Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Senator Bill Frist: Let's make nice with the Taliban

Senate 2006 Sen Bill Frist Majority Leader Afghanistan Taliban

  • Please log in to reply
116 replies to this topic

#101 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 10:56 AM

View Postsierraleone, on Oct 6 2006, 03:19 PM, said:

Many would argue it is a truth, just not everyone recongises it.

That's what makes it a belief and not a truth.

Quote

If you argue, well obvious its not a truth or women would have the right to self-determination everywhere... just because oppressors deny universal rights

Again, that gets back to belief as opposed to truth.

Quote

Of course there is no proof it is a right either, but not all truths are easily proved.

Please name 3 truths that are not easily proven.

Quote

The 'truth' has been wrong before, such as the universe revolving around the earth.

Truth is never wrong. Beliefs can be wrong of ill-placed, but the truth is just the facts.

Quote

One could argue at least drones have the same rights/duties/beneficts of drones all across the earth, same with queen bees.

But you can't separate things into categories when it's convenient and not separate them when it's not. If I said the same thing about male and female humans, you'd argue that it's "different" because we're human and that makes it different. It doesn't. I could give lots of examples: lions - the female hunts and raises the young; the males don't do much except sleep and eat. Praying mantis - the female eats the male after copulation. Remora - attaches itself to other fish to feed on remainders and get transportation (just to get away from the male/female trend).

One animal goes up to another and eats the other animal. Does anyone cry out for rights for the eaten animal - that another animal took away its right to live and to self-govern? Of course not.

Rights are not "natural". They're the result of the reasoning mind. Rights are cultural; no two countries have exactly the same rights and those that coincide may have evolved for different reasons. And for these reasons, there is no such thing as basic or "universal" rights. Therefore, no country should try to use physical force to make another country change their laws and rights, no matter how much they disagree.

Quote

But one could not argue the same for human beings, the rights recongise are not even across the board. So the analogy is somewhat flawed, IMO of course.

Again, that's why it's a belief and not a truth.

Quote

How do you know they haven't done anything? And some of them don't have the opportunity. Hello? Leave your home w/ out your husband and you are beheaded? You cannot even talk/get together with other women to form any sort of co-alition.
Sure, a rare rare few brave individuals find a way out.

Hey, completely valid point. In a totalitarian state, we certainly don't have an open new forum that is available in free countries. We don't know what people are doing. But 1) How do we know what they want and how do we know that what we can give them is necessarily better than what they already have? Look at Poland when they gained their freedom. They had instant inflation and a lot of problems. The people were free, but they knew nothing about governing themselves. Yes, they learned, but at a great cost. Was that cost worth it? Only the people in Poland can say for sure and not all of them may agree.

Quote

Freedom shouldn't have to be earned

If we all start out with freedom, then I'd agree, but we don't; at least not in this world.

Quote

Maybe people who think that something is wrong w/ the U.S. these days,  as no American-born citizens had to earn freedom?

I'd disagree with that. Fighting to keep your freedom is just as much earning your freedom as fighting to get it when you have none.

Quote

But putting limits on specific groups?

Again, I'm not saying that it's OK, but each country has to have the ability to choose their own rules, laws and rights. How they go about this has to be up to them, or we are hypocrites.

Quote

So we should have only given freedom to the blacks that were fighting and wanted change?

It depends. Did they ask for our help? Did the people who requested the help speak for the masses, or only for themselves?

Quote

No, the rights of an individual are limited by the transgression of that individual on *other* individuals. As least that is how it should be.

By that definition it's OK if I burn down a school or blow up a power station. I didn't transgress on any individuals; I transgressed against the state.

Quote

And for a husband to be entitled to power over this wife is a transgression.

But you can't stop that in either direction. Maybe a wife would hold out sex until her husband bought her a convertible. Isn't that using power?

Quote

Everyone deserves the recongisition that they have same rights as any other individual.

And that's a belief.

Quote

I didn't say we have a right to dictate to another country where the lines should be drawn, thats not the direction I'm really going with my thoughts

Then we're on the same page there.

Quote

You seem to be arguing on the international scale

It's kind of the subject of the thread.

Quote

Just discussing the impossible to prove/disprove concept of universal human rights.

