Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Muslims and Pederasty
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 76 of 113 (164632)
12-02-2004 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Silent H
12-02-2004 10:27 AM


All true, and if your read what I said again you'll note I never said it was hamful.
Still doesn't change the fact that your argument is wrong; history (and modern life) is full of practices that are harmful to those involved, the commonness of their practice is irrelevant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 10:27 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 10:55 AM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 77 of 113 (164635)
12-02-2004 10:45 AM


Yeah, it seems like we are moving away from the actual message I was intending. I guess no one is picking up on the irony I was trying to get at.
PG has mentioned a Arafat and Islam. These are two entities which are current topics because of their volatile nature and connection with overt violence in the world today. Without question they are connected to deaths of many innocent people.
The irony in order to get out how really bad these entities are, he does not discuss their connection to violence, which would effect us, but rather possible personal foibles and cultural differences... and everyone seems to be agreeing with that reasoning! People are talking about how faulty his facts are on relating the first two entities to the third, but not about whether there are any facts to believe the third is harmful, or in any case what that would say about those entities.
This is why I said let's assume PG was right. So what?
For example, let's say Pagan Greek civilization thrived and spread instead of Islam. So what we are seeing today is Israel being stamped on a bunch of Pagan Greeks and much of the MidEastern peoples in other nations are believing in Pagan Greek religion. Thus there is no question that there is pederasty (and perhaps pedophilia) accepted by all these people.
That would make PG's claims about Arafat and people who are now under Islam, correct. Is everyone really in agreement that this would mean something about Arafat or Islam (now Pagan-Greek thought)? That this is a sign that they are evil and so should judge the rest of their actions through that lens?
Maybe I am off my rocker but that seems to be totally besides the point.
That is why I mentioned another example, nonsexual, which is someone saying Bush is evil and Xianity is too, since Bush eats shrimp, and Falwell said Xians ought to have bacon with eggs in the morning.
These are moral ascriptions based on cultural beliefs/taboos, and speak more to cultural relativity than what should be concerning us at all.
Honestly, if Arafat was traditional Greek and so really accepted pederasty, hands down PG is right, would that change how you view Arafat and the issues he stood for? Or how we should have dealt with him and his people?
Really?

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by AdminNosy, posted 12-02-2004 10:48 AM Silent H has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3912 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 78 of 113 (164636)
12-02-2004 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Silent H
12-02-2004 9:16 AM


Call it a personal problem.
Like I said. It is my belief and I stick to it. I believe that adults
having sex with children is wrong and I would work to keep that a taboo
in the society that I live in. Nothing more than my own belief which I
also believe I share with most people in the community I live in.
I will not concern myself with other fringe or ancient cultures that "got along fine" practicing pedophilic acts.
Overall I believe you are starting to stand up on your saddle mister and starting to make generalizations about what I said that are not true. I don't agree that majority opinion makes something right. I don't believe that parents who strap bombs on their kids are doing the right thing and I in particular resent that statement.
There is a big difference between killing and molesting someone. My point earlier was just that I didn't feel that one or the other were more or less justified than the other. A crime is a crime.
Granted that child on child sexual exploration has been shown to be a normal and healthy thing. I never disagreed with this and yet you somehow distilled out of my post that I think homosexuality, masturbation, and other safe acts of sex are somehow "vile". While some might be outside the realm of my personal preference for sexual activity I do not judge those who do them and in particular I would not chastise my child for exploring their own sexuality. How you you get this out of my post so I can clear up any misgivings? Either that or please, in kindness, back down from this condemning sexually enlightened stance that you have taken.
If you want to start a thread about if adult on pre-pubescent sexual activity so we can discuss if it is harmful then I would join in. I am sure there is some material out there somewhere.
I openly admit I made assertions. The assertions were my own opinion. If I am wrong then you may call it a personal problem if you like.
You seem to not have forgiven me for my prior misrepresentation of myself. My "knee jerk" reaction was due to my own personal anger and had nothing to do with my own personal beliefs on the matter of killing versus pedophilia. I admitted that I was wrong yet you stuck it to me. Please forgive my original remarks said in anguish and cease harping on them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 9:16 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 11:37 AM Jazzns has replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 79 of 113 (164637)
12-02-2004 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Silent H
12-02-2004 10:45 AM


