This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Jubilee
Why does it matter what
you
would do, MyTie or Magician. The point is that you have your beliefs you would risk die for and that other people wouldn't, and she has her beliefs she would risk dying for and apparently you wouldn't. It's okay that you wouldn't risk your lives for that, but it's not okay to cheapen what she is doing.
As always with you guys, it comes back to the issue that for some reason you can't seem to understand why other people believe in things just as intensely as you believe in whatever you believe in. If you can see yourself risking life and limb for your beliefs, and you consider that a noble, heroic thing, then it's an insult to not recognize that other people feel the same way about their own beliefs.
To say she deserves to be sent to an insane asylum, Magician, because she was willing to stand up for her beliefs even at the risk of dying for them, is no different than saying Christians deserve the same for doing the same. And it's not even Christian martyrs. Look at New Hampshire's state motto: Live Free or Die. It's the exact same thing. People sometimes believe that certain things are worth the risk of dying for. They would rather cast off the shackles and die trying than accept the status quo and live.
Post by
MyTie
I believe that Squirrels are pretty terrific creatures. I believe that their lives are valuable. I also believe that human babies are pretty terrific, and I believe that their lives are also valuable. I would jump in front of a speeding train, to push a baby out of the way, and die, without even thinking about it. But, if I were to do the same thing for a squirrel, people would think that I died a crazy man.
That's not to say that religion is like the baby, and the squirrel is feminism. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that there ARE some instances where dieing for something isn't warranted. It's a matter of opinion, sure, but hand wringing isn't going to convince me that a woman, living in Iran, who refuses to wear the burqua, and gets stoned to death, died a worthy death. She's not going to change anything doing it. Is it her fault she died? No. Should she be able to go bare faced down the road? Yep. However, what you need to realize, is that just because you should be able to do something, doesn't mean that you should, nor that you are able.
It's all well and good to argue for women's rights, and I admire those that stand up for women's rights, but I won't advocate anyone walking down the road in a life risking manner.
To tie back to the Christian angle, if a Christian denies Christ, he is no longer a Christian. If a woman denies feminism, there isn't some goddess of feminism that is going to turn their back on her.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
You don't get to decide whats important to people.
Well, here's your problem. You don't understand a word I'm saying, and if you do, you have NO idea why I'm saying it. That's probably the problem you are having with Magician.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
If Christianity permitted the denying of Christ, and I would be put to death if I didn't deny Christ, I would deny Christ.
This
isn't
about which issue is more important. This
isn't
about "my issues" being more important than "your issues". (on a side note, I think feminism is one of "my issues", and I think it is sexist of you to try to suggest otherwise)
This
is
about weighing the importance of your own life. This
is
about picking your battles. That's all I'm trying to say. I even acknowledged that is a subjective measure. If you just take it at face value, and stop trying to apply labels to me, and what you think I am thinking, you'll see there is nothing sinister about this opinion.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Picking your battles? What is more important than freedom?
The two are not mutually exclusive. I think you are applying a false dichotomy to the argument. If I think that a person should be careful to pick their battles, that doesn't mean I think what they battle for isn't worth the fight.
Post by
Jubilee
There is no false dichotomy. You think what they battle for isn't worth
dying for
. She does. It's not a question of whether you support feminism in the abstract. It's a question of whether you are going to support the actions of someone who is clearly under extreme oppression and has the guts to stand up and announce that she will not be oppressed.
Post by
Magician22773
You think what they battle for isn't worth dying for
I'm not saying that its not worth dying for, I am saying that it is not the most effective way to stand up for a cause...
any
cause.
She was not, as you tried to compare her too, standing down tanks. She posted topless pictures on facebook. And for that, she stands a chance of being put to death. That is
<in my best Spock voice>
...illogical.
You seem to be so blinded by
'the cause'
, that you lose all sense of what is right, and what is wrong. This is the same thing many other radicals do with other causes. Abortion clinic bombers and Westboro....they have a
'cause'
as well, and at their surface, I support those causes too. But I, and most anybody else that is in their right mind, do not support the way they choose to act on them...and I think they are nuts too.