Well, technically you can't "disprove" it since you can't prove a negative. But it doesn't actually exist.

#102 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 02:07 PM

Borph, you are so far away from reality, I think I'll just move on.
Can't Touch This!!

#103 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 02:08 PM

Stinking Proxy server has been acting up all day.

Edited by Kosh, 06 October 2006 - 02:10 PM.

Can't Touch This!!

#104 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 02:47 PM

View PostKosh, on Oct 6 2006, 07:07 PM, said:

Borph, you are so far away from reality, I think I'll just move on.

Hey, don't feel bad that you're not right about something.

#105 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 04:11 PM

Quote

Hey, don't feel bad that you're not right about something.

I doubt he feels bad or that he's wrong either but think whatever makes ya happy.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#106 veganmom

veganmom
  • Islander
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 04:57 PM

Hey, Lin!
Well, I read the first two pages of this thread and gave up. He's just xxxxxxxx (edited the word out...) He's not really making reasonable arguments, just yanking your chain. Have a yummy circular baked good (clear glaze or chocolate icing? Perhaps some sprinkles?), but don't feed him. Here, I'll share mine!!!
:cool:

Edited by veganmom, 06 October 2006 - 04:58 PM.


#107 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 05:23 PM

View PostLin731, on Oct 6 2006, 09:11 PM, said:

Quote

Hey, don't feel bad that you're not right about something.

I doubt he feels bad or that he's wrong either but think whatever makes ya happy.

Well, I've found your reponses to be nothing to be hypocritical. You make false accusations about me playing word games, but when I challenge you to actually put your money where your keyboard is, you play some word games of your own. It didn't make you look too good.

#108 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 05:27 PM

View Postveganmom, on Oct 6 2006, 09:57 PM, said:

Hey, Lin!
Well, I read the first two pages of this thread and gave up. He's just xxxxxxxx (edited the word out...) He's not really making reasonable arguments, just yanking your chain. Have a yummy circular baked good (clear glaze or chocolate icing? Perhaps some sprinkles?), but don't feed him. Here, I'll share mine!!!
:cool:

Veganmom, I'm yanking nobody's chain. Please show me a single argument that is not reasonable.

The fact is, there is no such thing as a basic or universal human right; rights are whatever a country gives to the individual.

And no other country can dictate to another what they should and shouldn't have as their rights.

Nonny was hypocritical when she said that she didn't like the Pope telling us how we should run our country, but thinks it's OK for us to dictate how another country should run their country.

In the end, Lin showed blind support for anything that Nonny said, without ever actually making statements that lent any credence for her belief.

edit to add:

Veganmom, let me give a quick demonstration. It'll require your participation. Usually I ask for a list of 3, but in this case, I'll ask for a list of one. Veganmom, please name one country (besides the US, of course) that has the right to tell the US what our rights and laws should be, and please tell me why this country should be able to tell us what our rights and laws should be.

Edited by Broph, 06 October 2006 - 05:53 PM.


#109 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 08:19 PM

Quote

Hey, Lin!
Well, I read the first two pages of this thread and gave up. He's just xxxxxxxx (edited the word out...) He's not really making reasonable arguments, just yanking your chain. Have a yummy circular baked good (clear glaze or chocolate icing? Perhaps some sprinkles?), but don't feed him. Here, I'll share mine!!!

MMMMMMMMM...definately the chocolate icing and sprinkles! Glazed is just to blah. No wonder folks go into law enforcement, those wonderful wheels of dough can be very enticing! You're a generous soul...ya want one of the longshoreman's favorites? I got creme and custard filled?! Yummo!

Edited by Lin731, 06 October 2006 - 08:21 PM.

Posted Image
Posted Image

#110 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 09:19 PM

LOL, Lin; I kind of figured that you'd ignore anything that you can't explain, but contradicts your beliefs. Maybe you can explain Nonny's statement that women aren't people.

#111 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,226 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 09:59 PM

View PostBroph, on Oct 6 2006, 11:56 AM, said:

Rights are not "natural". They're the result of the reasoning mind. Rights are cultural; no two countries have exactly the same rights and those that coincide may have evolved for different reasons. And for these reasons, there is no such thing as basic or "universal" rights. Therefore, no country should try to use physical force to make another country change their laws and rights, no matter how much they disagree.