T o p i c !
All valid points Holmes, however, how about we get back to the OP. Are those claims correct or not? What sort of backing do we really have.
I notice in the support that for the last couple of more mild quotes we have an ISBN number and and existing book. It is less clear about all the preceeding ones.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 10:45 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 11:13 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 80 of 113 (164640)
12-02-2004 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Dr Jack
12-02-2004 10:32 AM


history (and modern life) is full of practices that are harmful to those involved, the commonness of their practice is irrelevant.
That's funny, I could have sworn I said common and not harmful, not common and therefore not harmful.
Given that I had just said to jazzns that common is not the sign of right, I certainly did not intend to turn around and say common is the sign of no harm.
If that seemed to be the implication of any of my statements, I apologize. Let me make it clear, pedophilia has been practiced commonly without harm to individuals in certain cultures. From this we can extrapolate that pederasty in ancient Greece was not inherently harmful.
Additionally, since many of the Greek philosophers shared this upbringing you'd think they'd mention it if they felt bad about it. They certainly punked on any other thing they didn't like about society, even if it meant their lives.
This message has been edited by holmes, 12-02-2004 10:56 AM

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Dr Jack, posted 12-02-2004 10:32 AM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 81 of 113 (164646)
12-02-2004 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by AdminNosy
12-02-2004 10:48 AM


Re: T o p i c !
how about we get back to the OP. Are those claims correct or not? What sort of backing do we really have.
I already addressed this in another post in this thread. Let me try and make this clear one more time:
The OP makes no argument but just a statement. There are two open and two hidden claim within the statement.:
hidden--
1) There is something objectively wrong with pedophila or pederasty such that anyone or any culture engaged in it is not right.
2) Any actions taken by such persons or cultures can be legitimately called into question based on the other actions which we see are not right.
open--
3) Arafat was a pederast.
4) Islam supports pederasty or pedophilia.
The last two have no reason to be discussed, or it is generally pointless to discuss them, unless the first two are felt to be true. Otherwise who cares?
I apologize if my addressing hidden premises makes it seem off topic, but from my education in philosophy they are just as important and relevant for discussion. Indeed they are usually critical.
Everyone is dealing with the last two alone which appears then to legitimate his first two points. I did deal with the first two (and they are shaky), and then moved on to address the last two.
Dealing with the last two alone will logically allow PG to continue creating such nonsense threads again and again. Dealing with the first two will pull the rug put from under PG altogether, because who cares who he wants to point the moral finger at unless it actually has relevance to the subject at hand?
I notice in the support that for the last couple of more mild quotes we have an ISBN number and and existing book.
Didn't you go to Homa.org to find out where he got the quotes? It seems that Khomeini may have said this. The question remains... how is this relevant to anything?
(edited in: I just put the premises in a better order for clarity)
(edited in 2: I think trying to deal with hidden point 1 is what threatens to drag the thread off topic, and I would rather concentrate on point 2 which is why I brought up Bush eating shrimp and Xians eating pork as another moral issue which could be used in insinuation and guilt by association arguments.)
This message has been edited by holmes, 12-02-2004 11:19 AM
This message has been edited by holmes, 12-02-2004 01:04 PM

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by AdminNosy, posted 12-02-2004 10:48 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 82 of 113 (164650)
12-02-2004 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Jazzns
12-02-2004 10:47 AM


