|
| Thread: Norway got a new law! |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
posted June 17, 2008 06:18 AM |
|
|
NIMBY isn't really the appropriate analogy here...
Nitpicking aside, I completely agree. People accept on the outside, while silently loathing on the inside.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
Korejora
Promising
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 07:19 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Gays are less worthy than straights. I challenge you to prove this statement wrong, if any of you want to.
Dunno about where you live, but where I am there's no discrepancy. Hell, some people just "try out" being gay for indeterminate amounts of time to see if they prefer it. (Usually they just know, though.) Sure, you still assume people are straight given no other information, but that's just because it's a statistical probability. There's no coming out of the closet; if you don't know someone's gay, it's just because it's never been brought up. You end up finding out they're gay when they talk about their ex-samesexfriend or current lover or whatever, and absolutely nothing changes.
(And same-sex marriage has been legal for some time now. Not really long, but a fair while.)
____________
That's the best part. 
|
|
Daystar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Back from the Dead
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 08:52 AM |
|
Edited by Daystar at 08:53, 17 Jun 2008.
|
Quote:
Gays are less worthy than straights. I challenge you to prove this statement wrong, if any of you want to.
Alright, I'll try.
Straights are human.
Gays are humans.
Humans have rights.
Gays have rights equal to Straights.
Straights are human.
Gays are humans.
Humans can think, feel, love, and care.
Gays have the same kinds of feelings that Straights do.
Many Gays do not realize their orientation until they are at least 14-18 or so (I think, if I'm wrong correct me) thus their education will not be affected by their orientation, and thus they have the same knowledge and teachings as Straights.
In fact, the only way in which Gays are less worthy is in this weird book some old dead guys wrote a while back. I've read part of it and it's pretty boring. Probably shouldn't be used as an reliable source of information.
EDIT: I agree with Mytical. And I am unanimous in that.
____________
How exactly is luck a skill?
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 10:11 AM |
|
|
Maybe everyone who posts in this thread should read back some informations about "discrimination", and then turn back here and post again.
It is really astonishing how narrowminded some people in the OSM are.
Do you really think it is better for a child to grow up without any parents than with 2 dads?
Do really think a girl turns into a lesbian only because she had 2 moms?
Do your really think your opinion counts for your whole country?
Do you really think a "normal" couple only gets married because of religious backgrounds or because of their belief?
Incredible.....
If discriminating posts won't stop here, thread will be closed soon.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 10:34 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe.
I wouldn't wish it upon any kid though, to go through school with two dads.
You do not know what it is like to grow as an orphan.
If you think bullying at school is bad, consider the emotional disabilities of living a life of a child unwanted; perhaps accompanied with mental or developmental disabilities. There are so many abandoned children. All need the love of a permanent family.
Well...
they are both bad
it's not like it's one or the other ...... like "you can keep the 2 dads or kill them" or something lol.
like saying "You lost a leg in a car accident? pff.... you don't know what it's like to have cancer"
They are completely separate and bad in different ways..
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
posted June 17, 2008 01:27 PM |
|
Edited by executor at 13:34, 17 Jun 2008.
|
Quote:
Do you really think it is better for a child to grow up without any parents than with 2 dads?
Yes, although I consider both situations to be seriously bad.
Quote:
Do really think a girl turns into a lesbian only because she had 2 moms?
Will for sure - definitely no, more likely - probably/uncertain.
Quote:
Do your really think your opinion counts for your whole country?
Whole - no, in my case - most of my country. Even if minority, why should someone be deprived of trying to bring about a model of society he/she finds the best one? Others have the right to counter that, of course, and whole thing is a matter of majority's agreement.
Quote:
Do you really think a "normal" couple only gets married because of religious backgrounds or because of their belief?
No, there are plenty of reasons.
Quote:
Maybe everyone who posts in this thread should read back some informations about "discrimination", and then turn back here and post again.
It is really astonishing how narrowminded some people in the OSM are.
Have it ever crossed your mind that if you ban a religious man from stating what he/she believes in, includeing what he/she finds sinful, it is discriminatory by definition?
And do you realize that enforcing human-rights as absolute is discriminatory of those who see it as flawed? What makes you think your opinion is superior than those who you consider to be discriminatory, save your value system and your beliefs? What makes are your beliefs any better than TA's, TNT's, galev's, Azagal's, executor's, and so on (even Incubus'es and Zan's?! )? Why it is you and not someone else whose judgement should be excercised and taken as the most right one?
