Multiculturalism

NoNukes inquires: I would suspect Coyote is referring to the "lax" accommodation on the part of people who could say otherwise to the Hispanic-American communities of having 2 languages.I.E.: The reason you have to even press "1" to continue in English.

jar writes: Pure poppycock. Only one transgressor would be a huge success. It's the % that slow down that counts.I will give you this: "...the law was NOT PERFECT as a deterrent".If only one person slows down, then there was an effect, as negligible as it may be. If 2 slow down, still probably negligible. 50? How about 80% slowing down? I'd call that pretty effective.

jar persists: Ah - it is a question of semantics after all. What makes you think that laws could be PERFECT?
Using your definition, every single law ever made is ineffective - a useless definition.

Jon writes: Well, I guess the lesson is that we can't take that for granted. It appears to me that the discussion rapidly ascended to one about basic morals. Shoot, it almost flew up into a meta-debate about debating. Everyone in the thread is against FGM, clearly enough. But some, like Zombie Ringo, are sort of asking themselves "wait a minute - how did I arrive at that conclusion so fast?" Some might say "it's absolute" or "it's obvious". The discussion seems to be about the internal mechanism that led to this conclusion.There have been some extreme outlier examples in attempts to draw a line in the sand somewhere, similar to the punchline of the bad joke about the man offering the woman money for sex, "...now we're just haggling over the price"....

Agree.4 words:Hurt people hurt people.

One of my favorite marble types writes of Ringo: Perhaps he has taken up the position of debating something he really doesn't agree with personally. Sort of a debate challenge.I was trying to come up with something like a UK family moving into a Maasai village with their 6-year old daughter and getting pressure to submit her to FGM. No way, the UK parents might argue. But what if it's the LAW there? But this didn't work out in my mind - the opposite side of a foreign culture abiding by the new cultural practices in their new location.Perhaps someone can come up with what I wanted to do. I was hoping to find something that Ringo could not abide....

dronester asks: In the USA, people voting for Republicans.

It's all bad.

Ringo argues: No. That is not what Tangle agreed to. What the argument here says is that the consent of the child is NOT AVAILABLE YET. The mothers have to wait until ?? 16 years? 21 years? I like 21, but that's just my culture speaking. The consent IS REQUIRED, it's just not available yet. You have to wait for it.However, I will take up your position that the mothers should not be separated from their daughters by jail sentences. There should be programs of heavy counseling sessions and intervention. Education, education, education. The mothers have to be convinced of their error in their own minds.

True, but the men have to be there. Are they even there?I was addressing Ringo's point, however, about the women that wanted it done.