You seem to not have forgiven me for my prior misrepresentation of myself.
Well I feel off "forgiving" something. I don't hold it against you anymore. I only repeated that you had made the statement because it tied in with another point I was trying to make.
If it makes you feel any better I really liked you post in the thread on terrorism, regarding Palestine/Israel. I agreed with it.
I openly admit I made assertions. The assertions were my own opinion. If I am wrong then you may call it a personal problem if you like.
Let me try and wrap this up as this part of the "pedophilia question" is getting further off topic.
You are making assertions. They are your opinion. That is not necessarily a problem, indeed as it forms your own tastes that is okay.
However, it does become a problem when it rises to the level of trying to form public opinion by stating them as fact, or feeling so strongly it must be true that you will create a fiction to make your personal taste seem logically justified.
That is what PG was doing with this thread, and why then I found it necessary to bring your own comments to ground. Your excitement on two separate issues has left you stating things that are not quite true. You were thus doing what he was doing without knowing it. Think of this as me trying to give you a lesson on sticking to facts, rather than going with just your gut.
Indeed question your gut when it is telling you what facts are, rather than simply what your personal taste is...
I never disagreed with this and yet you somehow distilled out of my post that I think homosexuality, masturbation, and other safe acts of sex are somehow "vile"
This was not what I meant. I was pointing out that not too long ago, your own level of assertion (used against pedophilia), was used against those others. The very idea that they are "safe" today is because courageous people fought the modern majority, to make them face the facts that there is no inherent harm from them, only what harm society inflicted on those who did them.
Many still believe they do harm, just as much, and in some cases more than pedophilia. If you believe the modern majority was wrong in those cases, it is logical to begin questioning the modern majority on other sexual issues as well (or any issue for that matter). Otherwise we all might as well revert to being like PG, what we feel is true must have some basis in fact.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Jazzns, posted 12-02-2004 10:47 AM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Jazzns, posted 12-02-2004 1:57 PM Silent H has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3912 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 83 of 113 (164668)
12-02-2004 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Silent H
12-02-2004 11:37 AM


Great reply. Thank you. Now lets try to drive this thing back on topic. I am going to try to put all this in perspective.
We here the posters at EvC I assume are generally from parts of the world considered "western civilization". I might be wrong in some cases but I make this assumption based on the fact that everyone I have seen post speaks english which is a common attribute of someone who has at least been exposed thouroughly to western civ.
Now to my understanding, all countries that can be considered part of western civ culturally believe that pedophilia is wrong to the point of creating laws about it and locking up those who practice it with severe penalties. I do not know this for sure bit if challanged we could probably look it up and I am pretty confident that I would me mostly correct.
So now we have defined our target audience. Us here at EvC and the culture therof. Within the limits of this culture we will probably find very few who agree with pederasty. Most probably think it is a crime or a sin while a few will agree yet have the more liberal view that it might be more acceptable outside of our culture.
In this light of the culture in which this issue was brought up, pederasty is wrong. It is a crime here in the US and I am sure it is a crime in many other countries that share many of the same cultural influences. Basically, we have scoped our issue down to the cultures where pederasty is a significant moral issue.
So I hope that we here at EvC can mostly all agree that as it relates to our discussion in the scope of our culture that pederasty is wrong. Any objections?
Add to this culture that of the Middle East. The culture there was
influenced by a religion similar to one very prominent in western
culture. They share much of the same moral systems on a basic level.
Middle Eastern culture I would argue shares the moral belief that
pederasty is wrong.
Now PG with his post is trying to show that this is not the case. He belives that Islam is an immoral religion and is such because it breaks one our shared taboos. Unfortunatly said taboo is not being broken in general or at least no evidence with any substance has been presented to show such a claim. We really haven't progressed any farther than this.
No further discussion of if pederasty is right or wrong need occur because we have put it in the arena where it only applies to people who mostly believe it is wrong. If we were discussing some religion other than Islam of a tribe of people distinct from any political controversy then any practice of pederasty in that culture would be a seperate issue with regards to some sort of global morals.
I hope some of that makes sense to someone besides me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 11:37 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 3:11 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 84 of 113 (164675)
12-02-2004 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Jazzns
12-02-2004 1:57 PM


