Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
It doesn't matter what I think is a "very good" argument for theism
Then why should I have to present an argument?
You said you have one, so, just present it.
Let me remind you what I said earlier.
This seems to me like an off topic tangent. So while I think "Life" is an ironclad argument for theism, I will not debate it here.
Can you please explain the differences?
You seem to want threads diverted to your preferred topic whenever you come across a topic you like. I think that is disrespectful to the OP.
Make a seperate thread if the topic interests you that much. I would find it interesting enough to post there.
If you don't care to do so, there you are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Ragnar
I will agree with you that the biggest drama did not originate there. However, the daily toxicity tended to be too high .
That was directly due to the inconsistency in the moderation. On Dart, Mike made moderating decisions to ban 2 trolls from DDO. Trolls whom Airmax ignored at the detriment of the forum.
When bsh1 took over, he continued the methods of his mentor Airmax, and the religion board here became like that at DDO.
Taking over after Bsh1, Virt immediately cut that nonsense out, and banned the idiots that Mike first banned, this time permanently.
The main problem with moderation here has always been inconsistency. Not just inconsistency in strictness, but an inconsistency in moderation itself.
If the mod team shows any bias against the religion board or the posters there, I will call you out on it.
And if you wink at the constant drama on the Debate.Org board, and turn a blind eye at the flames on the politics board, and pretend not to see the 5 or so old members who are constantly stirring up drama, only to go ballistic at one whiff of smoke on the religion board, I will call you out on it.
Most people are not aware of their bias, or how someone within their group with a bias can slowly affect them. I will play hall monitor for you.
Created:
-->@HistoryBuff
The only reason trump was able to win was because of the poor design of the electoral system.
Like the only way the Washington Nationals were able to win was because of the poor design of the MLB system?
Who is "we"?
Anyone who has been paying attention.
I've been paying attention, and I'm not part of that we.
It is a crime to ask for a thing of value from a foreigner to help you in an election.
The, " to help you in an election" part is you substituting your assumption for his intention. Trump asked for an investigation. It was his duty to do so.
Trump asked the president of ukraine for dirt on Biden. These facts are publicly available to anyone who cares.
This is simply untrue. The word "dirt" is never uttered by the president. He asked that the issue be investigated.
He asked about Biden by name.
Of course he did! Biden was a part of the situation, and Biden and his son were America's only interest in the issue.
If it was a general request to look into corruption he wouldn't have named Biden.
Illogical. If Biden, an American and sitting VP, was not involved, then America would not have needed an investigation. It would have been suspicious if Biden had not been mentioned.
The moment he asked for that he committed a crime.
Nonsense. He asked for an investigation, had he wanted dirt on Biden, he would have just asked for dirt. An investigation could have cleared Biden.
Statements can very easily be criminal.
And that is decided in a court where the accused receives due process.
A statement asking for dirt from a foreigner to help in an election is also a crime.
He did not ask for dirt, that is your assumption you are trying to artificially elevate into fact.
He did not ask to help his election bid, that is your assumption you are trying to artificially elevate into fact.
A person cannot be convicted on crimes you assume.
51% already support impeachment and removal. Where exactly are you getting this delusion that americans "aren't buying" it?
From non Fake-News organizations. 32% support impeachment and 19% only think the issue should be investigated. Your fake news sources falsely interpret that as 51% in favor of impeachment.
Trump has been proven to have committed 1 crime already.
Then why do we need a trial? Hmmm?
You tell me what president has used funds approved by congress to blackmail a foreign government into helping him win an election.
Barrack Hessien Obama through his VP Biden. Would you like me to send you the video link of Biden bragging that he used funds approved by congress to successfully blackmail a foreign government?
...there is no suggestion Biden ever broke a law.
Biden withheld funds from Ukraine until that country fired the official investigating the company his son was sucking millions from for a "job" for which he had no experience. Hello?
Biden gave something and the US got something. That is normal diplomacy.
And Trump gave something and the US got nothing, but that is a crime?
But Biden didn't do it with any intention of personally profiting.
How do you know this? You assign good intention to Biden and bad intention to Trump, and then pretend your assumption are facts.
