quote:Originally posted by glassman: Bush has to be the number one man in history to lose so much support so fast, and still be alive to experience it...
the whole world (other than, literally, a handful of countries) was behind him after 9-11..
now?
his best bet is to resign so people can (finally)start to feel sorry for him... NOT....
Are you up on the Adamses' and Roosevelts' kith n kin histories? I'm not...
but those strike me as the only parallels, re family "dynasties"
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
You just proved you have little understanding of the dregs of what too often calles itself "southern culture", where violently demonstrating hatred to becomes a requirement of "brotherhood".
Too, you posited that we (that's all of us) are not so backward as to be so intollerant of others. I provided a counter example.
(It may be racial to you, to those little black kids, it is a chance to avoid possibly becoming the victim of an honor killing and having the chance to grow up).
Please spell correctly if you are going to laugh at me about my own posting.
"Honor" killing in the Middle East is about the supposed "shame" put upon a family by a female member of that family... that is not the same to a KKK thug killing a black in the South where it's not about any type of shame put upon a family...
Killing a black in the KKK's world is equivalent to "making your bones" in the Mob... it is not about honor but about proving yourself to your superiors in that organization that you would be willing to commit a violent act such as murder for the "brotherhood" as well to prove your not a informant or gov't agent... so in that regards we are not backwards because the KKK is just another gang in the U.S. ala the Mob, Bloods/Crips etc. The general society as a whole in the U.S. do not go around killing our female relatives because they have been raped, had a affair (except husbands killing wives in a crime of passion), dated a person of a different religious faith or race (except of course such nice people like the KKK who do such things for hatred and not honor) etc. There have been very rare cases of "honor" killing in the U.S. (I watched a segment about this on NBC Dateline or one of those shows years ago) but they were committed by "surprise surprise" people of the Muslim faith (extremists no doubt & not usually U.S. born) or of Middle Eastern descent.
The so called "honor" killers in the Middle East are trying to undo a shame in their eyes...but really it is about control & humiliation of women in their society because you do not see "honor" killing of men who put shame on their family in that society...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
"Please spell correctly if you are going to laugh at me about my own posting."
That is a foolish threat, Mach. You surely don't want or intend to turn this into a hotbed of "Grammarians Without Cause".
Again you fail to understand the screwed up psyche of that sliver of the society claiming (even believing) to stand up for the "honor" of the South, but really bringing it shame and nothing else.
Paraphrasing:
"Honor killing" in the segrationist South (and not there only, by the way) is about the supposed "shame" put upon the "God given honor of the White Race" by deviating from proper etiquette of racial separation and position,
but, in reality, it is about control and humiliation of blacks in their society
Again, I will not be goaded into joining a demand for hateful reactions, physical or otherwise, to what to me (us) are animalistic and sickening activities of another culture (and religion). ( I want no part of such actions of that culture, but also want no part in the animalistic and sickening reprisals you advocate or your claim that such reprisal is a proper cause of a Christian nation.)
(I won't delve into the grammer and punctuation of your post and will not keep a watch on your typos and spelling errors in some attempt to cast a note of superiority and make myself look better, so long as what you post is reasonably nderstandable. Even so, thank you for noting that my mis-spellings (tyops?) are hindering communication.)
I'm sorry you took my post to be making fun of your's. That was not my intent. I certainly believe your previous post was an advocacy of a dangerous and criminal attitude and do not, in any way, find that to be laughable.
IP: Logged |
posted
I know that i felt horroble watching that... did you see where they pulled her dress back down to cover her panties? so ,its not about humiliation or degradation of women. but its that loss of honor thingy. Richard Gere-head kisses that woman and they get all over him..but then ,more or less, drop it. to me,,it was sick..but ...we're a different culture.
posted
How in hell can we expect to fathom the sexual mores of a culture that still practices the buying and selling of brides, often when they are only infants?
You didn't know?
Exactly what did you think a dower was?
They have as little concept of what we think is right as we do of what they think is right.
IP: Logged |
posted
Quote by bdgee:"They have as little concept of what we think is right as we do of what they think is right."
So we're over there trying to kill them for what they think is right, while they are trying to kill as many of "us" as they can for not doing what they think is right. It's a perfect circle.