Has it ever crossed your mind that it is you who is narrowminded?
And lastly, and most importantly, don't you think that banning any opinion you find wrong prom public discussion is a bit totalitarian  ?
I do respect you and your beliefs, even if I find them flawed, so please do the same, even if you despise mine.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 01:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Have it ever crossed your mind that if you ban a religious man from stating what he/she believes in, includeing what he/she finds sinful, it is discriminatory by definition?
And do you realize that enforcing human-rights as absolute is discriminatory of those who see it as flawed? What makes you think your opinion is superior than those who you consider to be discriminatory, save your value system and your beliefs? What makes are your beliefs any better than TA's, TNT's, galev's, Azagal's, executor's, and so on (even Incubus'es and Zan's?!)? Why it is you and not someone else whose judgement should be excercised and taken as the most right one?
Has it ever crossed your mind that it is you who is narrowminded?
And lastly, and most importantly, don't you think that banning any opinion you find wrong prom public discussion is a bit totalitarian ?
I do respect you and your beliefs, even if I find them flawed, so please do the same, even if you despise mine.
Agreed.
____________
The giant has awakened
You drink my blood and drown
Wrath and raving I will not stop
You'll never take me down
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 02:51 PM |
|
|
Quote:
whole thing is a matter of majority's agreement
Only after the rights of individuals are protected.
Quote:
Have it ever crossed your mind that if you ban a religious man from stating what he/she believes in, includeing what he/she finds sinful, it is discriminatory by definition?
It's one thing to ban statements, and another thing not to put them in action.
Quote:
And do you realize that enforcing human-rights as absolute is discriminatory of those who see it as flawed?
Human rights trump whatever prejudices people might have.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 02:57 PM |
|
Edited by angelito at 15:01, 17 Jun 2008.
|
Quote:
Has it ever crossed your mind that it is you who is narrowminded?
Huhh? Are you for real? I don't care about your personal opinion or the personal opinion of anyone in such cases, but I care about the definition of things like "discrimination" or "racicsm". Only because something is a "personal opinion" doesn't mean it is NOT discriminating, right?
Quote:
And lastly, and most importantly, don't you think that banning any opinion you find wrong prom public discussion is a bit totalitarian ?
This was stated a hundred times at least here on HC: Even though everyone is ABLE to join Heroescommunity, no one is allowed to break rules stated in the CoC or even "real life" laws.
Quote:
I do respect you and your beliefs, even if I find them flawed, so please do the same, even if you despise mine.
I will repeat myself: I don't care (or better: it is not important) if u respect my belief, but u have to respect given rules and laws.
example:
If you would say: "All snows are f**ked and should be shot to death", this would be a personal opinion, right? Should I have respect for this opinion? For sure not.
Try o express your personal opinion in front of a policeman and say things like "I will kill George W. Bush because he is a mor*n, a retared monkey, bla, bla, bla..".
You just stated "your personal opinion". Let's wait and see how many respect this policeman will show for your opinion.
I repeat what I said: If the "personal opinions" in this thread will continue being discriminating or racistic, thread will be closed. If u don't like that move, open an own forum and take responsability for the stuff your users will post there.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 03:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Do you really think it is better for a child to grow up without any parents than with 2 dads?
Yes, although I consider both situations to be seriously bad.
Whoa, Executor, now you've shocked me. ANY child needs parents and whether they are of the same sex or not doesn't count. Being Homosexual is a neuro-physical effect, and cannot be influenced by others (though you sometimes need others to see it youself). And yes, I think that two parents, one being male and the other female, still make better than two homosexuals, but only slightly. It's still better to raise a child with TWO parents (ignoring the sex), that with only one or none. Many children who've spent their youth in Orphanages or mono-parental households become more easier depressed and commit suicide earlier than other children. It's in the child's profit that we give it tow parents.
Enough with the theory, we can't be sure whether letting holebi's adopt children is a good choice, or not; but if we don't give it a chance, we will never know. but I believe we have to know before we can prohibid it. But what a child's life worth if you use it as a testing product ? What is the worth of the life of a child ?
The last question gentlemen, is the most difficult question in whole world...
I will now leave and let you slaughter eachother and ignore this intermission. (thus resuming the main OSM activities)
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
Minion
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 03:28 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Do you really think it is better for a child to grow up without any parents than with 2 dads?
