|
Take the discussions of the merits of religion to PMs - KwarK |
I still don't see how supposed increased productivity could ever justify repressing half the population.
edit: I'd also hesitate to ever say that religion made a country more prosperous. If anything in Europe it resulted mainly in a massive exportation of wealth in the forms of church tithes.
I cannot see how you say feminism is an experiment in possibly reducing productivity, (and insinuating that it's a failed one to boot)
If we're solely focused on overall productivity as a society, and not opposed to the violation of equality for certain members of society, why not reinstate slavery? That was crazy productive for the ruling class and what jump started the American economy after all.
|
On January 26 2012 00:26 mbr2321 wrote:
I don't think it's fair to blame religion for horrifying, reactionary religious governments. That would be like blaming atheism for horrifying, atheist governments (NK, China, USSR, etc). Certainly bad people manipulate religion to get off on their disgusting power trips, but using religion as a tool to manipulate minds that have already been down-trodden is not the basis of religion.
Religion is the answer to question we have not, yet, been able to answer. Before the advent of space exploration, religion explained the sun, the moon, and the stars. Before the great strides in biology and chemistry, religion answered what we are, and how we work. There are still questions the answers to which we do not know. At this point, there is no factual basis for any theory of the beginning of the universe-- certainly there are reasonable theories, but there is no knowledge.
Faith is belief without knowledge, and I agree that faith can be dangerous. But with regards to the way the universe works, I have as much proof that God created the Universe as anyone does that it was a random act of nothingness: absolutely no proof at all. Everything we know, from Newton's laws of conservation to Einstein's relativity theory is based on assumptions-- sometimes irrational assumptions. The set of assumptions we use today are different than those used by ancient philosophers. We decide what is "right" or "factual" based on the set of assumptions which explain the most while assuming the least-- we don't use necessarily the "correct" assumptions, but rather the most useful ones.
A higher power didn't ask, nor did it give authority, nor would a benevolent higher power accept the actions that these exploitative Imams are hoping to take. There is cruelty in man, not religion.
Yes it is fair to blame religion.. especially in the case of the genital mutilation community being almost entirely religious. North Korea atheist government? NK is like the perfect theocratic state lol... Maoism? Stalinism? Those aren't secular, exercise some critical thinking.
Agreed religion was one of our species failed attempts at understanding the universe. You correctly point out it was the best we could do pre modern science but fail to mention that now with what we know religion has been proven wrong on like very single occasion.
Well here your just proving how unaccommodating of discussion religion is. God did it end of story. There is no quest for truth and knowledge just people content with ignorance.
So you know the mind of god? You know god would disagree with these people? How did you come by such knowledge?
On January 26 2012 00:36 vetinari wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 00:11 Haemonculus wrote:
I don't understand what you're getting at. I'm not arguing that men and women are the same, but your thought process doesn't seem to have any goal whatsoever. You defend repressing sexuality, then go on to explain how sleeping around is the most genetically viable strategy, all while claiming that society depends on it.
edit: You're also bringing up examples and speaking about societies from hundreds of years ago. Tell me what justifies repression human sexuality in the modern world? What I have been trying to say, is that sleeping around is the most genetically viable strategy. In the absence of effective sexual repression, people will sleep around, because that is what we are programmed to do. Sleeping around is what is best for the individual. However, what is best for society is to harness the power of the sex drive to get people to work for the benefit of society. Sleeping around, however, undermines the rationing of sex and thus its motivating effect. Thus, some form of sexual repression is beneficial for society. In essence, we are spending our accumulated social capital, in order to experiment with secularism, feminism, socialism, capitalism, etc. Time will tell whether these investments will pay off, or bankrupt us. If they pay off, all well and good. If not . . . then oh shit. The example from hundreds of years ago was explaining the benefit of genetic diversity: it facilitates adaptation to changes in environment. The example had nothing to do with sexual repression.
Please provide source on all us being sluts without sexual repression... You know there are animals that have lifelong monogamous relationships right? Your trying to sound scientific and rational but... lol
|
One powerful strategy for both sexes is to find a partner (most likely one due to dangers of jealousy) with high general fitness (genetic, social, intelligent, etc) and with high attraction (physical, emotional, etc). Marriage is socially beneficial and adultery puts financial, physical, and social risk to the adulterer and hisher child. Having long term relationship ensures higher chance of the child's success as well.