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?
IP: Logged |
posted
It's not about who thinks who is right. It is about what IS right, and I'm sorry, but whether or not some choose to accept it, it is self-evident that the practice of stoning someone to death is NOT RIGHT, and any person, culture or religion that condones it IS WRONG.
Trying to excuse it as a cultural difference and suggesting it is not our place to interfere is almost as disgusting and sick as being in that crowd and standing idly by while this girl was brutally murdered.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
NaturalResources, You are exactly right on with your post. Evil is evil, plain and simple. There are heartless people all over this world unfortunately, and when any part of society condones such practices, it is a disgrace on humanity.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cottonjim: Quote by bdgee:"They have as little concept of what we think is right as we do of what they think is right."
So we're over there trying to kill them for what they think is right, while they are trying to kill as many of "us" as they can for not doing what they think is right. It's a perfect circle.
No, we're over there trying to kill them for Bush. (Clearly, he doesn't think, so any question as to what he thinks about it is a stupid one.)
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by NaturalResources: It's not about who thinks who is right. It is about what IS right, and I'm sorry, but whether or not some choose to accept it, it is self-evident that the practice of stoning someone to death is NOT RIGHT, and any person, culture or religion that condones it IS WRONG.
Trying to excuse it as a cultural difference and suggesting it is not our place to interfere is almost as disgusting and sick as being in that crowd and standing idly by while this girl was brutally murdered.
There are various ways of performing capital punishment.
IP: Logged |
Like Fat Rush the Doper always said, you do the crime, you do the time.
(Actually, having survived that stage of life, looking back, I doubt anyone really "knows" what is at risk or could keep from following the urges of what feels to be all forgiving "true romance". True love always wins in the long run, you know....otherwise, God wouldn't have created it.)
IP: Logged |
posted
So I am curious now, I don't know so I am going to ask. Now that this girl was murdered (in accordance with the quran) is she now clean and able to enter heaven to be one of the seven virgins waiting for terrorist martrys that kill non-believers in Alah's name? Her body was exumed to prove that she was a virgin. Or is this poor girl doomed to a etenity of torment in hell because of her actions on earth. (if you believe that kind of thing)
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?
IP: Logged |
posted
I'v never heard anything to cause me to believe that women were to be anything in a Moslem version of Heaven that they weren't beforehand in the Moslem world.
Frankly, I couldn't consider that a heavenly existance.
But, Then, I'm not too fond of the notions I hear claimed for the christian version either.
(On that, I'm not too sparated from Samuel L. Clemens. I doubt that he is 100% correct, but he had a near 100% correct attitude about it. If you want to know what sort of thinking I approve of and how I think and what about, give yourself a start by reading Letters from the Earth. It won't provide a full and complete course in the subject, though, just a start.)
IP: Logged |
posted
I am not to "up" on what the Muslim version of heaven is supposed to be either. I can't imagine, that for such a male dominated society, the women look to forward to getting into heaven if it is going to be the same.
Right now, I am content to find my own little slice of heaven here in earth, and I think that's pretty much it. Maybe thats why I just can't fathom anyone blowing themselves up for the good of their religion, and to get into Heaven. Sad to say, but I think they are just plain dead, along with their (sometimes)innocent victoms.
-------------------- If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by NaturalResources: It's not about who thinks who is right. It is about what IS right, and I'm sorry, but whether or not some choose to accept it, it is self-evident that the practice of stoning someone to death is NOT RIGHT, and any person, culture or religion that condones it IS WRONG.
Trying to excuse it as a cultural difference and suggesting it is not our place to interfere is almost as disgusting and sick as being in that crowd and standing idly by while this girl was brutally murdered.
There are various ways of performing capital punishment.
