- Joined
- 1 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 339
Yes I laughed!
We still have a way to go with equality and diversity...
- Thread starter wire-screw
- Start date
Yes I laughed!
Soldato
Voltaire would agree.
Soldato
The main point on this is, yes - everybody has a right to a belief.
Not nobody has the right to have that belief to be respected - all beliefs & opinions need to be critically examined when possible - to determine if these can work within a society or they will just cause additional human suffering.
People should be treated with respect by default, but actions & opinions shouldn't be.
It's akin to saying that Wayne Rooney's views on quantum theory or neuroscience should be respected - of course not, the same applies to morality & what constitutions a functional society - why people think ethics/morality & an understand of society are not also skills with a similar level of discipline is beyond me.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 5,038
INB4 social Marxism, oh wait..
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
A white village already exists, Midsommer. Although despite being entirely white and affluent, it has the highest murder rate in the world.
Soldato
Define exactly what you mean by social Marxism then give a detailed critique of it please.
INB4 no reply.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 5,038
Why would you need me to define it for you, you are living it.Define exactly what you mean by social Marxism then give a detailed critique of it please.
INB4 no reply.
We are not equal, we don't not deserve to be treated equally because of the colour of our skin or our financial background.
Stop supporting a system which has a gun to my head. If I refuse to contribute to this system I go to prison, you're sick mate.
Soldato
Well, I wasn't hoping for a reply....
Was that double negative intentional?, changes the meaning somewhat.
Could you elaborate on the wording of this statement (assuming the double negatives is just poor grammar).
we don't not deserve to be treated equally because of the colour of our skin or our financial background
Are you saying that person A & B (both identical apart from skin colour) do not deserve equal treatment?.
Or are you saying that two people - one black & one white, but with different abilities/behavioural characteristics - should not be treated the same (due to race, over-riding ability, not that this happens mind)?.
So, taking into account all the problems with the concept of government the one which really grinds your gears is being forced to be fair to people who happen to not be white?.
Your priorities are all wrong if it is, if it isn't - then those are arguments against government - not equality as a principle for a civilised society.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 5,038
I'll ignore your first part where you try to lower my position by suggesting that poor grammar takes away from what I stated.
I equally treat everyone unequally and judge them by their virtue.
It is sick that I should face prison instead of supporting those who wish to harm me, they could be black, they could be white, they could be a rainbow colour. Crime statistics would give a good indication who would.
Supporting those people (by force) is a sign of an uncivilised society.
Last edited:
Soldato
In that case the difference in grammar changes completely what you stated (So it was worth verifying).
That is equality, judging people by their actions - not by some arbitrary factor (such as skin colour).I equally treat everyone unequally and judge them by their virtue.
Equality doesn't mean treating everybody the same - or ignoring the actions of people who do harmful things (which you seem to be implying it does).
As statistics is my field, I thought I thought I'd drop this in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
So how would a civilised society look to you.
incidentally you also didn't answer either of my questions.
Man of Honour
You obviously don't know what E&D means if you think respecting opinions is part of it.
Soldato
Who is saying that?
- Joined
- 1 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 339
I did wonder whether people would start to notice!
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 5,038
That's not why you did it though, you wanted to warm up with some mud slinging, it's was extremely obvious what I was stating from the flow of the sentence.
And yes it does ignore the the actions of certain groups. Especially when it comes to Social Marxism because it destroys the notion that we are all equal and should be treated equally.
I'm well aware that correlation doesn't imply causation but when you look at data across countries and you don't see a pattern you are burying your head in the sand.
A civilised society to me is one where there is no initiation of force to people.
No, because they are not equal. You can't say they are equal apart from x - because you are making a clause of inequality in you statement of equality.
No, they should not be treated the same. If one of those people causes harm to me I am not going to treat them the same as a person who would not.
Last edited:
Soldato
Not really, I don't presume to know what you mean.
I didn't ask if they were the same, I asked if they are deserving of equal treatment.No, because they are not equal. You can't say they are equal apart from x - because you are making a clause of inequality in you statement of equality.
Why on earth do you think equality means everybody is the same?, do you even know what the principle of equality which many support even is?.
If you keep avoiding the questions then I'll withdrawn from debating with you (once again).
Now, to finally get some clarity - on the occasion of two people - identical in every single way (apart from skin pigment), are they not both equal in measure (when in reference to expected treatment in society?).
Do you agree with the following statement?.
A person should be judged on his actions & character, skin colour is not a worthy or socially conducive attribute to judge any humans worth with.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
The modern concept of "equality" is a nonsense and almost certainly destroying Western culture through piecemeal erosion of the social and political fabric of our civilization. In two-hundred years time we'll be living in some Balkanized third world hell-hole.
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 May 2009
- Posts
- 21,257
I've seen a documentary called 'American Beauty', and the guy is actually a repressed homosexual. He's just misunderstood, and really wants a big ^%^&^ *^*^ up his £$$£. Once he gets that he won't want an all white town again.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 1 Nov 2013
- Posts
- 13
Answer me this. Why is multiculturalism only happening in white countries and only white countries? at least countries worth living in...
Tell me there is nothing suspicious about this.
Why are whites racist and fascist for opposing the destruction of their people?
that's what the melting pot is.
Why is behind it? . It's being committed not by whites themselves but another group of people who own the banks, media much of the wealth and are massively overrepresented in governments.
Tell me there is nothing suspicious about this.
Why are whites racist and fascist for opposing the destruction of their people?
that's what the melting pot is.
Why is behind it? . It's being committed not by whites themselves but another group of people who own the banks, media much of the wealth and are massively overrepresented in governments.