I'd have to think more optimal strategies. But nature doesn't necessarily give us the pure optimal strategy. I'm pretty sure optimal would involve a lot of murder and rape.
We are programmed mostly by rules of attraction, not by strategy. We cheat because we like sex and attraction isnt one-to-one and we don't think about the consequences to our children and family.
|
..."Be fruitful and multiply" = afraid of sex?
Well, if people want to persist in their stereotypes about religion, who is anyone else to stop them....
|
On one hand, Women have it pretty rough in certain islamic countries.
On the other hand, a lot of times my hairs stand up on end when the UN gets involved with something so trivial. Aren't there better things for them to be working on? Are they really going to use the POWER of GLOBAL GOVERNMENT to ensure people are treated equally when they cheat on their spouses?
You'd think they maybe instead of attacking a symptom (cultural misogyny) they could address the problem (lack of education), which also happens to cure other problems. Then again, countries that the west bombs the fuck out of pretty much have a free pass to fucked up society, in my opinion. It's pretty hard to remain civil and orderly when there's always the chance that your house gets randomly exploded.
|
Well if women have more rights that usually increases education by increasing teachers. Women's rights is a big deal economically, not just socially. This is definitely an important global issue.
|
On January 26 2012 01:00 ShadeR wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 00:26 mbr2321 wrote:
I don't think it's fair to blame religion for horrifying, reactionary religious governments. That would be like blaming atheism for horrifying, atheist governments (NK, China, USSR, etc). Certainly bad people manipulate religion to get off on their disgusting power trips, but using religion as a tool to manipulate minds that have already been down-trodden is not the basis of religion.
Religion is the answer to question we have not, yet, been able to answer. Before the advent of space exploration, religion explained the sun, the moon, and the stars. Before the great strides in biology and chemistry, religion answered what we are, and how we work. There are still questions the answers to which we do not know. At this point, there is no factual basis for any theory of the beginning of the universe-- certainly there are reasonable theories, but there is no knowledge.
Faith is belief without knowledge, and I agree that faith can be dangerous. But with regards to the way the universe works, I have as much proof that God created the Universe as anyone does that it was a random act of nothingness: absolutely no proof at all. Everything we know, from Newton's laws of conservation to Einstein's relativity theory is based on assumptions-- sometimes irrational assumptions. The set of assumptions we use today are different than those used by ancient philosophers. We decide what is "right" or "factual" based on the set of assumptions which explain the most while assuming the least-- we don't use necessarily the "correct" assumptions, but rather the most useful ones.
A higher power didn't ask, nor did it give authority, nor would a benevolent higher power accept the actions that these exploitative Imams are hoping to take. There is cruelty in man, not religion. Yes it is fair to blame religion.. especially in the case of the genital mutilation community being almost entirely religious. North Korea atheist government? NK is like the perfect theocratic state lol... Maoism? Stalinism? Those aren't secular, exercise some critical thinking. Agreed religion was one of our species failed attempts at understanding the universe. You correctly point out it was the best we could do pre modern science but fail to mention that now with what we know religion has been proven wrong on like very single occasion. Well here your just proving how unaccommodating of discussion religion is. God did it end of story. There is no quest for truth and knowledge just people content with ignorance. So you know the mind of god? You know god would disagree with these people? How did you come by such knowledge?
Are you seriously trying to tell me that Stalinism and Maoims-- off shoots of Communism, which completely and totally rejects all faith in a higher power -- is theocratic in nature? On that point, we must fundamentally disagree, as you have absolutely no foundation upon which to base that claim, and I can't refute a point which defies all previously held definitions of society.
Your point may have been that Kim Jung Il, Stalin, and Mao all force their personal beliefs on their people in their tenure as Totalitarian dictators, and that this mimics the Theocratic Totalitarian dictators of the past. I agree on that point. That was my original point as well. People are bad-- it's not religion's fault that Imam's might start circumcising females. If it wasn't a religious position of authority ordering it, it would be a secular position of authority-- a mayor, a governor, a general, a dictator or any other positions within a whole host of easily corrupted authorities.