Yeah, I'm really sure they gave her a fair trial before they executed their "capital punishment".... The fact that you would even suggest this incident was such a thing is frankly, quite sickening.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: Bush has to be the number one man in history to lose so much support so fast, and still be alive to experience it...
the whole world (other than, literally, a handful of countries) was behind him after 9-11..
now?
exactly glass.. remember bush meeting with various islamic leaders from everywhere condeming the 911 atttacks?
we blew it.. do you think when we get hit again we will have the same kind of outpour of sympathy? i dont.
i think the prince of saudi arabia had it right after 911 when he said america should "reexamine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause," this is of course after he donated 10 million to the state of new york. Rudy Giuliani gave it back after that comment BTW
-------------------- "Gentleman, you have come sixty days too late. The depression is over." Herbert Hoover 1930
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by NaturalResources: It's not about who thinks who is right. It is about what IS right, and I'm sorry, but whether or not some choose to accept it, it is self-evident that the practice of stoning someone to death is NOT RIGHT, and any person, culture or religion that condones it IS WRONG.
Trying to excuse it as a cultural difference and suggesting it is not our place to interfere is almost as disgusting and sick as being in that crowd and standing idly by while this girl was brutally murdered.
There are various ways of performing capital punishment.
Yeah, I'm really sure they gave her a fair trial before they executed their "capital punishment".... The fact that you would even suggest this incident was such a thing is frankly, quite sickening.
Just as there are various ways of performing capital punishment, there are various things believed to be fair (not to mention right) from culture to culture and religion to religion (some of them right here in good old all-American River City, by the way).
Often, those varying beliefs are in utter conflict.
Sometimes, in one culture or religion, a particular act is thought to be an honorable expression of ones awe to God's principles, while in another it is considered the act of a demented madman.
I know of people who would personally and eagerly lop off the genetals of one they believed guilty of a sexual deviation (whatever the hell "deviation" means), provided they could get others to hold the object of their hate down while he did it and I know of other people that would, while refusing to take part themselves, would pin hero's medals on the ones that did. (And yes, I realize you are included in that collection of emotion before reason and rationality and hate warrants and excuses expression.)
I am not one that is foolish enough to offer to rape our system of justice, with its dependence on proof and the good will of men, by crying for henious crimes against nature to be done to even those "proved" guilty through the courts. (Actually, the word prooved" as used in legal proceedings DOES NOT MEAN THE SAME thing as the word "proved" used elsewhere.)
Justice, in order to be justice, must not only be blind, but deaf to cries for vengence and appeals to harm, even if it is a majority of the people (that are supposed to be enjoying the protected of the notion of "no cruel and unusual (or unnecessary) "punishment"), so crying.
Almost always, attmpts at justice handed out without patience and unemotional diligence to the need for justice and, in the case of the particular means of carrying out justice, the long term effects on the society do real and lasting damage to the culture and the people it should have been protecting.
(Each black man falsely convicted of a rape from the emotiunal cries of a confused victim and well intentioned friends and family of the victim has guaranteed a real and guilty rapist has been provided freedom from justice.)
IP: Logged |
posted
I think you are missing the point Bdgee... Certian things ARE NOT SUBJECTIVE, and therefore transcend the beliefs that any particular culture or society may have.
It is not about what is THOUGHT to be fair. It is about what IS fair, and you and I both know this girl was not given a "fair" trial in any sense of the word, for a "crime" that, by any standard, should not be considered a "crime".
Unfortunately, there seem to be many that have trouble understanding what the meaning of the word IS is.....
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
NR, i can give you dozens of examples of unfair trials right here in America, from last year alone...
we are not so far advanced....
i often hear conservatives claim "liberal judges" and the system favor the criminals, but i can show you one of the most atrocious miscarriages of justice right here in America in a very conservative community, and it was in the 90's..
Bob Kelly
Each defendant was tried separately with Bob Kelly the first to go to trial. Testimony lasted nine months with 12 children providing descriptions of sexual and physical abuse: babies ritualistically killed, victims taken out on boats and thrown overboard, and inappropriate trips in hot air balloons. After a three-weeks of jury deliberation, Kelly was found guilty on 99 out of 100 counts. He was sentenced to 12 consecutive life terms in prison.