There is also no evidence that he did personally profit.
I think the millions his son pocketed qualify as personal profit.
Sorry HB, but it is obvious you suffer from TDS.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Manik
Threads cannot be judged solely on the intent of the poster.
And yet the COC refers specifically to intent, as quoted above.
That doesn't mean intent is the only criteria for judgement.
Perhaps Coal had perfectly good intentions, but the thread still was 1. A violation of CoC,
People keep saying that, but which part of the COC exactly? I can't see it.
Virt spelled it out. If you still can't see it, take it on his authority as mod. The mods duty is only to explain his decisions, not to get your approval for them.
...and 2. Very likely to cause and encourage insult and abuse.
Well, yes. But you have to admit that ANY thread about religion in the religion forum is very likely to result in insult and abuse.
I don't have to admit any such thing. Many threads on the religion board are drama free.
But that's no reason to ban the religion forum.
Exactly.
Or threads related to controversial topics in other areas.
The threads topic was not controversial. It's treatment of that topic was flame bait.
To me, that would be bowing before the uncouth. It would be sad if they were to control us in that way.
OK. That is your opinion. The mods differ. The mods win.
In cases like this, someone must make a decision, that is why there are mods. You can disagree sure, but the mods did their job.
Coal naming himself is OK, but would everyone else have named only themselves?
Yes, Coal naming himself is OK. And yet his attempts to have an interesting discussion are blocked because of what other people might say.
Those people are also members who deserve to have their sensibilities considered. Not every "interesting discussion" is profitable or appropriate.
Coal often has good points and observations, but this one isn't even close. The mods are correct, and if they weren't, I'd be among the first to say so.
Created:
Posted in:
Threads cannot be judged solely on the intent of the poster. Perhaps Coal had perfectly good intentions, but the thread still was 1. A violation of CoC, and 2. Very likely to cause and encourage insult and abuse.
In cases like this, someone must make a decision, that is why there are mods. You can disagree sure, but the mods did their job.
Coal naming himself is OK, but would everyone else have named only themselves?
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Mage-CPA
Good answers. You said you generally "dont care" but are "absolutely opposed" when it comes to high school. Interesting.
Transgenders just confuse me, since they take issue with their body, but don't want their body to reflect what they feel, and to be honest, I have no idea how or why they feel that the way they feel is akin to a specific gender - it reinforces gender roles.
This issue deserves an entire thread of its own. I don't think many people have even realized that transsexuals are different from the transgendered.
...should a 16 yr old boy who identifies as a girl be allowed to shower with the girls in the locker room?
I do not believe people under the age of 18 should legally be able to change their gender. And I don't believe a persons sex can be changed, even with surgery.
Consequently, I personally believe everyone showering or using a restroom in a female facility should be genetically female, without exception. And vice-versa for men.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@bmdrocks21
Your answers are logical and consistent. I can detect no bigotry or hate in your responses.
Do you have any high school age children?
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Mage-CPA
Sensible answer.
OK. Now, his about the transgendered? Would you be opposed to a 16 year old trans "girl" using the female bathroom?
Created:
-->@HistoryBuff
Like the majority of Americans supported Hillery?
The majority did support hillary. She wont the popular vote.
She will go down in history as America's first female president.
The majority of Americans support impeachment if a president has broken the law.
We already know for certain he has broken 1.
Who is "we"?
He asked for a thing of value that would help him in an election. The moment he asked them for dirt on Biden he committed this crime.
He did not ask for dirt on Biden. He asked that the whole situation, of which Biden was a part, be investigated.
An investigation could have cleared Biden too. There was no reason for the president to shirk his responsibility to ensure a recipient of our tax dollars was not engaged in corruption.
Biden does not gain immunity just because he's running for office.
The 2nd has now been confirmed in sworn testimony as well as a statement by Trump's chief of staff. So it isn't really a secret he committed that one either.
Lucky for Trump then that this is America, where it takes more than "statements" to convict a person and people are innocent until proven guilty.
Trump asked for an investigation. That is not a crime, it was his duty. Democrats are assuming his intent. Assumptions do not convict people.