Yes, although I consider both situations to be seriously bad.
You want what is best for the child... Same thing said the mother who drowned her child. He was from the devil, she said.
Quote:
Quote:
Do your really think your opinion counts for your whole country?
Whole - no, in my case - most of my country. Even if minority, why should someone be deprived of trying to bring about a model of society he/she finds the best one? Others have the right to counter that, of course, and whole thing is a matter of majority's agreement.
That is how it goes. Poland is a scary place to be gay in.
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe everyone who posts in this thread should read back some informations about "discrimination", and then turn back here and post again.
It is really astonishing how narrowminded some people in the OSM are.
Have it ever crossed your mind that if you ban a religious man from stating what he/she believes in, includeing what he/she finds sinful, it is discriminatory by definition?
And do you realize that enforcing human-rights as absolute is discriminatory of those who see it as flawed? What makes you think your opinion is superior than those who you consider to be discriminatory, save your value system and your beliefs? What makes are your beliefs any better than TA's, TNT's, galev's, Azagal's, executor's, and so on (even Incubus'es and Zan's?!)? Why it is you and not someone else whose judgement should be excercised and taken as the most right one?
Has it ever crossed your mind that it is you who is narrowminded?
And lastly, and most importantly, don't you think that banning any opinion you find wrong prom public discussion is a bit totalitarian ?
I do respect you and your beliefs, even if I find them flawed, so please do the same, even if you despise mine.
No matter how much we have to respect religions, we are NOT forced to sit by and let them practice discriminatory procedures, hatespeeches, or just violent and brutal acts (mutilations of young girls etc.) The society shoul NOT bend into following religion when they choose the discriminatory way, and thank the Lords of Kobol in big parts of Europe that is so. Enforcing human-rights is discriminatory. I must say that I am astonished... worst thing I have heard a while, and I have heard some horrible stuff. Let me tell you something. Religion is not society! People who are born in a country, are born in THAT society and want to live in it, not in the religion of the area. Nevertheless if the religius people persecute these "wrong people" that were born in that COUNTRY, then it is the job of the society to protect these individuals.
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 03:35 PM |
|
Edited by Lexxan at 15:44, 17 Jun 2008.
|
Well I think angelito has a point here (please don't shoot me). Everyone has his oppinion, and may express it, but as long as (and only as long as) it doesn't hurt, insult, shock others in any way.
I think THAT's what angelito was trying to say... before you lot killed him, that is.
EDIT: oh, and before you start attacking me, see this and reconsider about whom you call narrowminded
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 04:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I will repeat myself: I don't care (or better: it is not important) if u respect my belief, but u have to respect given rules and laws.
I don't think 'given rules and laws' are to be respected blindly. If of course the laws are bad (I'm not talking about the CoC).
For example, if in a society, gay people are not accepted on the LAW, does that mean that it is not discriminatory simply because the law says so? Does discrimination come from the law? Laws are built by *some* humans -- so if in a law system gay are forbidden, does that mean that whether I say "gay people suck" I am not discriminatory, because I am doing what the divine law says? (gay people are forbidden in this example law remember?)
Another example, the other way around. Suppose that pedophilia is accepted by a given law. Does that mean that it is a 'good' thing because it doesn't hurt me in any way, but it hurts children that have no way to defend themselves (even from their curiosity). Do not misinterpret this the wrong way, I'm not talking about gays, but about pedophiles. Does this mean that pedophilia is ok since the law says so?
Or if a given law says that black people are bad -- does that mean that if I say "Black people must die" I am not racist since I agree with that particular law and follow it?
To respect the law? I don't know, whatever it is, you still have to do it to be a part of the society. But claiming that the law decides what's discriminatory and what is "ok" is not good.
If I did not understand what you meant please accept my apology  (I sure hope I did understand at least a bit).
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 04:30 PM |
|
Edited by executor at 17:47, 17 Jun 2008.
|
I have no intention of shooting you, Lexxan  .
Quote:
But I believe we have to know before we can prohibid it.
Well my opinion is exactly the contrary - we have to know if we were to allow it. We don't know - we don't allow it. Vicious circle? I don't care.
Concerning definitions you gave, unwillingness to go beyond a system of values that emhasizes euality of rights beyond anything else is narrow-minded as well, surprisingly you proved me right .