Summary: In excess of 90 children accused a total of 20 adults with 429 instances of child sexual abuse in a day care center in Edenton NC. Among the alleged perpetrators were the sheriff and mayor. Allegations included a baby killed with a hand gun, a child being hung upside down from a tree and being set on fire. Nobody in town noticed a baby missing. Needless to say, charges were never laid against the mayor or sheriff.
no physical evidence that any actual abuse or killing happened.
hysteria by the parents, investigators and general public.
lack of evidence which would have been present if the children had actually been abused.
the alleged abuse happened even as parents were coming to and fro during the day; nobody noticed anything strange at the day care center.
the children initially denied that anything "funny" happened at the day care; but the interviewers did not believe the children.
after months of extensive interviewing, using what are now known to be manipulative, suggestive techniques, children started to disclose abuse events. This was assisted by communications among parents who also grilled their children
all of the documentation and tapes of the children's initial interviews were lost or destroyed.
testimony described a long string of physically impossible or highly improbable events
nobody seems to have asked the logical question: how could 7 to 20 adults form a conspiracy and abuse children hundreds of times, without any child complaining or without any parent noticing something amiss?
During the winter of 1988-1989, Edenton police attended a Satanic Ritual Abuse (SRA) seminar. The first allegation of abuse followed shortly afterwards. One theory is that the first mention of abuse followed the accidental hitting of a child at the day care; another story has the first allegation following intensive questioning of a child by his mother under the guidance of a SRA course attendee.
Day-Care Owner Is Convicted of Child Molesting. The longest and costliest criminal trial ever held in North Carolina ended today when the owner of a day-care center was convicted on 99 of 100 charges of sexually abusing 12 children there. After 14 days of deliberating, a Pitt County Superior Court jury found the 44-year-old defendant, Robert F. Kelly Jr., guilty of 4 counts of rape, 46 of taking indecent liberties, 36 of first-degree sexual offense and 13 crimes against nature. He was acquitted only of a single charge of taking indecent liberties with one of the 12 children.
a panel of judges finally overturned everything...
the difference is these "defendants" weren't lynched...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Glass, I understand we are not perfect, and I'm not suggesting we are. You are right, there are many examples of unfair trials right here in the US, and we have quite a way to go before we even begin to live up to the truths our western society were founded on.
However, that still doesn't make what happened to this girl right or fair, nor does it mean that the perpetrators of the REAL crime, murder, should be excused on the grounds of a being from a culture that does not recognize self-evident truths.
As I've said many times before, just because western cultures may be hypocrites in many cases, doesn't mean we are automatically wrong, nor does it mean we should keep quite or refrain from action when we see injustice being perpetrated to anyone, anywhere.
Using "cultural diversity" as an means to suggest the actions of others cannot be judged by those outside of or lacking understanding of any given culture, is rediculus and illogical.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
i'm not suggesting what these people did was right or correct, what i am suggesting is that he/she who is without sin should cast the first stone..
this is the problem we are really facing in the mideast..
it's not that we have no business over there, it's about casting stones... or how we approach the problem...
we are in Iraq for a long time to come, and somebody needs to figure out what will work...
the longer this goes on? the more convinced i am that Iraq has to be divided into smaller peices...
our society is not "built" to handle the brutality that it's going to take to settle the problems that Bush created...
Sadam was as much a product of his own culture as he was a "maker" of culture...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
NR, you are trying again to play in a league for which you haven't the skills.
In support I provide excerpts for the usages of "subjective" from two dictionaries
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) sub·jec·tive /səbˈdʒɛktɪv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[suhb-jek-tiv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective). 2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. 3. placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric. 4. Philosophy. relating to or of the nature of an object as it is known in the mind as distinct from a thing in itself. 5. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience.
American Heritage Dictionary sub·jec·tive (səb-jěk'tĭv) Pronunciation Key adj.
1. Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision. 2. Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience. 2. Moodily introspective. 3. Existing only in the mind; illusory. 4. Psychology Existing only within the experiencer's mind.
Note that the overwhelming universal and underlying character of all those usages of "subjective" is that it is a personal condition of a person's (or group persons') mind. i.e., a belief and nothing else.
To furthur demonstrate that you are blowing wind rather than thought, I offer two dictionary's usages for "belief" and point out that they uniformilly announce that "belief" is subjective...that it is a thing "thought" to be true ranther than something that "is rigidly and universally true or factual".
American Heritage Dictionary be·lief (bĭ-lēf') Pronunciation Key n.