America isn't buying this nonsense because they see it for what it is. Nonsense.
It is carrying out the constitution.
Nonsense. Pelosi and Shiff are 2 of the most dishonest people in America. Its an impeachment looking for a victim.
Is the constitution nonsense to you?
The constitution isn't trying to impeach Trump. But losers who try to hide behind it to play dirty politics are nonsense.
Do you think the president should be above the law?
No. But simply calling a normal thing a crime and then trying to impeach is not the law. It's fakery.
This is exactly why the founding fathers made these rules for impeachment so that dishonest politicians could not railroad a president on only nonsense.
This hypocrisy will be crushed in the senate, and the president will go on to "lose" the majority of Americans again in 2020.
Tell Hillery to get ready for her second Term.
Created:
Post deleted
Created:
-->@SirAnonymous
I get it, but evidence is just evidence, extraordinary evidence is an oxymoron. What people mean is extraordinary claims require stronger proofs.
Created:
Like the majority of Americans supported Hillery?The majority of americans support impeachment.
The majority of Americans support impeachment if a president has broken the law.
And the republicans voted against open hearings because of the poison pills Nancy put in the vote. Like the chairperson would be able to sack the Presidents legal consul.
America isn't buying this nonsense because they see it for what it is. Nonsense.
Created:
The only way now would be civil war. And in America, civil war is possible only if our military fights itself.
Like if the Army and the Navy were on different sides. The US actually has 3 full armies, so a coup or civil war is virtually impossible.
But Sensible Americans will one day have to remove themselves from the America that wants to drown in illegal aliens and terrorists.
Either divorce or die with them.
If California wanted to go, I would let them. They would return begging to be let back into the union after they got tired of being a 3rd world hell hole.
Created:
Posted in:
The investigation is not over and niether you know what all of the connections between Trump and Russia are. There a number of people involved in the Russia connections and they are slowly coming out. How direct are they to idio-ump. That is what Mueller is hired to do.
Suddenly, our hero doen't mention Mueller anymore. I wonder why?
It is only a matter of time before Trump and his cult followers bite the dust.
It's pushing on to 3 years now and you're still singing the same clueless tune.
Every time you've been proven wrong, you simply switch to some other dumb theory and keep singing.
TDS is strong in this one.
Created:
Posted in:
Now imagine that there are thousands upon thousands of cups and only one coin.
OK.
even if it only amounts to everyone at the carnival laughing and making fun of you
In otherwords, like this topic, it's all meaningless.
The game with the cup and the coin? Not at all.
Of course it is. You said its an arbitrary choice one does not need to make and the "punishment" is innocuous. How is it not meaningless?
If.... it is impossible to know which religion actually has revealed truth or indeed if any does then it is not cheating it is just a high degree of confidence in an arbitrary decision.
Why would it be impossible to know?
Of course, you have rigged the scenario. I've asked you before, if your case is so good, why do you have to fake the scenario?
I can shake the cups without lifting them and one of them makes a "tink, tink" sound of a coin being hit by the lip of the overturned cup.
I can take a metal detector and see the faint image of a coin under one of the cups.
I can watch old video of people picking the wrong cups and through a process of elimination, pick the right cup.
But the barker says no, I can't do those things. Why? Because it is impossible to know which cup actually has the coin or indeed if any does.
But why is it impossible?
Because there are just so many cups! He says.
I sincerely hope that I never know everything.
I think you can let go of that worry SecMer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@bmdrocks21
Well, I am a bit late to the party.
No problem. Sensible people are always welcome.
Are you still under the impression that different bathrooms are bad?
No, I never did think they were bad. I just wanted to get peoples views on it.
What often interests me are people who hold contradicting beliefs, for example, like posters who will say people are intrinsically good, but then say men would misbehave in unisex facilities. Seems a contradiction.
Where do you stand on unisex bathrooms in highschools? For or against? And why?
Created:
Posted in:
-->@ebuc
We are not one sex humanity ergo unisex restrooms makes no sense and only creates a problem where none already exist.
OK. Some say we are more than 2 sexes, so would you be opposed to having more than 2 types of bathrooms?