Off-topic, but in reply:
all countries that can be considered part of western civ culturally believe that pedophilia is wrong to the point of creating laws about it and locking up those who practice it with severe penalties. I do not know this for sure bit if challanged we could probably look it up and I am pretty confident that I would me mostly correct.
You are wrong. There are varying ages of consent, even within the US. I am not sure what the "majority" of AOCs are, but there is a consistent range from 12-18 depending where you are. And even those with laws do not necessarily do so because pedophilia is wrong but to create protections from potential abuse from authority figures. Google age of consent and you will find a site which deals with age of consent laws.
You might one day look into histories of age of consent laws and find out why they came about and begin wondering how people began viewing them as meaning kids are actually hurt by sex itself.
The nation I am in currently allows sex from 12, with a few complicated bits thrown in for protection from teachers till 16. It is currently reviewing its laws because of pressure from the US so that the US can more easily enforce its national (not state) sex laws. If this country caves to US pressure am I to believe harm suddenly started occuring, or that the US was always right? See how silly this gets.
I might add that until recently they all had laws against homosexuality and porn. Does that mean everyone agreed or that such things are objectively wrong?
Within the limits of this culture we will probably find very few who agree with pederasty. Most probably think it is a crime or a sin while a few will agree yet have the more liberal view that it might be more acceptable outside of our culture.
For the entire thread, and that includes PG, we should really define whether pederasty is the same as pedophilia or what. Traditionally it has slightly different meanings. Indeed a person could be fine with having sex with young girls yet be against pederasty because it involves homosexual sex.
In any case, I do agree that for the most part throughout the US, perhaps the world, and definitely for those within this thread, most will feel pederasty is wrong.
So I hope that we here at EvC can mostly all agree that as it relates to our discussion in the scope of our culture that pederasty is wrong. Any objections?
Yes. And I will explain by example. Let's say Arafat was gay and ran off to get married in the Netherlands. Lets say Islam allowed for those kinds of unions.
Clearly gay marriage is considered wrong by many people, even today. If the title of this thread was Muslims and Gay Marriage, would everyone get a free ride to just assume gay marriage is wrong because it is so harmful, since most people think that is wrong? Or would that also be something to debunk as an issue to be worried about at all?
I think most gays and gay supporters would be like. whoa why do we just assume this is correct to label as objectively wrong... just because the majority happen to feel so and there are laws against it?
Middle Eastern culture I would argue shares the moral belief that pederasty is wrong.
I have no idea about Palestinians in specific, but there are definitely cultures within the MidEast which allow for fondling and kissing and some oral sex of younger men by older men. And without question sex is allowed to very young ages between sexes as long as it is within a marriage (not sure if we are considering this pederasty?). Palestinians can be married from 12 if I remember right. 13 maybe?
I think it is pretty obvious though that what PG was eluding to was not something people in that region would find very cool... sex parties with a dictator? No that wouldn't be cool at all.
ON TOPIC:
He belives that Islam is an immoral religion and is such because it breaks one our shared taboos.
This is what I am getting at. This is hidden premise two, that an entire entity can be judged wrong because of a difference in moral beliefs.
I am arguing that even if he showed that all of Islam allowed for pederasty, that might mean that you would not agree to be a follower of Islam, but does that make it "wrong". Does that mean that the things people do under Islam are now under question?
A shared taboo for Jews is not eating pork, since Xians do does that make Xianity wrong or immoral? Even if so, then so what? What are we supposed to make out of that point? A group of people that don't like something don't like that another group likes that something? Whoop dee do. You see what I am getting at now?
It is irrelevant if we are talking about pederasty or eating a ham sandwich. The point he is trying to make is that another religion is immoral because it doesn't share the same moral beliefs he does... or we do? If we are reduced to this level of introspection on topics then this is going to be a sad new millenia.
Unfortunatly said taboo is not being broken in general or at least no evidence with any substance has been presented to show such a claim. We really haven't progressed any farther than this.
Actually he has moved somewhat. He has shown that perhaps a segment of the Islamic community, particularly in Iran, does practice pedophilia and bestiality.
I can't read farsi or know if this is actually written by Khomeini, but it appears that Khomeini was setting out laws to regulate it. Interestingly enough noting how one should not be harming the children one has sexual contact with.
I will state that I have heard experiences of this kind of social customs within Iran, Afghanistan, and I think maybe Syria and Jordan. It is not direct knowledge but it came from people defending their culture so my guess is they wouldn't be admitting such a thing if it didn't hold some truth.
The fact that Khomeini does not represent all of Islam or all of the cultures within Islam stands as the only refutation for PGs general claim regarding the religion as a whole. Indeed, his Quran quotes were nothing at all.
No further discussion of if pederasty is right or wrong need occur because we have put it in the arena where it only applies to people who mostly believe it is wrong.
I hope you can understand why this is not true. It may explain why you don't want to challenge that portion of the claim, or why it gets your hackles up, but it is still relevant to address it as it is part of an objective statement.
Of course it is more important to deal with the general issue of if a culture can be stigmatized as immoral by people with a different moral system, and have that stand as something more than making a cultural comparison. And what does that mean about everything else they do or think?