1. The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another. 2. Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something 3. Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) be·lief /bɪˈlif/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bi-leef] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. something believed; an opinion or conviction. 2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof. 3. confidence; faith; trust. 4. a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith.
Indeed, as is demonstrated by the actual formal and documented usages of "subjective" and "belief", contrary to your expousal and demand, they each parallel the other and do not exist independently and, each does not exist except as ideas.
Moreover, what constitutes "fair" or "guilt" as well as the requirements to "believe in fairness and guilt" are not universal truths and certainly are not facts. (I am quite capable of producing the formal usages of these terms and phrases too, which clearly demonstrate that you will not or can not use them correctly. That desire of yours to warp anything into a personal and political insult and attack at work, of course.)
In my mind, that girl was treated horribly and inhumanely, with respect to the standards of my own culture and beliefs. However, having known a number of Moslems quite well over the years and having "discussed" religious and cultural feelings with them (including the proprieties of legal systems and force and punishment), I can state that, absolutely they believe that we are committing a deadly sin by what they describe as "forcing" females to go about half naked and susseptable to the evil thoughts (and, to them, necessarilly resultant physical abuses) of men.
Many of those Muslems were fine and generous people, who accepted that they simply were not capable (or maybe unwilling) of understanding our mores (or us theirs), but a very few, like you, demanded that their "beliefs" and "religious teachings" are fact, not beliefs, and must be forced on others, whatever the force required and whatever the harm to others or those others' beliefs and religions. Like you, they were driven by the comfort of egotistical rigidity and the assurance from innocence due to ignorance. (And like you, a worship of a backward political agenda.)
I do not object to you holding religious or political "beliefs" differing from mind, but I do object strongly to your demand that I must abandon my own rationale and beliefs in order to adopt the fundamental regidity of yours, which is clearly and openly based on bigotry and ill-formed hate. And I object to your similar demand when, in that last sentence "me" is replaced by any other person or group of persons.
THAT DEMAND IS NOT YOUR RIGHT AND IT IS A DISGUSTING INSULT!
IP: Logged |
posted
Glass, do you have any children? If so, you should understand why sometimes it is necessary to "cast the first stone", even when you are "with sin". Think about what kind of place this world would be if the US never did acted because we were "with sin", or worried about being seen as a hippocrate...
I know you are not trying to advocate total complacency when it comes to stopping injustice against humankind, but where do you draw the line between when you act and when you don't? How do you reach a balance between taking time to come up with the proper approach vs. acting quickly to save lives?
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
Think about what kind of place this world would be if the US never did acted because we were "with sin", or worried about being seen as a hippocrate...
not only do i have kids, but i encourage joining the military to them and their friends ...
you still don't get it. we have no way to "change" cultures.. look what it took to free the slaves in our own country, that was done 140 years ago... and i can tell you we still have along way to go on race issues here in the US..
the more you try to change the culture in the mideast the way we are doing it right now? the more terrorists we will have...
as i said earlier? Mandella? King, Ghandi? and yes, even Jesus, they CHANGE cultures... the military is for killing, and sometimes that needs to be done...
i'm not against killing my/our enemies, but i know better than to stand on top of the dung heap and INVITE more....
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
You are correct, we have no way to force them to "change cultures" but we can use other methods, including the threat of force to influence them, just as you do with a child. Still, sometimes even that does not work, and indeed most often the desire to change must come from within, often as the result of negative personal experiences. I agree with you that it is no easy or quickly accomplished task, as evidenced with the United States own struggle with slavery, but rather just making clear the point that we can have some influence through one means or another, and shouldn't take an attitude of complacency.
With the exception of Jesus, who BTW, did not see a change in culture during his lifetime, your other examples of men who have brought about "changed" through non-violence were only able to do so because those who were oppressing them were of a western society. Mandella, King and Ghandi would probably not have been successful in a society in which those who oppose the status quo get run over by tanks, lined up next to a trench and shot, or drug out into the streets and stoned to death.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
You just can't (or won't) handle the either the logic or the psychology.