Religion hasn't failed in understanding the universe. Religion has succeeded in the same way that every other theory has succeeded-- it has used the least amount of assumptions to explain the most. I admit that I don't know everything-- I haven't delved into the depths of the universe and unlocked every secret therein-- there are things none of us knows. Religion answers the unanswerable, it gives reason to that which we cannot reason, it brings purpose to life. Am I arguing that my religion is correct? No. Am I arguing that any religion is correct? No. I am saying that Religion, right or wrong, is useful.
On your last point, you're right. I don't know the mind of God. I cannot see His Will. I know nothing about the metaphysical world-- that doesn't mean I can't postulate or reason what a Just God would allow. I have never come across any sacred text that asks females to be circumcised, and the thought itself is so horrifying that I would reject any faith that called for female circumcision.
My overall point is: I can accept that I believe without knowing for sure. Can you accept that you do not believe with the same lack of complete understanding?
EDIT: fixed quotes
EDIT 2: clarified one of my points
|
On your last point, you're right. I don't know the mind of God. I cannot see His Will. I know nothing about the metaphysical world-- that doesn't mean I can't postulate or reason what a Just God would allow. I have never come across any sacred text that asks females to be circumcised, and the thought itself is so horrifying that I would reject any faith that called for female circumcision.
You would not circumcise females even if it was god's will? Explain please.
|
Cutting a Man or Woman in such a way as circumcision is beyond pointless. Humanity will go on regardless. Disgusting.
<3 To all who have had their genitalia mutilated without their consent.
Gods will be damned, his interests are no longer our own. What a pathetic Deity to desire us to be his slaves.
|
On January 26 2012 01:21 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On your last point, you're right. I don't know the mind of God. I cannot see His Will. I know nothing about the metaphysical world-- that doesn't mean I can't postulate or reason what a Just God would allow. I have never come across any sacred text that asks females to be circumcised, and the thought itself is so horrifying that I would reject any faith that called for female circumcision. You would not circumcise females even if it was god's will? Explain please.
If a higher power told me to circumcize a female, I would not want to worship that higher power. I would also hope that I wouldn't do it, knowing that I would be punished for not doing so. This is making the assumption that a higher power would will that, though.
|
On January 25 2012 23:08 Nancial wrote:
This is absolutely wrong to interfere with how muslims live. Not only it's none of our business, but also it's hypocritical.
Why do you think you're right and they are wrong? Maybe their god is the one that's true and he wants what they do, not what YOU think gawd wants.
Seriously religious people are so stupid... on both sides
What I find wrong is mutilation of women, not islam.
|
I'm not sure what's worse, the UN or the Islamists. I'm going to go with the UN for obvious reasons though.
|
Are people seriously discussing "optimal mating strategies" as if they have even the slightest right to intervene?
What sickening collectivist and totalitarian nonesense.
Supressing every individual in the world in order to appease the non-existent "collective." The collective does not exist, stop offering human lives and freedom to its pyre.
|
Ive heard of female circumcision before, but never really had the time to think about it.
But thinking of it now, God isnt it like VERY VERY painful? Words fail.
At least on men its only the foreskin (I am circumcised as an infant), but in women, its like the very organ. Awful practice.
|
It's pretty clear all the Islamic defenders did not bother to actually read the Qu'ran.
It is a simple FACT that Islam is a very volatile religion, the Qu'ran is full of crap, it literally says jews should be killed, women are stupid and will make up most of hell and that a womans word can not be trusted because they are liars.
Some other gems are that Muslims can not be friends with non musilms, your in a permanent state of war with ALL non believers, that cats and dogs should be massacred because they are unclean and ofcourse the 40 virgins thing (this has been found to be likely a mistranslation of the Assyrian word for grape vines, despite that most muslims still believe it though) a lot of other stuff I can't remember right now, suffice to say the Qu'ran is the most agressive religious book I've ever read.
And of course there's all the wonderful stuff in the Hadiths about Muhammad having sex with a 9 year old.