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Jazzns, posted 12-02-2004 1:57 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Jazzns, posted 12-02-2004 5:35 PM Silent H has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3912 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 85 of 113 (164739)
12-02-2004 5:35 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Silent H
12-02-2004 3:11 PM


Okay I think we are getting somewhere.
I can see where you are coming from with the age of consent. I agree there will be a grey area. There does exist in the same spirit as my previous post though a line to cross and it is just a matter of details where that line is drawn in the specific parts of "our culture"
I might add that until recently they all had laws against homosexuality and porn. Does that mean everyone agreed or that such things are objectively wrong?
This is where its starts to get a little confusing I guess and I don't necessarily think this really applies. The right to view porn or be a homosexual is very different from the right to have sex with children. The first two involve a personal taste while the second involves the necessary element of a child whom which will be directly affected by the right so to speak. It is different.
About distinguishing between pederasty and pedophilia, we would have to ask PG about that but based on the quotes he gaves about sex with young girls and animals it seems like it is more just plain old "perversions" which cover pedophilia and even beastiality.
If we switch the argument to homosexuality like you suggest then we introduce a new set of variables that I don't think exist in this particular case. We believe that pedophilia is wrong because we don't feel children are mature enough to make sexual decisions. Homosexuality where it is two consenting individuals might still be considered wrong by most but it dosen't have the association with violent crime like pedophilia. (btw I don't think homosexuality is a crime)
Given that though you seem to agree that by some definition most people agree that it is wrong. You go on to give the example of pork eating. This I think actually lines up pretty well with what is going on but to a much lesser degree. I have heard of some who think us westerners who eat pork are disgusting. In the same way PG is trying to elicit that feeling of disgust by associating Islam with pederasty IN GENERAL due to the fact that we think pederasty is wrong. It is different though in its degree due to the fact that a staunch Jew of Moslem would probably tolerate watching someone eat pork while few of "us" would tolerate adult fornication with a child.
I hope you can understand why this is not true.
I guess I still don't. It is all about context and I am glad that we are progressed to this point about context because it seems like a more mature argument. "We" think pedophilia is bad in various degrees. Much worse than "pork eating" or some other more minor cultural difference. PG's arguments have no power without the light of this taboo as it relates to "us". He might not have even thought of making the argument if he didn't expect it to arouse our moral firmware. Since this taboo is shared with the group of people in question (Muslims), we have a case where sandpaper meets skin all because of the specific context in which pederasty is being viewed.
What I think you are trying to get at is that if we step back and remove ourselves from this context then PG illicits no responses and this thread gets closed 50 posts ago. He has no power because there is no sense of moral injustice to either jump on the PG bandwagon or defend the falsely accused. Am I understanding you properly?
If so then I do agree with you. Should we all be so enlightened as to allow other culture's seemingly criminal acts to be taken as the consequence of diversity then we would not be having this discussion. I guess I am just not sure that is a reasonable expectation especially given that the argument put forth is so seemingly riddled with error AND malcontent.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 3:11 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 6:44 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 86 of 113 (164751)
12-02-2004 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Jazzns
12-02-2004 5:35 PM


