Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 15:44:59 GMT
Why not just have a single standard of freedom of speech, expression and belief and not try to control what people do too much? Banning the hijab, banning silent prayer and forcing minorities to "acculturize" sounds like a good way to erode freedom and take society back towards the bad old days. I think it depends on the level of harm to third parties when an individual or group employs its right to the freedoms you mention. Putting it another way, I think those rights should be limited and defining those limits is a function of society. They seem to have become so limited that it's now acceptable to arrest women for insulting major western leaders on facebook |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 2, 2024 15:53:20 GMT
Yes, when the language game being played is nationalist versus patriot, I disapprove of those that game identifies as nationalists. When the language game being played is Scottish people who approve of independence versus those who don't, I don't disapprove of the people that game identifies as nationalists. So what you're saying is I'm playing the language game? I'm simply saying the far-right are often patriotic and good people, as well as good nationalists, you disagree and think they are bad people and the pejorative version of nationalists I don't think centrists or far-left are bad people either, they are also patriotic and good people I don't see fit to judge entire groups of people. But I accept your intentions in doing so are good as you want to fight racism etc If you're using language, you're playing the game. What a word means will depend on which language game is being played. Perhaps, it would be easier just to say that I don't think you have the kind of nationalist who believes that non-Aryans should be subjugated or exterminated in mind when you say that nationalists are good people. |
|
|
|
Post by equivocal on Oct 2, 2024 15:57:01 GMT
I think it depends on the level of harm to third parties when an individual or group employs its right to the freedoms you mention. Putting it another way, I think those rights should be limited and defining those limits is a function of society. They seem to have become so limited that it's now acceptable to arrest women for insulting major western leaders on facebook Can't say I am aware of the incident, but it sounds distinctly illiberal to me. I would say that the treatment of Muslims by the French is also illiberal (I've said so here previously).
To my way of thinking, a liberal society should only limit those freedoms to the extent that not limiting them would cause an unacceptable level of harm to third parties. That's not to claim the limits in the UK are necessarily set correctly, but I have no problem with the idea of banning silent prayer in the vicinity of abortion clinics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 16:09:36 GMT
So what you're saying is I'm playing the language game? I'm simply saying the far-right are often patriotic and good people, as well as good nationalists, you disagree and think they are bad people and the pejorative version of nationalists I don't think centrists or far-left are bad people either, they are also patriotic and good people I don't see fit to judge entire groups of people. But I accept your intentions in doing so are good as you want to fight racism etc If you're using language, you're playing the game. What a word means will depend on which language game is being played. Perhaps, it would be easier just to say that I don't think you have the kind of nationalist who believes that non-Aryans should be subjugated or exterminated in mind when you say that nationalists are good people. Maybe, but I'm not fully white myself and yet, an ex-NF prevented me from being homeless by allowing me to stay there, he was a friend, I've also been friends with others who really were Nazis. That guy who let me stay - he wasn't a bad person either, maybe you would say he was misguided I don't think anyone should be judged ultimately Maybe this is an interesting read for you www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25142557 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 16:10:40 GMT
They seem to have become so limited that it's now acceptable to arrest women for insulting major western leaders on facebook Can't say I am aware of the incident, but it sounds distinctly illiberal to me. I would say that the treatment of Muslims by the French is also illiberal (I've said so here previously).
To my way of thinking, a liberal society should only limit those freedoms to the extent that not limiting them would cause an unacceptable level of harm to third parties. That's not to claim the limits in the UK are necessarily set correctly,
Cool. Why? It's harming no one |
|
|
|
Post by equivocal on Oct 2, 2024 16:39:40 GMT
but I have no problem with the idea of banning silent prayer in the vicinity of abortion clinics. I think it adds additional stress to patients, and I don't think it is acceptable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2024 16:44:55 GMT
So silently standing outside somewhere is harming patients?
If she was harassing them yes but she wasn't, it was silent
There's no freedom of speech in England anyway, they can arrest you for nearly anything, there's nothing like the 1A. So loitering or any number of things could have been used...