I wanted to say that not letting me speak my opinion is as well discrimination. And by the way, many people may be *hurt, insulted or shocked* by opinion that they are should stay out of public discussion because of their view of the world, and that this view is considered inferior, ehatever that view would be.
What concerns me is that one group of people speak something considered to be discriminating, and when these people's opinion is bashed and considered crap they should keep to themselves, it is not discriminating at all. How fair .
And my sincere apologies to Angelito for one thing. I had no intent of questioning your authority over the forum  . Without slightest irony I say that if you think that I should be penalized for saying that I like blue strawberries or my (potential) thread about taxation thorems closed for any reason you find apropriate and based in CoC, I will have no problem with that. It is you who is the mod here, not me, I do know the rules, I joined HC out of my free will (and I am happy with that, many discussions are on good level, although they get flamy at times), and I have no problem submitting to mods' actions.
However, I thought that I may state my critical opinion about mods' job, hope I was not wrong with that  .
Oh, one more thing. The policeman example. If I were the policeman, I would put the guy in arrest for security reasons, but do not neglect his right to have his opinion and make it known to public.
@mvass:
Quote:
It's one thing to ban statements, and another thing not to put them in action.
I could not agree more.
Quote:
Only after the rights of individuals are protected.
But isn't it value system of majority that defines what the rights of individuals are? Remember that what you think to be essential rights of an individual is based on the values you believe in.
And one more thing
Quote:
Let me tell you something. Religion is not society! People who are born in a country, are born in THAT society and want to live in it, not in the religion of the area. Nevertheless if the religius people persecute these "wrong people" that were born in that COUNTRY, then it is the job of the society to protect these individuals.
It is of no consequence what do people in a given country believe in, what is important is that they, in one way or another, as a society, agree on a set of laws, based on *their* understanding of right and wrong, and it is absurdous (and oppressive) for them to accept laws based on someone else's judgement.
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 05:23 PM |
|
|
Time to smoothen the misunderstandings
Quote:
I have no intention of shooting you, Lexxan .
Quote:
But I believe we have to know before we can prohibid it.
Well my opinion is exactly the contrary - we have to know if we were to allow it. We don't know - we don't allow it. Vicious circle? I don't care.
Concerning definitions you gave, unwillingness to go beyond a system of values that emhasizes euality of rights beyond anything else is narrow-minded as well, surprisingly you proved me right .
I wanted to say that not letting me speak my opinion is as well discrimination. And by the way, many people may be *hurt, insulted or shocked* by opinion that they are should stay out of public discussion because of their view of the world, and that this view is considered inferior, ehatever that view would be.
What concerns me is that one group of people speak something considered to be discriminating, and when these people's opinion is bashed and considered crap they should keep to themselves, it is not discriminating at all. How fair .
Well, you have your oppinion and I have mine, but really I think that its immoral and injust to prohibid something we don't know (yet). But the choice between "allowing it and use the child as a testing subject" and "prohibiting it and being discriminative towards homosexuals" is killing me. I'm someone who values Morality and Justice very highly, but this time they are eachother's opposites. That's why I asked what the worth of a child's life is. We CANNOT (it's both injust and immoral) make any decision before we answer that question. Anyhow, I'm getting too far away from the topic itself.
Carry on
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 05:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
But isn't it value system of majority that defines what the rights of individuals?
An individual has the right to do anything as long as he doesn't infringe on the rights of others.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 05:31 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
But isn't it value system of majority that defines what the rights of individuals?
An individual has the right to do anything as long as he doesn't infringe on the rights of others.
Are you copy-pasting your phrases? The question was: "what are the rights of others", in a way, who 'defines' them.
if I am the one who misunderstood executor can as well kick me
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 05:34 PM |
|
|
The value system is irrelevant. People should have the objective right not to be bothered.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 05:39 PM |
|
|
What does 'bother' mean?
You could say, for example, that some people get bothered for pollution, but does that mean the people with cars should stop driving (they bother the rights of that person)?
|
|
executor
Famous Hero
Otherworldly Ambassador
|
|
posted June 17, 2008 05:42 PM |
|
Edited by executor at 17:42, 17 Jun 2008.
|
Quote:
The value system is irrelevant. People should have the objective right not to be bothered.
As long as there are at least two people in a society they will bother themselves in one way or another. And it is the value systems that set the border of what is acceptable and what is not.
@theDeath
No need of kicking, you got the idea.
____________
Understanding is a three-edged sword.
|
| |
|
|