I think we are almost there...
The right to view porn or be a homosexual is very different from the right to have sex with children. The first two involve a personal taste while the second involves the necessary element of a child whom which will be directly affected by the right so to speak. It is different.
Actually this is not true. The argument against porn and homosexuality was that it did harm someone. Only masturbation, or porn made for onesself, was solely a personal issue. Remember these were considered inherently harmful, and as we treat kids today, nothing that any normal person would want.
Thus in the production of porn one is hurting someone, through its distribution one is hurting the viewer (though they may have made the choice to view it how are they unlike kids not realizing they shouldn't). Homosexuality was not natural and certainly not genetic and so it was always a homosexual perverting an innocent and dragging them into certain physical and psychological harm.
In fact they were both considered to be part of violent crimes, porn especially so. The violence argument is still made against porn even today.
Thus they are very accurate, and in any case the overall point I was trying to make is that most people thinking something and even passing laws doesn't mean anything is real or objective.
You go on to give the example of pork eating... In the same way PG is trying to elicit that feeling of disgust by associating Islam with pederasty IN GENERAL due to the fact that we think pederasty is wrong. It is different though in its degree due to the fact that a staunch Jew of Moslem would probably tolerate watching someone eat pork while few of "us" would tolerate adult fornication with a child.
Absolutely correct. It is different in degree but the same issue. That only tells us that sexual issues are considered more serious in these times than culinary ones. Then again, try and feed pork to a child of a Jew or Muslim and you will find almost the same level of anger. I personally witnessed a Muslim try to attack a person for giving him pork in what was supposed to be a helal meal. It was serious.
Actually this did make me think of a better analogy still. Lets say we were dealing with some Indians in the Southwest US. A person like PG can talk about a popular political/military figure and point out that he has engaged in drug use, and indeed his tribe not only uses but endorses drug use as part of their religion. Thus they use it and push its use on others. That certainly would make them immoral according to most western minds. Okay, so then what is the point? We are supposed to end dealing with them? Whatever they say is wrong?
What I think you are trying to get at is that if we step back and remove ourselves from this context then PG illicits no responses and this thread gets closed 50 posts ago. He has no power because there is no sense of moral injustice to either jump on the PG bandwagon or defend the falsely accused. Am I understanding you properly?
That is just about dead on. As an addition it will hopefully kill future threads along the exact same line.
I guess I am just not sure that is a reasonable expectation especially given that the argument put forth is so seemingly riddled with error AND malcontent.
Well it obviously is error filled and for malignant purpose. The problem is if his topical errors are the only one's addressed, then he will be free to continue shifting his sites to another single target along the same line. Oh that guys a pedo, hey she's a druggie, etc etc immoral issues. I am arguing its better yet to say, or ask, so what? What does that mean to anyone, even if true?
Hmmm. Well I guess I should ask... It does appear that many muslims... ones following Khomeini and now the new leader in Iran, do allow for pedophilia and bestiality. What does this mean to you about them (even if not about all of Islam)? That they are immoral, or that they have a different moral system? And even if they are immoral what does that mean regarding how we deal with them? For example, does this mean we have to treat Iran differently regarding their nuclear program, than if their beliefs did not allow this?
I see no practical use of PGs claim, even if it was 100% true.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Jazzns, posted 12-02-2004 5:35 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Jazzns, posted 12-02-2004 8:09 PM Silent H has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3912 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 87 of 113 (164759)
12-02-2004 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Silent H
12-02-2004 6:44 PM