Most Islamic apologists won't tell you this because they WANT their religion to be peaceful because they are, but because they've already been indoctrinated by this flavor of religion as a child they rather lie to themselves then accept the truth and either rewrite their own religion or choose another one.
Muslims can be wonderful people, the religion however will always be barbaric and the peacefulness of the people is often dictated by how seriously they take their own religion.
A good example is Thailand, there in the Buddhist part everything is peaceful while the Muslim part is a clusterfuck of violence and religious murders.
And to the "but westerners abused women too" crowd, true, but not even close to the levels being portrayed in the Muslim communities, we might have all beaten our women but at least we didn't mutilate their vagina's because we thought god told us to.
|
On January 26 2012 02:34 zalz wrote:
Are people seriously discussing "optimal mating strategies" as if they have even the slightest right to intervene?
What sickening collectivist and totalitarian nonesense.
Supressing every individual in the world in order to appease the non-existent "collective." The collective does not exist, stop offering human lives and freedom to its pyre.
Sorry, I have argued against his pseudoscience before and got a little carried away.
Even if his pseudoscience wasn't laughably false, it certainly wouldn't justify infringing on the rights of humans.
|
On January 26 2012 00:27 DoubleReed wrote:
He's responding to me Haem. He's suggesting our sexual strategies have to be repressed in order for a sensible society to work. And perhaps as men and women are different means they should be treated differently. It's bullshit, of course. Differences between male and female mating strategies are minor at best, and everything he's claimed is incorrect and some even inverted.
The fact is that all evidence shows that men and women are far more similar than most people believe. There is zero justification for any state to grant rights based on sex.
No vetinari, that's not competition. Women compete with each other on reproductive success not against men. You are making less than no sense.
You are right that he mixes stuff and states as fact reproductive strategies without any hard proof. But saying male and female mating strategies are just slightly different is kind of strange. Of course depends what is minor for you, but exactly the fact that women can get pregnant as you stated (and pregnancy is a big time and resource investment for a woman) means that their strategies are different.
|
they are trying to make iranian women start a riot
|
On January 26 2012 02:55 Scootaloo wrote:
It's pretty clear all the Islamic defenders did not bother to actually read the Qu'ran.
It is a simple FACT that Islam is a very volatile religion, the Qu'ran is full of crap, it literally says jews should be killed, women are stupid and will make up most of hell and that a womans word can not be trusted because they are liars.
Some other gems are that Muslims can not be friends with non musilms, your in a permanent state of war with ALL non believers, that cats and dogs should be massacred because they are unclean and ofcourse the 40 virgins thing (this has been found to be likely a mistranslation of the Assyrian word for grape vines, despite that most muslims still believe it though) a lot of other stuff I can't remember right now, suffice to say the Qu'ran is the most agressive religious book I've ever read.
And of course there's all the wonderful stuff in the Hadiths about Muhammad having sex with a 9 year old.
Most Islamic apologists won't tell you this because they WANT their religion to be peaceful because they are, but because they've already been indoctrinated by this flavor of religion as a child they rather lie to themselves then accept the truth and either rewrite their own religion or choose another one.
Muslims can be wonderful people, the religion however will always be barbaric and the peacefulness of the people is often dictated by how seriously they take their own religion.
A good example is Thailand, there in the Buddhist part everything is peaceful while the Muslim part is a clusterfuck of violence and religious murders.
And to the "but westerners abused women too" crowd, true, but not even close to the levels being portrayed in the Muslim communities, we might have all beaten our women but at least we didn't mutilate their vagina's because we thought god told us to.
I have never read so much crap in one post in my life....Muslims can marry Jews and Christians. I don't know where you got the idea that Muslims aren't allowed to be friends with non-Muslims. Prophet Muhammad didn't consummate his marriage when Aisha was 9 years old and if you actually read any history on her. She was far from a child and was the leader of the religion after his death, but no one talks about that she was the authority of the religion and how she was the main teacher of it when he was alive and dead. No one talks about how important she was in leading second largest religion in the world. No one looks at the history to see that men and women married around that age and lived independently.