No, entitlements & priveledges & taboos are cultural. Just because rights are denied in places doesn't mean they don't exist.
A women is not allowed to leave her house without risk of bodily harm. She still has ability to leave the house. She leaves the house. Who's rights has she transgressed? In reality, no ones. She has the ability to leave the house and move about, it generally does not transgressed another's rights (save trespassing on private property), so therefor she is being denied the right to move freely.

View Postsierraleone, on Oct 6 2006, 03:19 PM, said:

Quote

How do you know they haven't done anything? And some of them don't have the opportunity. Hello? Leave your home w/ out your husband and you are beheaded? You cannot even talk/get together with other women to form any sort of co-alition.
Sure, a rare rare few brave individuals find a way out.

Hey, completely valid point. In a totalitarian state, we certainly don't have an open new forum that is available in free countries. We don't know what people are doing. But 1) How do we know what they want and how do we know that what we can give them is necessarily better than what they already have? Look at Poland when they gained their freedom. They had instant inflation and a lot of problems. The people were free, but they knew nothing about governing themselves. Yes, they learned, but at a great cost. Was that cost worth it? Only the people in Poland can say for sure and not all of them may agree.

I can say with absolute certainly that there is at least some people, however few in each group, in each culture that do not want their rights kept from them. Because there is always some agitators isn't there? The only problem I have is they are hypocritical if they say to other countries they deserve self-destiny, but they deny the rights to their citizens. But generally, unless that country  has attacked us, I don't think we should interfere overtly, partly because it nearly never works. Are we not hypocriticial to say that people deserve the right to vote and then we prop up dictatorships?

Quote

Quote

Freedom shouldn't have to be earned

If we all start out with freedom, then I'd agree, but we don't; at least not in this world.

We do, the consequences of our actions vary widely according to the circumstances of our birth is all. Some of those consequences being death prevent people from exercising their freedoms.

Quote

Quote

No, the rights of an individual are limited by the transgression of that individual on *other* individuals. As least that is how it should be.

By that definition it's OK if I burn down a school or blow up a power station. I didn't transgress on any individuals; I transgressed against the state.

You have transgressed the individual school children's right to persue education (assuming no more serious rights were transgressed). If the school is public property you have transgressed *everyone's* rights, if its owned privately, then the owners rights.

Quote

Quote

And for a husband to be entitled to power over this wife is a transgression.
But you can't stop that in either direction. Maybe a wife would hold out sex until her husband bought her a convertible. Isn't that using power?

Power was the wrong word. And you cannot equate the right to bodily integrity to withhold from sex for any reason to the entitlement/privelegde of complete control of one spouse over another spouse's self-desinty.

Quote

Quote

You seem to be arguing on the international scale
It's kind of the subject of the thread.

Seemed to go all over the place, so I picked up the subject I most wanted to discuss.

Edited by sierraleone, 06 October 2006 - 10:05 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#112 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 06 October 2006 - 10:23 PM

View Postsierraleone, on Oct 7 2006, 02:59 AM, said:

No, entitlements & priveledges & taboos are cultural. Just because rights are denied in places doesn't mean they don't exist.

That's your belief. If people don't ask for rights, if they don't fight for them, if they don't ensure them, then they don't exist. There was a time in the United States that black men did not have the right to vote. Whether or not the should or shouldn't have such a right is completely irrelevant. The fact is that they did not have the right. It was only through an intellectual change of the minds of the population that this fact was changed.

Quote

A women is not allowed to leave her house without risk of bodily harm. She still has ability to leave the house. She leaves the house. Who's rights has she transgressed? In reality, no ones.

I get on a completely unpopulated highway and I drive 85 miles an hour.

I sit in my house and I grow and smoke pot.

I'm bored on day and I register my dog to vote.

Whose rights have I transgressed? Nobody's. Is it legal? Is it a right? Can I get a ticket or even be arrested for doing this? People made up laws because people were getting killed because of people driving too fast and drugs became a problem. And dogs always pick the wrong candidtates. You don't know why the laws were made prohibiting women from going out alone.

