This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - cxfhvxgkcf-56:7
Pages: 1 ... 151617 1819 ... 517
481
« on: November 24, 2015, 04:23:41 PM »
yeah man poor Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam. They were just misunderstood and couldn't control themselves.
482
« on: November 24, 2015, 04:18:48 PM »
WELL DO I HAVE THE VIDEO FOR YOU
so fucking M A J E S T I C
483
« on: November 24, 2015, 04:10:11 PM »
The right to abstain is equally as important as the right to cast a vote.
That being said I consider voting to be a fundamental duty of every citizen.
That's kind of where I sit. I want a larger voter turnout without actually forcing people to do so but I'm not sure how to go about accomplishing such. I think it should be more publicized to people about the importance of casting your vote but idk. I think online voting would help a lot with the issue as well.
Why on earth would you want a large voter turnout, though? Most voters are stupid and misinformed. Hell, most people are stupid and misinformed.
I would think the better outcome would come from a small number of well-informed, motivated voters who really care about the election, rather than a big crowd who only show up because they're required to.
Wouldn't the solution to that be better educating the population on contemporary politics so we have less misinformed people?
484
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:46:17 PM »
The right to abstain is equally as important as the right to cast a vote.
That being said I consider voting to be a fundamental duty of every citizen.
That's kind of where I sit. I want a larger voter turnout without actually forcing people to do so but I'm not sure how to go about accomplishing such. I think it should be more publicized to people about the importance of casting your vote but idk. I think online voting would help a lot with the issue as well.
485
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:43:38 PM »
States are not moral actors. You know this. There is nothing to gain, geopolitically, from intervening in Myanmar. It's a money pit. Why on earth would any country do anything?
Obviously for the sanctity of human rights worldwide. You say the states are not moral actors but have we not started entire wars of violation of human rights before? I figure you more than anyone would condemn the actions of a group violating basic human rights and call for some sort of action.
I am appalled by this, but you can't really expect world governments to do much without a clear incentive. The US doesn't militarily intervene without benefitting in some way. It is disgusting, yeah, but that's government in general.
I honestly can't think of any conflict where the US used human rights as a major pretext for action, let alone where it was the sole cause. Somalia maybe? Maybe?
Oh now I see what you were trying to say with your post. Disregard my rebuttal.
486
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:37:58 PM »
What's a Myanmar?
It's a Burma
487
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:33:23 PM »
Alright Americans, if the US political system wasn't restricted to two parties would it change your stance at all?
Bren and Door need not answer this question. I know that's not why you disagree with the concept.
488
« on: November 24, 2015, 03:15:52 PM »
And that action, carried out by the level-headed and moderate majority population, should be discourse and dialogue aimed at deradicalizing and moderating people that hold such thoughts. Not state sanctioned censorship and persecution.
As nice as it is to think that creating a dialogue with people who think a certain way will actually amount to something, in many instances, it does not. We may gain a better understanding of what they believe and why they believe it, but it does not do much to dissuade someone from their belief. Current events are a perfect example.
See there, that is a perfect example of the problem. The thought that "Oh engaging in dialogue with this group whose views I disagree with or offend me is useless and not worth trying. We should just censor them instead." It's this idea that people have never had their views changed through hearing views which conflict with their own. Rather than us make an attempt to help these people understand the fallacies of their beliefs let us silence them through force. If dissuasion through dialogue fails, though it has changed people's views many times in the past, the last step should be complete social ostracism. You say it won't dissuade people from their beliefs, and that may be true in many cases, but if someone is that deeply rooted in their beliefs what makes you think legality of that belief will influence them? You can't kill ideas and there still remains no empirical evidence of state sanctioned censorship being effective or at the least any more so than dissuasive dialogue and social ostracism.
489
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:50:12 PM »
Pretty sceptical of the outcomes of these surveys as those responses can mean quite a few things.
Such as?
Pretty big difference between opposing someone's ability to criticise minorities and the harm some of their beliefs and practices might cause for our society on the one hand, and thinking that it should not be legal for people to publicly proclaim that all immigrants are filthy subhuman mudslime niggers who should be round up and eradicated.
I personally don't think the state should be able to limit free speech in either case.
Question. For anyone really...
If a man was standing on a street corner talking about how attracted he is to 6-9 year old girls, how much they turn him on and what have you, would it be okay for the police to arrest him? Would it be okay for him to then be put under surveillance for expressing his sexual desires?
Until he provides further evidence of intent or actually commits the act, no.
Would what he said be enough evidence to put him under investigation?