Cultures change according to their whims, not outside influences. The threat of force is force and only forces a culture to bolster its uncompromising inate defenses against outside interference. That is proved by the reactions of the masses bombed in Germany and England and Japan during WWII, who rected with previously unheard of patriotism and resolve.
Just how do you know, NR, oh great champian of proclaiming falsities and ignoring truths that were not presented to him in elementary school or childrens sunday school class, that there have been no isomers of a King or a Ghandi or a Mandella? (I can present two candidates for that role for you from very recent history: Ben Laden and Lawrance. Each of whome awoke the cultural pride of the Arab lands. One succeded overwhelmingly and the other certainly hasn't lost any stature in his culture.)
IP: Logged |
posted
ok.. i been gone for a couple of days and everyone or most people and especially Bdgee gets everything wrong lol ill reply each of the posts that interest me one by one...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: NR, you are trying again to play in a league for which you haven't the skills.
In support I provide excerpts for the usages of "subjective" from two dictionaries
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) sub·jec·tive /səbˈdʒɛktɪv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[suhb-jek-tiv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective). 2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. 3. placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric. 4. Philosophy. relating to or of the nature of an object as it is known in the mind as distinct from a thing in itself. 5. relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as distinguished from general or universal experience.
American Heritage Dictionary sub·jec·tive (səb-jěk'tĭv) Pronunciation Key adj.
1. Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision. 2. Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience. 2. Moodily introspective. 3. Existing only in the mind; illusory. 4. Psychology Existing only within the experiencer's mind.
Note that the overwhelming universal and underlying character of all those usages of "subjective" is that it is a personal condition of a person's (or group persons') mind. i.e., a belief and nothing else.
To furthur demonstrate that you are blowing wind rather than thought, I offer two dictionary's usages for "belief" and point out that they uniformilly announce that "belief" is subjective...that it is a thing "thought" to be true ranther than something that "is rigidly and universally true or factual".
American Heritage Dictionary be·lief (bĭ-lēf') Pronunciation Key n.
1. The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another. 2. Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something 3. Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) be·lief /bɪˈlif/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[bi-leef] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun 1. something believed; an opinion or conviction. 2. confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof. 3. confidence; faith; trust. 4. a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith.
Indeed, as is demonstrated by the actual formal and documented usages of "subjective" and "belief", contrary to your expousal and demand, they each parallel the other and do not exist independently and, each does not exist except as ideas.
Moreover, what constitutes "fair" or "guilt" as well as the requirements to "believe in fairness and guilt" are not universal truths and certainly are not facts. (I am quite capable of producing the formal usages of these terms and phrases too, which clearly demonstrate that you will not or can not use them correctly. That desire of yours to warp anything into a personal and political insult and attack at work, of course.)
In my mind, that girl was treated horribly and inhumanely, with respect to the standards of my own culture and beliefs. However, having known a number of Moslems quite well over the years and having "discussed" religious and cultural feelings with them (including the proprieties of legal systems and force and punishment), I can state that, absolutely they believe that we are committing a deadly sin by what they describe as "forcing" females to go about half naked and susseptable to the evil thoughts (and, to them, necessarilly resultant physical abuses) of men.
Many of those Muslems were fine and generous people, who accepted that they simply were not capable (or maybe unwilling) of understanding our mores (or us theirs), but a very few, like you, demanded that their "beliefs" and "religious teachings" are fact, not beliefs, and must be forced on others, whatever the force required and whatever the harm to others or those others' beliefs and religions. Like you, they were driven by the comfort of egotistical rigidity and the assurance from innocence due to ignorance. (And like you, a worship of a backward political agenda.)
I do not object to you holding religious or political "beliefs" differing from mind, but I do object strongly to your demand that I must abandon my own rationale and beliefs in order to adopt the fundamental regidity of yours, which is clearly and openly based on bigotry and ill-formed hate. And I object to your similar demand when, in that last sentence "me" is replaced by any other person or group of persons.
THAT DEMAND IS NOT YOUR RIGHT AND IT IS A DISGUSTING INSULT!
I find it funny that someone who is atrocious at spelling is giving someone else (Natural Resources) a lesson in grammar. Especially after he tried to reprimand me for doing the same to him (Bdgee).
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
NOT.... 
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