Created:
Posted in:
I will not be supporting any suggestion of deleting the religion forum.
I was not worried about that at all. But given your admitted bias, I wonder why not?
That (some) members of it chose to behave in such a way as to give it a bad reputation, is where the fault lies
The behavior on the religion board was not worse than any other board. In fact, both here and on DDO, the biggest drama came from boards other than the religion board. It's a bias, and biases tend not to be logical.
I think the changes are good. We did need a consolidation, but the changes will not solve the problem of ghost forums.
My only gripe, too small to pursue, is that that the order of topics betrays the average age of the mods, and shows what subjects they think are most important.
I've always liked Virt, and I think all of you are showing us you're capable. All of your behaviors and decisions since the change have given me confidence that the future of the board has brightened.
I hate not having anything to rag on you guys about.
Created:
Posted in:
And India, and Asia, and China, and South America....Christisnity (sp) is moving to Africa.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Reece
As I always say, meaning, order, and information can only come from intelligence, and intelligence can only come from life, never materialism.
Thanks for the demo tho.
Created:
Posted in:
--> @ebuc
Women birth men. Men birth no-things.
Men impregnate women, women impregnate no things.
Pagan female worshipping will outlast all other religions....
So will cockroaches.
Created:
-->@Fallaneze
You are letting yourself be fooled by an illusion.There'll never be closure on whether God exists.It's an open ended question and we will never truly know the answer.
For very many people, the question does get settled. But new people are always coming into the system.
Closure happens to individuals, not to groups. Your implication is that anything short of total and instantaneous closure is not closure."
Very many people find closure and truly know the answer. Would "closure" to you be everyone coming to a similar conclusion at the same time? Is that even possible?
Created:
Posted in:
Are you trying to imply that Dr.Franklin is not 108 years old?
Gasp! What? He isn't?
Lol!
Created:
Posted in:
The materialists argument of a meaningless universe is self-refuting.
The say the universe is material only, but will then admit that meaning can be found in a conscious mind.
Both could not be true. Meaning, order, and information cannot come from materialism.
Created:
Posted in:
The prognosis for Christianity is already out, and things are going exactly as Jesus said they would.
Christianity will outlast all other religions. Hinduism for example, is clearly going to decline. It adds members by birth, and for the last 3,000 years has not been able to leave the dusty Indian valley of its birth.
Now that the government of India has banned Hinduism's caste system, young people are ignoring the religion in droves. Hinduism will clearly die.
The list of people and religions predicting the death of Christianity is long, and secularists tend to think numbers is what validates a religion.
But Christians know that truth is what validates a religion, regardless of size. Christianity is still the largest religion, and remains the fastest growing in terms of actual numbers of new converts, and will remain so for a long time.
Young people are leaving the catholic church. Other churches around the world are growing.
Created:
Posted in:
--> @3RU7AL
Please present even one "very good" argument for theism.
I haven't a clue what you consider an argument for theism. I don't even know what "theism" is to you.
This seems to me like an off topic tangent. So while I think "Life" is an ironclad argument for theism, I will not debate it here.
Make a seperate thread if the topic interests you that much. I would find it interesting enough to post there.
The point here is that the OP says that deism is functionally identical to atheism, and my considered opinion is that this may seem so because arguments for theism must first establish deism.
The OP also misunderstands his own word - "functionally". He apparently thinks this functionality should "inform" our daily lives, our system of government, our laws, and/or our sense of morality.
He is clearly incorrect, as deism has implications that atheism clearly does not have. And as expected, diests have worldviews very different than that of atheists.
But I wanted to handle the reason why he thought deism was the same as atheism first, before complicating the argument with the "functionality" side show.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Christen
Guys could go into the girls' bathroom and do all sorts of things.
What would you say to a person who asked you, "How do you know that guys would go into the girls' bathroom and do all sorts of things?"
How would you answer?
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Dr. Franklin
it HAS TO BE SEPERATE
But why? Why do you think they have to be?
Created:
Posted in:
The author does not call for the destruction of Hinduism nor does he call Hibduism evil.
So then, when he says, "such a religion must be destroyed," what religion is he talking about?