See, with this girl....I am glad she got taken to a mental hospital, because that may just save her life. I do not want to read an article about her being killed...no matter what the cause. I am starting to wonder if you feel the same way. Or do you believe, actually wish, that she would be stoned to death...for the 'cause'?
Post by
Adamsm
For frellin' sake...
do politician's get stupider every day or what?
Post by
Magician22773
For frellin' sake...
do politician's get stupider every day or what?
I don't think we need 'laws', and especially do not need 'law enforcement' on this issue. I think this is an issue where a little common sense would go a long way.
As silly as this sounds, I think the only place where this should even be an issue would be at a standing urinal. If you are in a stall, behind a closed door...what does it matter?
Now, if you are a pre-op male to female trans, and you are, by all outward appearances, a woman, and you for some reason choose to use a standing urinal in a men's restroom...well...that would be 'awkward' to say the least. Outside of that, I think all other possible combinations result in using a stall...which as I said, is at least private enough to make me not really care either way.
Post by
MyTie
There is no false dichotomy. You think what they battle for isn't worth
dying for
. She does. It's not a question of whether you support feminism in the abstract. It's a question of whether you are going to support the actions of someone who is clearly under extreme oppression and has the guts to stand up and announce that she will not be oppressed.
Pffft. There is a false dichotomy here as well. Either I think her choosing to go out without her burqua and getting stoned to death is a good idea, or I don't support her rights. Lovely. Let me pick neither. I support her rights, but don't think that's a battle she should have chosen. I'm certainly in no position to force people to choose the battles I would, and that's not my point. My point is that there ARE battles that should be taken and there ARE battles that shouldn't. We may differ in opinion where that line sits, but there IS a line. Risking death is a pretty weighty decision. Is it so radical, and need of an argument, if I came down on the "safe" side of that line? I mean, really? Can we take a step back and look at that as perhaps practical, and not a massive insult to you and all women? Can we be practical,
for once
?
Post by
Magician22773
The world has some pretty
%^&*ty
priorities.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/21/west-virginia-papers-anti-lgbt-column-wants-death-for-nggers-spics-kikes-and-wops/
Jesu Chrstio.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Magician22773
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/22/1764141/north-dakota-passes-personhood/
Has this been posted?
"And before people are like “lololol North Dakota who lives there anyway?”
You know what particular population North Dakota is higher than most in?
Native Americans.
And Native women have astronomical rates of violence and rape against them
."
Classic example of what happens when two sides of an issue cannot come together to reach reasonable concessions.....you end up with flawed legislation.
I agree with the concept, as I agree that life begins at conception, and that that life should be protected. But I do not agree that a doctor should be criminally liable for damaging a fetus while attempting in vitro fertilization, or while trying to save the mothers life.
I am also not sure "astronomical" is the best term for the rates of violence there...unless you believe that the rate is "astronomical" for everyone else as well. (which, to be honest, I think think the overall rate is "appalling" and "sickening"....and for me..1 in <anything> is 1 too many)...but (from the article)
Roughly 1 in 3 Native American women will be a victim of sexual assault, compared to 1 in 5 women overall.
Roughly 1 in 5 Native American women will be a victim of "Intimate Partner Violence"..this is actually about the same as the overall population.
Native Americans have an very high rate of other social issues, especially alcohol abuse. This is even more severe in Alaska (which the study you linked included). There is also a higher rate of poverty.
I would argue that if you compared the results from the Native Americans / Native Alaskans to similar demographics in America, such as inner cities, that have high drug and alcohol abuse, and high poverty, you would find similar results in sexual and domestic crimes as well. I would propose that finding solutions for those underlying social issues would help to reduce the rate of this type of violence significantly.
And, BTW
"And before people are like “lololol North Dakota who lives there anyway?”
The Dakota's have recently become an area that is almost similar to California was during the Gold Rush, due to major oil and natural gas reserves that have been able to be tapped by fracking. People are relocating there by the thousands because of extremely high paying jobs. This could either exacerbate the problem because of an influx of people, or it could help it because of an influx of new jobs and money in the economy.
Post by
MyTie
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/22/1764141/north-dakota-passes-personhood/
Has this been posted?
thinkprogress I'd rather not click that.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.