Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 Kind of difficult to characterize obvious contradiction as nuance. It's not a contradiction. People have the right to do stupid things - or to make stupid posts, evidently. We can support their right to be stupid without saying we approve of the stupidity. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 (edited) If she wants to, its not oppression. So any woman who stays in an abusive relationship is actually willingly embracing her own abuse Is that your position? Edited March 17, 2015 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 It's an interpretation aka an opinion. If we start out with the certainty that only extremely conservative Muslims wear the niqab and we know what the beliefs are of extremely conservative Muslims in terms of women and their rights, then calling the niqab a symbol of oppression would be a fact, not an opinion. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 No, it's very straightforward. To you and others, the niqab represents oppression of women. To other people, likely including the actual practitioners, it represents something else: modesty, privacy, religious commitment. It's a matter of perspective, not a question of fact. It's commitment to a misogynistic social view under which women can be beaten, excluded, discriminated against and abused. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Keepitsimple Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 So in other words you're just an unaccommodating bigot. Nobody's taking anything from you here. You're the one trying to take away their cultural and religious identity from them because you're completely intolerant and have a superiority complex. You're right, nobody's taking anything specifically from me. But people come from all countries and many - in their own way, make small sacrifices (or changes) to better fit in with mainstream Canadians. Muslims themselves have conceded that some traditions don't "fit" that well with Canadian culture. You won't see prayer mats all over the place. You won't hear the call to prayer coming from every street corner. Those are signs that indeed, the vast, vast majority of Muslims in Canada understand what this country has to offer and they WANT to fit in. The Niqab however is a vestige of the tiniest splinter of Islam that is not so tolerant, that represents the extreme orthodoxy that bumps up against Canadian values and women's rights. They represent the few that do not have the desire for "accommodation". As I mentioned in another post - the REAL religious headscarf - the hijab - can be proudly worn as a beautiful garment AND religious entity - and anyone who doesn't like it will not find a friend in me. So call me a bigot if you like but I think the attitude of your post says more about you than it does me. Quote Back to Basics
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 like I said. I believe you are the chap who insisted that I was a leftard , politically correct idiot Now why would I make that insistence when you make the point yourself in every post? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 It is something many (incl th survey posted here) want to wear ergo it is not a symbol of oppression. So if women want to stay with their wife-beating husbands, and don't want them arrested there's no coercion involved there, right? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 I do not understand that the posters who state bigoted beliefs get excited when they are identified as bigots. Given how utterly vapid your replies are I understand why you'd prefer to insult people, but I have to say it really doesn't help disguise the absence of any kind of logic or intelligence in your posts you know. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/canada/2015/03/17/tory-mp-on-niqab-issue-stay-the-hell-where-you-came-from.html If youre not willing to show your face in the ceremony that youre joining the best country in the world, then frankly . . . if you dont like that or dont want to do that, then stay the hell where you came from, Miller said during the show. Oooooo ... idiot cpc'rs shooting themselves in the foot everywhere these days! Attaboy! Make yourself look like a total dweeb! Plays well with the base(st). . You realize that 90% of the country is nodding their heads in agreement with him, right? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 Yea, you're way above insults. Just put him on ignore. Mister Bitter never has anything of value to contribute any more anyway. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Black Dog Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 If we start out with the certainty that only extremely conservative Muslims wear the niqab and we know what the beliefs are of extremely conservative Muslims in terms of women and their rights, then calling the niqab a symbol of oppression would be a fact, not an opinion. Again: it's one interpretation. It's also irrelevant to the question of the extent to which the state should dictate fashion choices. It's commitment to a misogynistic social view under which women can be beaten, excluded, discriminated against and abused. That's one interpretation. I've presented another by someone who actually wears the niqab. Here are others. Funny how you often rail against the left for infantalizing women and making them out to be perpetual victims, yet you're doing the same thing here. Quote
Black Dog Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 You're right, nobody's taking anything specifically from me. But people come from all countries and many - in their own way, make small sacrifices (or changes) to better fit in with mainstream Canadians. Muslims themselves have conceded that some traditions don't "fit" that well with Canadian culture. You won't see prayer mats all over the place. You won't hear the call to prayer coming from every street corner. Those are signs that indeed, the vast, vast majority of Muslims in Canada understand what this country has to offer and they WANT to fit in. The Niqab however is a vestige of the tiniest splinter of Islam that is not so tolerant, that represents the extreme orthodoxy that bumps up against Canadian values and women's rights. They represent the few that do not have the desire for "accommodation". Quote
Black Dog Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 Again with the insults. Why don't you just develop an all-purpose response whenever you don't know what to say, something like: "Dear ... I hate what you said and I wish I had some kind of witty or intelligent or thoughtful, or even coherent response, but I'm just not capable of any of that. So you're a bigot. Nah, nah, nah, nah naaa nahh." It's really all they're capable of. Thoughtful, intelligent responses are beyond them. It's not a contradiction. People have the right to do stupid things - or to make stupid posts, evidently. We can support their right to be stupid without saying we approve of the stupidity. Given how utterly vapid your replies are I understand why you'd prefer to insult people, but I have to say it really doesn't help disguise the absence of any kind of logic or intelligence in your posts you know. Just put him on ignore. Mister Bitter never has anything of value to contribute any more anyway. Nice job, Forum Police. Way to stay above the fray. Quote