I don't think so but pedophilia is such another larger issue. This boils down less to "should he have the right to say these things without arrest" and more to "if someone expresses interest in pedopholia they should be physiologically treated and helped with that problem not condemned and prosecuted."
So with our current system of condemnation and persecution do I think he should be put under investigation for simpley expressing that he is indeed attracted to children?
No not until he is found in possession of child porn, explicitly expresses specific intent to commit an sexual act upon a child, or actually commits a sexual act upon a child.
In my imagined system of rehabilitation for pedophiles do I think he should be evaluated for treatment and help of pedopholia for expressing sexual attraction to children?
Yes
It is all part of a larger issue. The fact of the matter is that expressing violent, deviant or abnormal thoughts is enough to justify some amount of intervention/investigation. A government could not protect its people if it did not take those statements seriously.
And that action, carried out by the level-headed and moderate majority population, should be discourse and dialogue aimed at deradicalizing and moderating people that hold such thoughts. Not state sanctioned censorship and persecution.
490
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:47:15 PM »
States are not moral actors. You know this. There is nothing to gain, geopolitically, from intervening in Myanmar. It's a money pit. Why on earth would any country do anything?
Obviously for the sanctity of human rights worldwide. You say the states are not moral actors but have we not started entire wars of violation of human rights before? I figure you more than anyone would condemn the actions of a group violating basic human rights and call for some sort of action.
491
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:35:10 PM »
Pretty sceptical of the outcomes of these surveys as those responses can mean quite a few things.
Such as?
Pretty big difference between opposing someone's ability to criticise minorities and the harm some of their beliefs and practices might cause for our society on the one hand, and thinking that it should not be legal for people to publicly proclaim that all immigrants are filthy subhuman mudslime niggers who should be round up and eradicated.
I personally don't think the state should be able to limit free speech in either case.
Question. For anyone really...
If a man was standing on a street corner talking about how attracted he is to 6-9 year old girls, how much they turn him on and what have you, would it be okay for the police to arrest him? Would it be okay for him to then be put under surveillance for expressing his sexual desires?
Until he provides further evidence of intent or actually commits the act, no.
Would what he said be enough evidence to put him under investigation?
I don't think so but pedophilia is such another larger issue. This boils down less to "should he have the right to say these things without arrest" and more to "if someone expresses interest in pedopholia they should be physiologically treated and helped with that problem not condemned and prosecuted." So with our current system of condemnation and persecution do I think he should be put under investigation for simpley expressing that he is indeed attracted to children? No not until he is found in possession of child porn, explicitly expresses specific intent to commit an sexual act upon a child, or actually commits a sexual act upon a child. In my imagined system of rehabilitation for pedophiles do I think he should be evaluated for treatment and help of pedopholia for expressing sexual attraction to children? Yes
492
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:23:22 PM »
Pretty sceptical of the outcomes of these surveys as those responses can mean quite a few things.
Such as?
Pretty big difference between opposing someone's ability to criticise minorities and the harm some of their beliefs and practices might cause for our society on the one hand, and thinking that it should not be legal for people to publicly proclaim that all immigrants are filthy subhuman mudslime niggers who should be round up and eradicated.
I personally don't think the state should be able to limit free speech in either case.
Question. For anyone really...
If a man was standing on a street corner talking about how attracted he is to 6-9 year old girls, how much they turn him on and what have you, would it be okay for the police to arrest him? Would it be okay for him to then be put under surveillance for expressing his sexual desires?
Until he provides further evidence of intent or actually commits the act, no.
493
« on: November 24, 2015, 02:20:30 PM »
If you haven't kept up the Burmese government has denied citizenship and many basic human rights to the minority Rohingya group since 1982. While some may think that in and of itself should not be worthy of global condemnation the actions inflicted upon the Rohingya Muslim minority by the Buddhist Burmese majority go further. The Rohingya face violence and lack basic rights such as access to healthcare, education and employment. They live in “apartheid-like conditions” due to, among other things, Myanmar’s refusal to recognize them as citizens. But this is nothing new. Between May 1991 and March 1992, more than 260,000 Rohingya fled the country over “human rights abuses committed by the Burmese military, including the confiscation of land, forced labor, rape, torture, and summary executions,” the nonprofit group Physicians for Human Rights wrote in a 2013 report While this problem isn’t new, it’s gotten demonstrably worse in recent years.
Myanmar’s 2010 transition from a military-led government to a somewhat more democratic system led to some of the worst violence against Muslims. The national government has tacitly permitted the rise of the 969 movement, a group of Buddhist monks who employ “moral justification for a wave of anti-Muslim bloodshed,” Reuters reports. Since 2012, roughly 140,000 Rohingya have fled northwestern Myanmar amid deadly fighting with the majority Buddhists. And although a by far more democratic party won election just earlier this year, they have remained quiet on the issue and seem to have no intention of improving the situation. http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/06/17/why-is-no-one-helping-myanmars-rohingya/Now there has been some response by the US and other human rights organizations but not what I would consider satisfactory.
