|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Multiculturalism | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Coyote writes:
We're talking about blending societies here. If we're going to accept people from other societies to merge into ours, we have to be prepared sometimes to take the bad with the good.
If you want to consider various behaviors as "social norms" you must place them in the society to which they belong. What is a social norm in one place isn't always acceptable elsewhere. Coyote writes:
It's funny how you guys fixate on the most extreme examples. Our legal system is not obliged to ignore beheadings because someone's daughter dated the wrong fellow, not is blasphemy a crime punishable by death here just because it offends someone's sensibilities. I have not suggested letting people get away with murder. I have suggested not putting mothers in prison for making decisions for their children, such as about vaccinations, appendectomies or circumcision.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Who is advocating that mothers, rather than those who actually undertake the FGM procedure, should face legal consequences? I thought it was those actually doing the cutting whose actions are illegal.
What are you talking about imprisoning mothers?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Straggler writes: Who is advocating that mothers, rather than those who actually undertake the FGM procedure, should face legal consequences? I thought it was those actually doing the cutting whose actions are illegal.What are you talking about imprisoning mothers? Anybody aiding and abetting FGM is comitting a crime. Given that no one has been convicted of the offence since it came into existence in 1983, it's highly unlikely that a mother would be imprisoned even if convicted. Ringo is just taking an extreme and emotive position for no obvious reason.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
Whatever ringo.
You're being so ridiculous that your posts no longer warrant reply.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2105 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
We're talking about blending societies here. If we're going to accept people from other societies to merge into ours, we have to be prepared sometimes to take the bad with the good. If people come from other places to "blend into our societies," perhaps it is best if they actually do so, not demand that their ways of doing things be dominant. If they wanted that, they could have saved themselves the trip. Take the reverse case: any of us who emigrate to another country and demand that our ways be not only accepted but dominate are in for a rude awakening. As an example: I believe you are from Canada. And I'm willing to bet that anyone moving to Canada from the US who brings a lot of guns and demands to be treated under US rather than Canadian laws would not get a warm reception.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
The people who want to keep the practice are in Africa. Nobody is talking about imprisoning those people.
The people who are talked about being imprisoned are in the UK. And that's because you have to follow the laws of the country that you become a citizen of. But nobody has actually been imprisoned in the UK for FGM. And you haven't shown us anyone who wants to keep the practice there. Immigrants may want to practice FGM there, but that is going against what the UK wants. If they want to become citizens, then they need to follow the laws. Those laws say to not perform FGM. If they want to go against the law, then they should face the punishments. But nobody is talking about sending a task force to their homes and ripping them from their children and throwing them in prison.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
No, it puts other reasons, such as compassionate reasons, ahead of sociological reasons. What compassionate reasons? I mean, domestic violence victims keep going back to their husbands. They must not be being abused, eh? And if you had compassion for the husband, you wouldn't think that we should not press charges against him, right? Nor should we help the women get out of the situation, right? I mean, if you had any compassion for the husband... What is compassionate about keeping people in an oppressive society where they have to cut off their childrens' genitals in order for them to not be outcasted? Part of ending FGM is changing those societies so that the women are not so oppressed. That's way more compassionate than: "if they say they ain't abused then they ain't", which is actually pretty disgusting.
If a society has ingrained reasons for a certain practice, whether those reasons are good or bad, we are not forced to ignore their stated feelings in favour of our own calculations. We can, and sometimes should, make allowances. This has totally happened with FGM. The conclusion has been that FGM is rejected as a social norm that should be allowed to be practiced. The opinions have been respected, they have been gathered and analyzed, and the reaction is that FGM needs to be stopped. The women who say they want to perpetuate it have been coerced by the patriarchal societies that they are forced to live with. Too, even some of the surveying methods were suspect. Like, when they were asked if they think they should be allowed to continue the practice, they were considering that against the other option of being banned from society. So, they choose the lesser of two evils. But if they understood that the practice can be eliminated, without them being banned from the society, then they are willing to admit that in that case they would not want to continue the practice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member
|
But nobody is talking about sending a task force to their homes and ripping them from their children and throwing them in prison. To be fair, I kind of am. But then again I am absolutely convinced (and, I believe, rightly so) that Western cultural values are superior to FGM cultural values and that as we have been blessed with such great powers that we have a responsibility to use them to advocate for the oppressed, the hungry, the exploited, etc. I think we have a duty to step in and help people who are being enslaved to evil, even if that evil is their own culture.Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Tang writes: Anybody aiding and abetting FGM is committing a crime. But this emotive nonsense about hordes of mothers being ripped away from their children is just disingenuous drivel. It is the doctors who undertake the "circumcisions" in question that are primarily at risk of any prosecution. The relevant section of the British law declares, "A person is guilty of an offence if he excises, infibulates or otherwise mutilates the whole or any part of a girl's labia majora, labia minora or clitoris." Obviously this would include any mother who attempts to slice off her daughters clitoris with a carving knife on the kitchen table. But in the UK, where the law in question applies, realistically it will be medical practitioners rather than mothers who face any prosecution. This is the only case of FGM going to court in the UK I could find.
Link
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Straggler writes: The relevant section of the British law declares, "A person is guilty of an offence if he excises, infibulates or otherwise mutilate Certainly the person doing the actual cutting will be treated quite harshly and almost certainly go to jail. But anyone who assists in the process of someone committing a crime is also committing an offence - just not of the FGM. I don't know whether the CPS would go for a mother who aids and abetts - I doubt it unless it's a bombproof case. Their inability/unwillingness to prosecute any FGM so far suggests that they wouldn't. Now that the tide is changing and a couple of cases are going through the courts, I suspect the message will get out that this FGM is a bad idea and the police will be getting progressively harder on it. Personally, I think like Jon - we should define our position on this and come down heavy on it because it's the higher moral right - even if it means imprisoning so called 'mothers'. The sooner this abhorrant culturural practice is stamped out here the better for both cultures.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Sure. I don't have a problem with any of that. But the idea that the main aim and practical effect of the law will be to separate mothers from their babies by throwing hordes of mothers into jail (as per Ringo's objection) is just drivel.
The focus of the law will be on those who do the cutting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Straggler writes:
Read the thread. I have asked several times if the mothers should be imprisoned and the general view seems to be that "the law must be enforced". Who is advocating that mothers, rather than those who actually undertake the FGM procedure, should face legal consequences? Personally, I don't think the laws are targeted at the mothers - so why can't I get anybody to distance themselves from imprisoning the mothers? I'd like to see opponents of FGM say, flat out, "No!, Don't imprison the mothers!" Why don't they?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Jon writes:
Just for the record, you have no reply for:
You're being so ridiculous that your posts no longer warrant reply.quote:or for quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 411 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Coyote writes:
Nobody's demanding that their culture be dominant. They just want to be tolerated.
If people come from other places to "blend into our societies," perhaps it is best if they actually do so, not demand that their ways of doing things be dominant. Coyote writes:
What a bizarre scenario. If I brought my guns to the US, I'd expect a lot more tolerance for them than I would get in Canada.
And I'm willing to bet that anyone moving to Canada from the US who brings a lot of guns and demands to be treated under US rather than Canadian laws would not get a warm reception.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined: |
Ringo writes: I have asked several times if the mothers should be imprisoned and the general view seems to be that "the law must be enforced". But what is it about the law in question that leads you to think mothers, rather than those doing the cutting, will face imprisonment? You have invented a problem that doesn't exist and isn't likely to exist even if the law in question is pursued to a far greater extent than it is at present. Your objection based on imprisoning mothers as a major issue is a complete straw man. What mothers have been imprisoned?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024