I don't want to belabor this point but were there any people who were sent to jail for 25 to life for watching porn or engaging in homosexual activities? It was my understanding that these practices were considered mental illnesses rather than true violent crimes. I will admit to only having a passing knowledge of this though.
Your analogy with the hypothetical native americans was good in regards to the same structure minus the fact that we believe that the claim of acceptance of said taboo act by that culture is false. It does clarify your point though that given that the culture does consider "our" taboo acceptable there is no point of acknowledging the bigoted argument brought forth by PG.
My only concern with that was my own motive for jumping in on this argument was for defense of a culture for which I partially consider my own. If everyone just said "who cares" then the fallacy remains standing going against honest perception even if the argument is belittled to the bottom of forum.
It is the same reasoning that many others jump on your average "spirited" creationist even when the arguments are old and silly. It is the sense that you can't leave an unjustified, demeaning, or just plain untruthful statement to be a matter of record without a corresponding refutation. In this case it was even more enticing for me in particular due to the personal nature of the association.
I am not quite sure how effective enacting the "so what" argument would have on the fanatical right. It certainly sounds good but seems like it might be impossible to get everyone to agree to it. You can always find someone to feed the trolls. You also might just get a bunch of proclamations of victory which would only encourge the behaviour. Overall I feel it might be better to make sure that they always know that us mostly reasonable people will always be there to let them know that they have not won.
As for how I feel about Iranian acceptance of these taboos, I fell that if their is evidence that they actually do and it is accepted in the culture then I would simply know more about Iranians then I do now. I would still consider it immoral personally. I have a feeling though that it probably is not practiced in general even there. One leader who mostly says "good" things and sometimes says "weird" things is not indicative of the general attitude and beliefs of the populace. I would need more evidence to even believe it in the first place though.
As it relates to Islam I feel that it would just be another sect that has strayed from the mainstream teachings. The type of Islam that our infamous friend Bin Laden practices is FAR different from that of most of the Muslims that I know personally. Compare this to the different sects of Christianity or just about any other religion in the world and you will always find people willing to read something into their religion to help support their own worldview. Heck, you don't even have to look any further than the YECs themselves here in this forum for that.
In regards to how we deal with Iran I think it means that we need to be careful who we send to deal with them considering the fact that under the current administration the representative may be more inclined to be unable to look past the cultural indignation. It is very hard to negotiate with people whom you consider morally inferior. If recent times as telling in hindsight as they are today then you need not look very far for examples of this as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 6:44 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Silent H, posted 12-03-2004 5:17 AM Jazzns has not replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4678 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 88 of 113 (164768)
12-02-2004 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Silent H
12-02-2004 4:42 AM


Is PG trolling the EvC Forum?
but it just seems to me that ol' PG never would have had an audience if people realized his claims (even if true) didn't amount to a hill of beans. The fact that he was wrong as well just compounded the error. But he was counting on, and received, the knee jerk reaction necessary to give him validation.
What you have described is a classic troll. Pecos George makes a very inflamatory statement that engages several hot buttons and offers no evidence in support or verification and sits back and watches the discussion boil over occassionaly offering a few more inflamatory comments but refusing to offer evidence.
My question is this. Is Pecos George trolling the EvC Forum and if so should he be allowed to be a troll here?
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Silent H, posted 12-02-2004 4:42 AM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by AdminNosy, posted 12-02-2004 10:43 PM lfen has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 89 of 113 (164772)
12-02-2004 10:43 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by lfen
12-02-2004 10:21 PM


Re: Is PG trolling the EvC Forum?
He's certainly attracted my attention. We'll see how he does in the next week or two.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by lfen, posted 12-02-2004 10:21 PM lfen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by PecosGeorge, posted 12-03-2004 10:53 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5820 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 90 of 113 (164835)
12-03-2004 5:17 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Jazzns
12-02-2004 8:09 PM


