specifically demanded by your religion's holy text, it is not being 'permitted to do anything and everything'. It is fundamental to your culture and your freedom.[2]

probably the thousandth time you've had to resort to making my argument drasticallymore extreme than intended.

permitted to do anything and everything -=- permitted to religious freedom as it is commonly practiced in your culture

Last edited by HillaryClitTounge; 11-13-2014 at 06:56 PM.
HillaryClitTounge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 06:58 PM   #73772
Ando!
classic ando
 
Ando!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 15,002
stoning adulterers is mandated by the old testament

that doesnt mean stoning is mandated by christianity
Ando! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 07:00 PM   #73773
HillaryClitTounge
Hillary Clittongue
 
HillaryClitTounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Posts: 1,698
yes it does. (modern) Christianity is just filled with fake believers who want the benefits without holding the beliefs.

Muslims also have a much stricter reading of the Quran in general. bad example.

Last edited by HillaryClitTounge; 11-13-2014 at 07:02 PM.
HillaryClitTounge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 07:12 PM   #73774
488878542
mx premier inn
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 590
there's plenty of objectionable shit that's present in islamic religious texts, promoted as proper interpretation by scholars, and strictly adhered to in muslim countries

i mean you only need the last one for it to be a part of their culture anyway, who cares about the first two

the problem is that smokey says you must tolerate exactly this much of other cultures, where this much is some arbitrary amount that he's pulled out of thin air. it's so stupidly inconsistent to say that there have to be limitations to tolerance in order to meet our western standards when your basic position is relativism
488878542 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 07:13 PM   #73775
488878542
mx premier inn
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 590
ooh nothing is intrinsically better than anything else except the specific things that i give a shit about. those things are magic and special.
488878542 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 07:58 PM   #73776
Smokey D
Moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 32,417
Quote:
Yes it is demanded by the Quran, maybe if you weren't so worried about your my typos and grammar you would know that.
I don't make a claim either way. Islam is a big and complicated religion with a very nuanced and not always consistent set of rules etc. So I plead ignorance. I don't need to make a positive one way or the other.

Quote:
Yes it does preclude a genuinely multicultural society if you don't let a culture practice what the culture believes will keep them from hell. Get a grip Smokey. 'Come one, come all, to our magical land of multiculturalism. Just leave those asinine fucking sacred beliefs of yours at the door friend!'
I dunno. It seems ludicrous to say that a society can only be multicultural if it permits honour killings or whatever else you deem to be essential to a particular culture. But if that's what being multicultural means, I'm not a multiculturalist. It's plain Ron's objection goes much further than that in any case.

Quote:
probably the thousandth time you've had to resort to making my argument drasticallymore extreme than intended.

permitted to do anything and everything -=- permitted to religious freedom as it is commonly practiced in your culture
I'm not sure it matters much. You are saying society can only be genuinely multicultural if everyone is permitted to do everything their culture permits or enjoins. I think that's a pretty useless understanding of multiculturalism and doubt many people subscribe to it even theoretically.

Quote:
the problem is that smokey says you must tolerate exactly this much of other cultures, where this much is some arbitrary amount that he's pulled out of thin air. it's so stupidly inconsistent to say that there have to be limitations to tolerance in order to meet our western standards when your basic position is relativism
My basic position is not relativism. My basic position is liberalism, which permits a wide field of action but not everything.
Smokey D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 08:05 PM   #73777
HillaryClitTounge
Hillary Clittongue
 
HillaryClitTounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Posts: 1,698
Quote:
It seems ludicrous to say that a society can only be multicultural if it permits honour killings or whatever else you deem to be essential to a particular culture.
So we are in agreement that the idea of a multicultural society is ridiculous, and is just used by the left as a misnomer to promote their culture of anti-white racism over all others.

All RouteOne is saying is it is a zero-sum game. If you want to preserve your culture you cant allow other cultures to not only immigrate but also demand things like Shariah Law, 1st language Spanish in public US schools, right to not pay taxes on churches etc.

Last edited by HillaryClitTounge; 11-13-2014 at 08:11 PM.
HillaryClitTounge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 08:12 PM   #73778
Smokey D
Moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 32,417
Quote:
So we are in agreement that the idea of a multicultural society is ridiculous, and is just used by the left as a misnomer to promote their culture of anti-white racism over all others.
No we're not in agreement you lunatic.

Quote:
All RouteOne is saying is it is a zero-sum game. If you want to preserve your culture you cant allow other cultures to not only immigrate but also demand things like Shariah Law, 1st language Spanish in public US schools, right to not pay taxes on churches etc.
It's not a zero sum game.
Smokey D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 08:24 PM   #73779
488878542
mx premier inn
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 590
if the goal is liberalism then why on earth would you support an influx of people who are as far from liberals as it's possible to be

we must build a tolerant society. how can we do this? by diluting it with less tolerant people.

what
488878542 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 08:26 PM   #73780
488878542
mx premier inn
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 590
how do you feel about your cultish adherence to multicultural doctrine prolonging the suffering of marginalized groups like homosexuals smokey d

how do you sleep at night

with your boyfriend telling you off for being self-hating
488878542 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 09:04 PM   #73781
Smokey D
Moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 32,417
Quote:
if the goal is liberalism then why on earth would you support an influx of people who are as far from liberals as it's possible to be
by having sufficiently rigorous liberal institutions
Smokey D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 11:17 PM   #73782
HillaryClitTounge
Hillary Clittongue
 
HillaryClitTounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Posts: 1,698
Oh look Smokey is resorting to name calling, vague-meaningless sentences like "sufficiently rigorous liberal institutions", and using circular reasoning.