The 40 virgins, is a mis-translation, not to grapes, but that you will get all sexual desires fulfilled in heaven with 40 'hurineiin' - beings who's sole purpose is sex. Putting the label of virgins on them makes it seem like they're human, but they're not. Islam doesn't shy away from sex. Society does. Having sex with one's spouse is an act of worship and is seen as a mutual duty in a marriage. If you want to go into how Islam teaches people to treat sex, the man has to keep going until the woman is satisfied or else he's seen as not doing his duty to her as a husband. If you're muslim, have sex with your spouse as much as possible. God loves it.
As Judicator said, I have my own experiences with Middle Eastern countries. It is very live-able and most westerns would probably love to vacation in Jordan, Egypt, UAE, etc. They certainly like being allies with even the more conservative countries. I know people who were born and raised in the USA, but still moved to the Middle East when they got older. They had all the flair of Western culture in them, but they still chose to live in the Middle East because they saw other opportunities there.
Does female circumcision happen? Yes it does, because people are stupid idiots that think a woman shouldn't enjoy herself. Does it come up in Islamic and in-culture debates? YES IT DOES. I've seen talk shows on Arabic and Islamic television that have brought on circumcised women to talk about their experiences. It ruins marriages because the woman isn't feeling any pleasure in sex. Point is that it's a hot topic and a large part of society acknowledges that it is bad. There is nothing in the Quran that talks about a woman being circumcised. It talks about male circumcision but never female circumcision. If it did, then you could bet that most Mideastern women would be circumcised, but they're not because this situation is in the minority.
Edit: about cats and dogs being slaughtered. Really?
Narated By 'Abdullah bin 'Umar : Allah's Apostle said, "A lady was punished because of a cat which she had imprisoned till it died. She entered the (Hell) Fire because of it, for she neither gave it food nor water as she had imprisoned it, nor set it free to eat from the vermin of the earth." – [Bukhari Vol.4, Book 56, #689]
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “While a dog was going round a well and was about to die of thirst, an Israeli prostitute saw it and took off her shoe and watered it. So Allah forgave her because of that good deed.” (Book #56, Hadith #673)
|
I'm not terribly concerned about Islam or their culture to be honest... I just worry about my own and that is what everyone should do. Maybe I've just grown tired of the never ending war propaganda and I just want to leave people alone so long as they are not trying to hurt me.
As for female circumcision in particular... again I can't be terribly concerned about it while so many young boys are mutilated every day in my own country. Now people will usually respond to this with arguments about the severity or the extent of the mutilation that takes place but I think that is irelevent and that we are in no position to criticize another culture... it just comes down to me not liking when a permanent modification is made to someone's natural body without their consent. Obviously some procedures have to be done when someone is in a hospital and a body part is seriously infected, damaged or broken in some way and cannot be repaired or it would risk the life of the patient.
So yeah when I hear about fgm..i think it is mostly propaganda. The people in those countries don't practice female circumcision in order to control women... they do it because it is their culture and it is what they think they are supposed to do...it is the exact same reasons many fathers want their sons to be circumcized in the United States. Now if you look at the reasons why these procedures came into existence in the first place then it probably was to suppress women, again just like circumcision of males was adopted originally to attempt to stop boys from masterbating. Even so the people who want their kids mutilated and the people who practice it aren't thinking of the procedure as a punishment or even as soemthing negative..they are making their kids look "normal" to their culture.
I would say just let their culture evolve and we can worry about our own cultures. It is too easy to look at someone else and find something that they do is barbaric or just plain wrong but you should also try to look at things from different angles. For example we tend to look at these third world countries in terms of "women's rights" and of course based on our own idea of what it means for women to have rights. Personally I don't believe in women's rights or men's rights, I believe in individual rights. In the countries in question do the men really have "more" rights than the women? Are they better off overall? Or do they just have their own expectations and burdens? When their country goes to war who gets forced into combat and killed? When their is civil war or general chaos many women get raped and that gets treated as a worse crime than all of the men who get slaughtered. I don't think any of them have very many rights so why do we always hear the focus on women's rights? Because it is propaganda... it sparks an emotional reaction in a lot of people... if anything it appeals to a very sexist notion that women are indeed weak, helpless cattle that need to be protected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