I don't want to belabor this point but were there any people who were sent to jail for 25 to life for watching porn or engaging in homosexual activities?
Are you kidding? I can't say anything for numbers of years, tougher sentencing is the norm within the last 20 years, but yes people went to jail for porn and homosexuality. Perhaps you were unaware but it was the goal of the Bush administration to make porn a crime again. Seymour Butts was facing jail time just recently because his videos involved fisting.
Larry Flynt is well known for having been arrested on porn charges as well as other people in the early porn industry. Oscar Wilde was also a pretty famous figure for having been imprisoned for homosexual sex... I think his was five years hard labour.
You seem to not understand what times were like against other hated groups once "known" by the majority to be wrong and harmful. And you do not seem to know how sex with minors went from a nonissue to the "known" harm it is today. Its just a wheel going round and round having to pick on some group and coming up with rationalizations which sound good and no one bothers to scrutinize.
Remember beer was once considered 'known' to be harmful and bad by the majority of this nation... as well as intimately tied to violent crime (which making it illegal helped secure the illusion).
It was my understanding that these practices were considered mental illnesses rather than true violent crimes.
By psychologists it was considered mental deviance, with psychological and physical repercussions. These deviants were, like pedophiles, thought to be "predators" on otherwise innocent people. Their deeds were as "violent" as any sex with minors could be. That is it involved coercion and deception at the very least, and actual physical violence at the very worst.
Indeed I am hard pressed to believe that you view all cases of sex with minors as "true violent crimes". That seems a little bit out of place, even today. It is known that children can and do engage in sex without violence being involved.
Remember this was not that long ago. You can find plenty of popular items from the time which depict gays or pornographers as predators. There are even military training films which show how to avoid problems on shore leave... the leering gay man in the shadows is definitely good for a laugh.
Or you can always watch, or better yet read, The Big Sleep by Raymond Chandler. It was a popular book and movie early last century. The bad guys are predatory gays and pornographers. Frankly I love Raymond Chandler but in these times much of his attitudes can be pretty offensive.
Your analogy with the hypothetical native americans was good in regards to the same structure minus the fact that we believe that the claim of acceptance of said taboo act by that culture is false.
Heheheh... who said it was hypothetical? Well the particular native american leader might be, in order to construct an analogy to Arafat, but the rest was culled from actual US legal issues. You do know that there is at least one tribe that uses peyote and its religious practices made illegal by the government because of their "drug use"?
It is the sense that you can't leave an unjustified, demeaning, or just plain untruthful statement to be a matter of record without a corresponding refutation.You can always find someone to feed the trolls. You also might just get a bunch of proclamations of victory which would only encourge the behaviour.
This is true. But if held to actually having to come up with some connection of the claim to a real reason anyone should care, their proclamations would seem pretty hollow.
I would still consider it immoral personally. I have a feeling though that it probably is not practiced in general even there. One leader who mostly says "good" things and sometimes says "weird" things is not indicative of the general attitude and beliefs of the populace. I would need more evidence to even believe it in the first place though.
I cannot argue against whether you should feel it is immoral or not, unless you gave your criteria for morality and for some reason it didn't seem to fit. In any case I'm fine with personal judgements. That's what makes the world go 'round. I actually love diversity like that... just not ignorance.
But to let you know, from what I have heard of the eastern areas of the MidEast, the subjects mentioned by Khomeini are actually practiced by a multitude of different peoples throughout Iran and Afghanistan (which everyone should keep in mind are not uniform societies like in the US). This does not appear at all to be a leader saying weird things from his personal worldview. It was not like Jim Jones or Koresh creating a new moral reality.
It is certainly known that marriage can reach down as low as nine years old, which would certainly involve pedophilic sex.
The site Homa.org is where PG pulled his quotes and the site has buttons to go see the farsi writings of Khomeini. If you read farsi maybe you want to go take a look and see if they are real quotes.
Compare this to the different sects of Christianity or just about any other religion in the world and you will always find people willing to read something into their religion to help support their own worldview.
Absolutely, but again I don't think this is actually the case here. While he obviously does not represent all of Islam, he doesn't even seem to be talking about "here is what the Quran says" to say these acts are what all Islam should practice. It looks more like he was creating law for the people, based on applying Quran principles to the real world. If Quran mentions nothing about age, then he sets down law without age proscriptions and instead mentions its right or wrong based on harm, moral or physical. I saw no endorsement of any actions.
It is very hard to negotiate with people whom you consider morally inferior. If recent times as telling in hindsight as they are today then you need not look very far for examples of this as well.
Exactly. When oh when is the United Nations going to issue the Prime Directive? Oh hell, that's right... we have to wait for a few more major wars and then the United Federation of Planets issues the directive.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Jazzns, posted 12-02-2004 8:09 PM Jazzns has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024