That doesn't make it right, just because it's legal to cart someone off for almost anything
|
|
|
|
Post by equivocal on Oct 2, 2024 16:56:57 GMT
So silently standing outside somewhere is harming patients? If she was harassing them yes but she wasn't, it was silent There's no freedom of speech in England anyway, they can arrest you for nearly anything, there's nothing like the 1A. So loitering or any number of things could have been used... That doesn't make it right, just because it's legal to cart someone off for almost anything That's a matter of opinion. In my opinion, a well known anti-abortionist is more than capable of causing additional stress to patients. It's not practical to only ban those who are well known, so it has to be a blanket ban. It's hardly a major infringement on someone praying to be excluded from an area no more than 150m radius.
I'm not religious, but I assume prayers will be answered or otherwise even if they aren't issued from the individual's chosen location. Of course, if one is not seeking a result from the deity to whom the prayer is addressed but to influence users of clinics, then location is rather more important.
|
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 2, 2024 17:35:19 GMT
If you're using language, you're playing the game. What a word means will depend on which language game is being played. Perhaps, it would be easier just to say that I don't think you have the kind of nationalist who believes that non-Aryans should be subjugated or exterminated in mind when you say that nationalists are good people. Maybe, but I'm not fully white myself and yet, an ex-NF prevented me from being homeless by allowing me to stay there, he was a friend, I've also been friends with others who really were Nazis. That guy who let me stay - he wasn't a bad person either, maybe you would say he was misguided I don't think anyone should be judged ultimately Maybe this is an interesting read for you www.bbc.com/news/magazine-25142557 A person may be described as far right if he or she prescribes to particular political viewpoints. Whether someone on the far right is a fundamentally nice person will depend on the individual's metric for measuring such things. Whether or not you have found yourself liking Nazis (or whoever) is immaterial to the question whether they are far right according to the common usage of those words. |
|
|
|
Post by foldart on Oct 2, 2024 17:47:13 GMT
Much is being made by this administration of legislation around violence and coercion against them,in myworking life I had two women who were subject to domestic violence,one I managed to find another job within the company far enough away and helped her find accommodation another was so in fear of the **** she was married to she refused help.
Anyway my point is I believe that in Islam women are second class citizens and many are subject to coercion by male family members even mothers which is why I believe a good reason for banning the burka and niqab possibly the hijab too.
Can ai see that happening? No not at all which is why liberal values are often not liberal at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 2, 2024 17:54:34 GMT
Much is being made by this administration of legislation around violence and coercion against them,in myworking life I had two women who were subject to domestic violence,one I managed to find another job within the company far enough away and helped her find accommodation another was so in fear of the **** she was married to she refused help. Anyway my point is I believe that in Islam women are second class citizens and many are subject to coercion by male family members even mothers which is why I believe a good reason for banning the burka and niqab possibly the hijab too. Can ai see that happening? No not at all which is why liberal values are often not liberal at all. The problem is that their culture or religion is illiberal. Christianity is illiberal too. But not every Muslim or Christian adheres to the illiberal imperatives of their religion. Those who say that girls and women should be allowed to wear whatever they choose are being liberal. Those who seek to impose restraints are being illiberal. In the example you gave, the coercive relatives are being illiberal. |
|
|
|
Post by foldart on Oct 2, 2024 18:46:01 GMT
This is from my part of the world and it isn’t isolated. link |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 2, 2024 18:48:56 GMT
This is from my part of the world and it isn’t isolated. linkYes, that is a sad example of religious extremism. Do you have a wider point? |
|
|
|
Post by foldart on Oct 2, 2024 18:54:28 GMT
This is from my part of the world and it isn’t isolated. linkYes, that is a sad example of religious extremism. Do you have a wider point? I would’ve thought it self evident and why I’d ban religious dress for women |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Oct 2, 2024 18:59:27 GMT
Yes, that is a sad example of religious extremism. Do you have a wider point? I would’ve thought it self evident and why I’d ban religious dress for women Sorry for being so slow. It's not self-evident to me. The sad case you highlighted shows why illiberalism should not be tolerated. If you take away the choice of wearing religious dress, you will be acting illiberally, the very thing that was responsible for that poor girl/woman's death. |
|