494
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:57:06 PM »
mmmm i too love echo chambers of irony
495
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:54:40 PM »
nice A S S T E T I C S
A A A E E E S S S T T T H H H I I I A E S T H I C I H T S E A I I I H H H T T T S S S E E E A A A
496
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:52:46 PM »
what even is vaporwave
slowed down samples of 80's music, generally
seems all right
do people, like, hate this, or something
what's with this "ironic listening" thing
well it basically got popularized as a meme on /s4s/ on 4chan and generally yeah a lot of people dislike it because the classic "sampling in music is bad" meme
497
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:50:53 PM »
When will America invade, take over and transform Mexico into the World's largest water park?
While I don't necessarily think we should invade them, though I figure you're jesting, I do think that we should be helping Mexico a lot more. We help these foreign nations half a world away but we won't even help our own neighbors; we somehow are okay with the Mexican government completely extorting and abusing its people. Helping the Mexican government in the interest and well-being of the Mexican people can only benefit us in the end. You really wanna stop Mexican immigrants coming to the country (not sure why you would but w/e)? Start by fixing the country they live in; building a wall or suggesting deporting them is exactly what we should not be doing to the Mexican people right now.
498
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:43:02 PM »
>he unironically likes let the right one in
>he is a cold shell of a human being who did not get a strong emotional response from that beautiful film
it's like you've developed menopause from the old women you love so much
499
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:39:03 PM »
what even is vaporwave
slowed down samples of 80's music, generally
500
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:37:56 PM »
is this what it feels like to be a meme?
501
« on: November 24, 2015, 01:35:35 PM »
>he unironically likes let the right one in
502
« on: November 24, 2015, 12:49:19 PM »
upsides of these restrictions.
What exactly would those be? And I don't want some long drawn out subjective reasoning of your own. I want some empirical data showing limitations of free speech actually having any positive effects. As you said Mordo has the burden of proof for his claim, the same goes for you. I've seen no empirical data in this thread or anywhere for that matter showing positive effects of limiting free speech.
503
« on: November 24, 2015, 12:13:01 PM »
In comparison to the East when places like Myanmar, North Korea, China, the Middle East (which can be argued of not being part of the "East" dichotomy but let's not be pedantic) and Singapore exist?
I think not
504
« on: November 24, 2015, 11:58:52 AM »
Tolkien is such a shit writer tbh fam
Great imagination but should have gotten someone that actually can write worth a shit to write the books.
505
« on: November 24, 2015, 11:58:20 AM »
I look forward to the possibility of Obsidian getting their hands on the new engine if Bethesda allows them to make an installment in the next couple of years. I personally think they will. Gotta have something to feed the almighty Bethesda cashcow between the next Elder Scrolls and their next Fallout but idk we'll see.
Might not happen...
You could say Bethesda and Obsidian had a bit of a...fallout...
Yeah but I think Bethesda gives way more of a shit about money than their personal relationship with Obsidian
506
« on: November 24, 2015, 11:57:16 AM »
>Tolkimeme
507
« on: November 24, 2015, 11:40:05 AM »
dark brown is best for both genders
508
« on: November 24, 2015, 11:29:23 AM »
turkey and USA are close allies
Back in the Cold War when we had the common enemy of the Soviet Union around? Sure Post-Iraq war they harbor a lot of animosity towards us. I'd say we're far from close allies these days.
509
« on: November 24, 2015, 11:25:36 AM »
I look forward to the possibility of Obsidian getting their hands on the new engine if Bethesda allows them to make an installment in the next couple of years. I personally think they will. Gotta have something to feed the almighty Bethesda cashcow between the next Elder Scrolls and their next Fallout but idk we'll see.
510
« on: November 24, 2015, 11:22:12 AM »
Moderate rebels committing a moderate war crime by shooting one of the pilots while he parachutes down.
Turkey fucked up big time.
Should clarify, AFAIK these guys are Turkmens who are backed by Turkey. Turkey may have inadvertantly assisted them in committing a war crime.
Aside from it being an utterly shitty thing to do, what makes that a war crime?
Well it somewhat falls under Crimes against peace which fall under war crimes Crimes against peace
- planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances
- participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the above
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/overview/crimes_1.shtml
Pages: 1 ... 151617 1819 ... 517
|
Show Posts