Quote

She has the ability to leave the house and move about, it generally does not transgressed another's rights (save trespassing on private property), so therefor she is being denied the right to move freely.

She can't be denied something that she didn't have in the first place.

Quote

I can say with absolute certainly that there is at least some people, however few in each group, in each culture that do not want their rights kept from them.

But if they want the right to self-determine, shouldn't they be the ones who finally come to terms and say "I want to self-determine"? If we go into a country, take out the government, put in our puppet government that will fail in 2 years (and whip a little 'industry' on them), then what have the people learned? Do they really have freedom, or do they simply have a new government that doesn't know or care about them?

Quote

The only problem I have is they are hypocritical if they say to other countries they deserve self-destiny, but they deny the rights to their citizens.

Do we allow children to choose their own foods? Might a child decide on a diet entirely of chocolate, cola and ice cream? What about countries where people believe in witchcraft (or at least accuse their neighbors of witchcraft), or countries like Zaire, where people kill each other because of what tribe they're in? Is personal freedom and self-determination a good thing there?

Quote

But generally, unless that country  has attacked us, I don't think we should interfere overtly, partly because it nearly never works. Are we not hypocriticial to say that people deserve the right to vote and they prop up dictatorships?

Exactly my argument against the war in Iraq. I never believed in those WMDs. And personally, I don't like propping up dictatorships.

Quote

We do, the consequences of our actions vary widely according to the circumstances of our birth is all. Some of those consequences being death prevent people from exercising their freedoms.

No, we don't all start out with freedom. Whether you talk about the start as conception or birth, that's the start and that's the determination. If you're a woman born in a repressive country, then you are not starting out with freedom!

Quote

No, the rights of an individual are limited by the transgression of that individual on *other* individuals. As least that is how it should be.
Should be. Not is, but should be. This is exactly why it is a belief and not a truth.

Quote

You have transgressed the individual school children's right to persue education (assuming no more serious rights were transgressed). If the school is public property you have transgressed *everyone's* rights, if its owned privately, then the owners rights.

The children's right? Nope; they still have the ability to go to a private school or go to another school.

Everyone's rights? Nope; it'll cost a little more tax money, but their rights? No, no rights have been transgressed. At least not of individuals.

Quote

Power was the wrong word. And you cannot equate the right to bodily integrity to withhold from sex for any reason to the entitlement/privelegde of complete control of one spouse over another spouse's self-desinty.

What was the right word?

But the right to bodily integrity is exactly what you're talking about! The ability of the body to leave the house, or drink alcohol, or dance, or wear revealing clothing, or to have sex. It's one thing for a spouse to refuse sex for the fact of not wanting sex. It's another to withhold sex for a convertible. You'd hate this one guy I knew; he said that there was no such thing as rape in a marriage because once a woman agrees to have sex, then she can never really say no. He was also pro-smoking, but that's another story.

Quote

Seemed to go all over the place, so I picked up the subject I most wanted to discuss.

Right, but you seemed to take me to task when all I did was keep up the discussion that was already going on.

I think you need to ask yourself what a right is, where it comes from and what it really means to people. Go back to the part where you talked about what "should be". If I'm in a country, are my rights based on my Constitution and other legal documents, or are my rights whatever a girl in another country thinks they should be?

Edited by Broph, 07 October 2006 - 07:51 AM.


#113 DWF

DWF

    Dr. Who 1963-89, 1996, 2005-

  • Islander
  • 48,287 posts

Posted 07 October 2006 - 10:27 AM

Well if he thinks he can work with the Taliban make him an ambassador let him work with them then. :evil:
The longest-running science fiction series: decadent, degenerate and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarans... Cybermen! They're still in the nursery compared to us. Fifty years of absolute fandom. That's what it takes to be really critical.