It's not a zero sum game. Smokey D said so.
HillaryClitTounge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 11:40 PM   #73783
Ando!
classic ando
 
Ando!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 15,002
"sufficiently rigorous liberal institutions" shouldn't be mysterious at all to someone who allegedly spent "years" "studying" "politics" at a "major university"
Ando! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2014, 11:50 PM   #73784
HillaryClitTounge
Hillary Clittongue
 
HillaryClitTounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Posts: 1,698
I never said it was "mysterious". I said its intentionally vague nonsense that is typical of people (generally "liberals" or worse, green party members) who have no valid arguments left to stand on. "sufficiently rigorous liberal institutions" has no meaning because you could find a way to call virtually any institution a "sufficiently rigorous liberal" one. Every time a liberal gets backed into the corner in an argument they resort to some idiotic vague catch phrase. Check your privilege Ando.

Last edited by HillaryClitTounge; 11-13-2014 at 11:53 PM.
HillaryClitTounge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2014, 12:11 AM   #73785
Ando!
classic ando
 
Ando!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 15,002
perhaps you are aware that "vague" and "mysterious" are a bit synonym-ish

then again reading comprehension has never exactly been your strong point, so perhaps not
Ando! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2014, 03:33 PM   #73786
HillaryClitTounge
Hillary Clittongue
 
HillaryClitTounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Posts: 1,698
grabbing at straws lol

I didn't imply vague and mysterious don't have similar meanings. I said "intentionally vague". Check your reading comprehension and your privilege, Ando.
HillaryClitTounge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2014, 10:31 PM   #73787
Smokey D
Moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 32,417
If you have sufficiently rigorous liberal institutions, then an influx of non-liberals (by definition) will not dilute the liberalism of your society.

Quote:
It's not a zero sum game. Smokey D said so.
Well, how could it be a zero sum game? That implies to the extent one side wins the other side loses, which really doesn't seem to be how cultures interact at all. it's more a dialectic than a zero-sum game.

Quote:
circular reasoning
Such as?
Smokey D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2014, 08:51 AM   #73788
488878542
mx premier inn
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 590
'liberal institutions' bend to popular sentiment all the damn time

i think your proposal is a bit fantastic
488878542 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2014, 08:53 AM   #73789
488878542
mx premier inn
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 590
unless you don't consider e.g. the US supreme court rigorous

in the same way that teenage revolutionaries don't consider anything a fair example of communism
488878542 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2014, 02:23 PM   #73790
Smokey D
Moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 32,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by 488878542 View Post
'liberal institutions' bend to popular sentiment all the damn time

i think your proposal is a bit fantastic
Well sure. I reckon being a liberal institution entails listening to the majority in most cases. But if they compromise their liberal character in so doing, they are insufficiently rigorous. That is certainly a possibility too.
Smokey D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2014, 03:04 PM   #73791
HillaryClitTounge
Hillary Clittongue
 
HillaryClitTounge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: DC
Posts: 1,698
Can you explain to me what "sufficiently rigorous liberal institutions" means? Seems to me that could mean just about anything and has nothing to do with people who politically identify as "liberal" (a misnomer).
HillaryClitTounge is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2014, 05:29 PM   #73792
Ando!
classic ando
 
Ando!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 15,002
popularly elected legislature
independent judiciary
entrenched administration
free and fair elections
Ando! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2014, 05:32 PM   #73793
Mardy
hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY
 
Mardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY LADIES!!!
Posts: 18,608
the end is nigh

http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/11/zuckerberg-explains-gray-t-shirts-sounds-sexist.html

Last edited by Mardy; 11-18-2014 at 05:35 PM.
Mardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2014, 05:36 PM   #73794
Ando!
classic ando
 
Ando!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 15,002
i dont get it
Ando! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2014, 05:55 PM   #73795
Mardy
hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY
 
Mardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY LADIES!!!
Posts: 18,608
She thinks Mark Zuckerberg is a casual sexist because he's wearing a grey t-shirt.
Mardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2014, 05:58 PM   #73796
Mardy
hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY
 
Mardy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY hey HEY LADIES!!!
Posts: 18,608
but I don't blame you for not getting it. this is too idiotic, there has to be something between the lines, right? nope.
Mardy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-18-2014, 07:51 PM   #73797
Smokey D
Moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 32,417
Quote:
Can you explain to me what "sufficiently rigorous liberal institutions" means? Seems to me that could mean just about anything and has nothing to do with people who politically identify as "liberal" (a misnomer).
I don't mean liberal like that term is used on Fox News. I mean liberal like that term is used in "liberal democracy". I don't have time to write a dissertation on it, but quoting wikipedia:

Quote:
Liberal democracy is a form of government in which representative democracy operates under the principles of liberalism, i.e. protecting the rights of the individual, which are generally enshrined in law. It is characterised by fair, free, and competitive elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties, and political freedoms for all persons. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either formally written or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of sustained expansion throughout the 20th century, liberal democracy became the predominant political system in the world
eg, extensive and enforceable rights both against the government and among citizens, a substantive (rather than merely formal) rule of law, representative and responsible government, civil society, multiparty politics, widespread education, etc.
Smokey D is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:50 PM.