GostHacked Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 So the problem is that you still don't know what a fact is and you continue to demonstrate it.For example, "The Swastika has been around for a long time" is not a fact. It's an opinion. It cannot be proven or disproven. What amount of time is long? It's subjective. "The Swastika has many and varied uses as a symbol" is a fact, but it's banal and meaningless.Your final point about it being a fact that the Swastika is a symbol of nazi atrocities is belied by the fact that it has "many and varied uses as a symbol." Therefore, it's an opinion, a single interpretation of many possible interpretations, that it's a symbol of Nazi atrocities. It's an inarguable point that can neither be proven nor disproven. Is it a symbol of Nazi atrocities? For some it is. For others it's a symbol of their religious faith.Fact: The Swastika was the symbol of the National Socialist Party of Germany during the Second World War. Opinion: The Swastika symbolizes the atrocities committed by the Nazis. The swastika has been used by various cultures for thousands of years. It seems to predate the Bronze Age. That's longer than you or I can actually conceptualize in our brains. It is also not meaningless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika Most understand the swastika through Nazi Germany. And in modern times that is all we really know about it. But with a few searches you can find out how old the thing really is. Not sure, but is 10,000 years long enough for you? Because that is how long archeologists predict it has been around. Even if it's only half that, it is still 5000 years. Which to me is a very long time, as I might make it to 100. The earliest known object with swastika-motifs is a bird from the tusk of a mammoth from the paleolithic settlement of Mezine, Ukraine dated to 10,000 BCE.[13] Among the earliest cultures utilizing swastika is the neolithic Vinča culture of South-East Europe (see Vinča symbols). More extensive use of the Swastika can be traced to Ancient India, during the Indus Valley Civilization. The earliest swastika known has been found in Mezine, Ukraine. It is carved on late paleolithic figurine of mammoth ivory, being dated as early as about 10,000 BC. It has been suggested this swastika may be a stylized picture of a stork in flight and not the true swastika that is in use today.[19] In England, neolithic or Bronze Age stone carvings of the symbol have been found on Ilkley Moor.[citation needed] Mirror-image swastikas (clockwise and anti-clockwise) have been found on ceramic pottery in the Devetashka cave, Bulgaria, dated 6,000 B.C.[20] Some of the earliest archaeological evidences of Swastika in the Indian subcontinent can be dated to 3,000 BCE.[21] Swastikas have also been found on pottery in archaeological digs in Africa, in the area of Kush and on pottery at the Jebel Barkal temples,[22] in Iron Age designs of the northern Caucasus (Koban culture), and in Neolithic China in the Majiabang,[23]Dawenkou and Xiaoheyan cultures.[24] Other Iron Age attestations of the swastika can be associated with Indo-European cultures such as the Indo-Iranians, Celts, Greeks, Germanic peoples and Slavs. Quote
GostHacked Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 It's commitment to a misogynistic social view under which women can be beaten, excluded, discriminated against and abused. You don't need a niqab to be beaten excluded or discriminated against. Quote
Big Guy Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 Strange - I define what a bigot is, name no names and basically place the bigot shoe out for fit and comfort - and certain posters who think I am talking about them then step into the shoe without asking. Hey, if the shoe fits then wear it! Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Guest Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 Strange - I define what a bigot is, name no names and basically place the bigot shoe out for fit and comfort - and certain posters who think I am talking about them then step into the shoe without asking. Hey, if the shoe fits then wear it! No you didn't. You stated this: You folks dislike Muslims and their ideas. You refuse to accept them. Muslims are a religious group. Why do you try to reject what you are? Be proud of your beliefs and take ownership of your views. Load of bollocks really. Wiki says: Bigotry is a state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly or intolerantly dislikes other people, ideas, etc (my bold) Physician, heal thyself, and all that. Quote
guyser Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 Now the other Larry Miller , the really unfunny one, has been slapped by his mentor he is now recanting his words but "said that he stands by his views that those who wish to be sworn in as citizens should uncover their face." http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/conservative-mp-larry-miller-recants-inflammatory-niqab-ban-comment/ar-AA9TnHm Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 So any woman who stays in an abusive relationship is actually willingly embracing her own abuse Is that your position? Perhaps just take a pause and think about that. And then get back to us with why that has anything to do with a woman choosing to wear what she wants. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 It's not a contradiction. People have the right to do stupid things - or to make stupid posts, evidently. We can support their right to be stupid without saying we approve of the stupidity. Yes apparently they do. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 17, 2015 Author Report Posted March 17, 2015 Given how utterly vapid your replies are I understand why you'd prefer to insult people, but I have to say it really doesn't help disguise the absence of any kind of logic or intelligence in your posts you know. You sure waste an awful lot of time complaining about insults only to throw them around yourself. You also spend an awful lot of time replying to things you call moronic, idiotic, and vapid. If these posts are so stupid, what does that say about you that you'll spend so much time responding to them? Quote
cybercoma Posted March 17, 2015 Author Report Posted March 17, 2015 Nice job, Forum Police. Way to stay above the fray. Insults are against the rules, unless it's Argus throwing them around. Then it's par for the course. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 17, 2015 Author Report Posted March 17, 2015 The swastika has been used by various cultures for thousands of years. It seems to predate the Bronze Age. That's longer than you or I can actually conceptualize in our brains. It is also not meaningless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika Most understand the swastika through Nazi Germany. And in modern times that is all we really know about it. But with a few searches you can find out how old the thing really is. Not sure, but is 10,000 years long enough for you? Because that is how long archeologists predict it has been around. Even if it's only half that, it is still 5000 years. Which to me is a very long time, as I might make it to 100. That's why I'm saying that the statement, "the Swastika is a symbol of Nazi oppression," is an opinion and not a fact. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 Nice job, Forum Police. Way to stay above the fray. I was hoping someone would point that out. Of course its doubtful it will have any impact, but kudos for the effort. Quote
GostHacked Posted March 17, 2015 Report Posted March 17, 2015 That's why I'm saying that the statement, "the Swastika is a symbol of Nazi oppression," is an opinion and not a fact. It was also to correct you on the long history of the swastika which you berated the other poster for. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.