"Don't mistake a few fans bitching on the Internet for any kind of trend." - Keith R.A. DeCandido

#114 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 07 October 2006 - 11:44 AM

Broph, don't bother addressing anymore comments to me in this thread, I won't reply nor will I read them anymore. Has nothing to do with what I can or can't explain and everything to do with you wasting my time for the sake of arguing. Doesn't matter what anyone says, doesn't matter what they provide you. It's all just a big game and like Kosh and Veganmom, it's just a pointless waste to continue. You'll have to find someone else to play your little games (until they tire of them as well).
Posted Image
Posted Image

#115 Broph

Broph
  • Islander
  • 6,671 posts

Posted 07 October 2006 - 11:57 AM

View PostLin731, on Oct 7 2006, 04:44 PM, said:

Broph, don't bother addressing anymore comments to me in this thread, I won't reply nor will I read them anymore. Has nothing to do with what I can or can't explain and everything to do with you wasting my time for the sake of arguing. Doesn't matter what anyone says, doesn't matter what they provide you. It's all just a big game and like Kosh and Veganmom, it's just a pointless waste to continue. You'll have to find someone else to play your little games (until they tire of them as well).

Lin, it's really sad that you can't support your own ideas of rights. I know that it can be disconcerting to find out that your belief system is built on a foundation of sand, but sometimes people are relieved to have a wake-up call.

Perhaps in the future you'll think twice before accusing someone of playing word games when you aren't able to simply explain what you think is right.

I'm sorry to see that you weren't able to find the integrity to accept my challenge. It's sad to see that you give blind acceptance to idea that have no real support.

But since you're reading this, please answer 2 questions: Why aren't women people, as Nonny says, and what country has the right to dictate what laws and rights the US has.

#116 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 12 October 2006 - 04:09 PM

Quote

As Chris Tucker would say, "do you undertand the words that are coming out of my keyboard?"

Quote

Veganmom, let me give a quick demonstration. It'll require your participation. Usually I ask for a list of 3, but in this case, I'll ask for a list of one.


Quote

OK, you're still not reading anything that I'm actually writing.

Quote

That would be a complete misinterpretation of what I wrote.

Quote

I have no idea what that mishmash of words is supposed to mean. I don't think you're following the flow of the thread very well.

Quote

Great. We weren't talking about that in that paragraph, though. Thanks for your input.

Quote

I hope you learned something from that!

How does it look down there, Scotty?

Patronisation on maximum, captain!

In many ways, I understand what you're saying here Broph- and why you're frustrated. For example - Human rights are a belief, not a truth, and just because it's not 'OK' to do something doesn't mean it's against some fundamental human right and gives someone else the capacity to act based on 'moral highground' - if I read you correctly, though with current track records, probably not ;)

Nevertheless, maybe you'll accuse me of cherry-picking, or maybe you'll agree that your sarcasm levels have gone sky-high. Cool it, Broph. A little patience goes a long way in heated debate. I would urge you to recognise that you are talking to intelligent people here, and not children. Thanks :)

Quote

I'm sorry to see that you weren't able to find the integrity to accept my challenge. It's sad to see that you give blind acceptance to idea that have no real support.

Does a debate really have anything to do with one's integrity? Let's not bring that into this discussion - we're not talking about the integrity of people on this board, and someone not telling you why they believe something is not a basis to assume they don't HAVE a reason to believe something. In other words, please don't make this so personal.

Thank you!

Sparky
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#117 Nonny

Nonny

    Scourge of Pretentious Bad Latin

  • Islander
  • 31,142 posts

Posted 12 October 2006 - 04:47 PM

View PostKosh, on Oct 5 2006, 09:42 AM, said:

View PostBroph, on Oct 5 2006, 12:05 PM, said:


Basic human rights is whatever a community decides for themselves and enforces. If I walk down an alley and a guy comes up with a knife, can I rely on "basic human rights" to walk out of that alley with my wallet and my life?

You said that basic rights are up to the community to decide, Nonny pointed out some of the things that go on in some of these places, on a regular basis. So if you think the community can decide rights, then you are saying it is OK for these things to happen in other countries, since thir community sets the standard.
Thanks, Kosh.  {{{{{{{Kosh}}}}}}}

Nonny
Posted Image


The once and future Nonny

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank, give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Can anyone tell me who I am quoting?  I found this with no attribution.

Fatal miscarriages are forever.

Stupid is stupid, this I believe. And ignorance is the worst kind of stupid, since ignorance is a choice.  Suzanne Brockmann

All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings. Diderot



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Senate, 2006, Sen Bill Frist, Majority Leader, Afghanistan, Taliban

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users