Dodging questions and re-spamming your post will not work for long.
Remember, this site is moderated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@Ragnar
You identify a problem you think needs addressing,...
"There are 22 forums, most of which are not particularly utilized."The change would ideally handle "the current problem of ghost forums."
And then immediately castigate what is arguably the most active forum. Even going on to say,...
Putting religion at the second to last place generally does sound like a good ideaI will openly admit to bias against the religion forum,
Great, yet another mod who has a bias against the religion forum.
One wonders, why have a religion forum at all? Nix the religion forum and you will not just have ghost forums, you'll have a ghost board.
But it does not give me a lot of confidence that my mod team will be fair and objective when problems arise - when he finds out I'm a religion board regular.
DDO died, even Airmax died, the religion board remained. But I'm glad we have you on record as admitting a bias against the religion board.
And you self-identify as a progressive catholic no less! That might just be coincidence though. Right?
Created:
Posted in:
Yet the authors conclusion was to call for the destruction of Hinduism as the originator and sustainer of the vile, slave making caste system.
You are lying. Please show me where in your link did he call Hinduism evil and advocated its destruction
I have, therefore, no hesitation in saying that such a religion must be destroyed, and I say there is nothing irreligious in working for the destruction of such a religion.
So you were lying.
Only if you can't read.
The author does not call for the destruction of Hinduism nor dies he call Hibduism evil.
So then, when he says, "such a religion must be destroyed," what religion is he talking about?
Christianity had everything to do with African slavery.
So you claim, but African slavery is not the topic here, Hinduism is.
It is relevant when one is talking to an African slave...
I disagree. Topics are decided by the OP, not by the bigotry of the poster.
No matter who you are speaking to, Hinduism has nothing to do with African slavery and Ambedkar's answer is the same.
"Once you clear the minds of the people of this misconception, and enable them to realize that what they are told is Religion is not Religion, but that it is really Law, you will be in a position to urge its amendment or abolition."
Created:
Posted in:
Neither do I. What I did say was that his sexuality was slipping out of his control. I'm not the first or the only one to have noticed this. Being attracted to a 16 year old is not illegal, but soliciting one is.I don't believe bsh is an evil child predator.
I know bsh1 did not believe what he was doing was wrong, and if he had thought it was wrong, would not have done it. This was Castin's point, which I agree with.
The problem is that he did not (and apparently still does not) think it was wrong.
And press4's personal opinion on the matter is irrelevant as far as the morality and the legality of it are concerned.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@ludofl3x
You know Hari is a racist who stalks me. Is your solution that I post nowhere?
I have a racist chasing me around the board, whom I oppose, and to you its a "pointless rivalry"? God knows what you would have made of MLK and the people opposing him.
Just so you know, I was a member here before you were, and I have posted nothing in this thread worthy of being insulted.
I addressed the OP's question without insult or vitriol to anyone. Here is a trick I have with posts I don't like that may be useful to you. Ready? I ignore them.
Created:
Posted in:
Yet the authors conclusion was to call for the destruction of Hinduism as the originator and sustainer of the vile, slave making caste system.
You are lying. Please show me where in your link did he call Hinduism evil and advocated its destruction
I have, therefore, no hesitation in saying that such a religion must be destroyed, and I say there is nothing irreligious in working for the destruction of such a religion.
Christianity had everything to do with African slavery.
So you claim, but African slavery is not the topic here, Hinduism is.
Created:
Posted in:
...the authors conclusion was to call for the destruction of Hinduism as the originator and sustainer of the vile, slave making caste system.
You are lying. Please show me where in your link did he call Hinduism evil and advocated its destruction
I have, therefore, no hesitation in saying that such a religion must be destroyed, and I say there is nothing irreligious in working for the destruction of such a religion.
The caste system is not a purification or ethnic cleansing system like the Nazi system was.
It is a slave making system like the Nazi system was, we know.
Christianity had everything to do with African slavery.
Perhaps, but the topic here is Hinduism, and the OP's qurstion whether its a religion, not Christianity or African slavery.
Created:
Posted in:
Yet the authors conclusion was to call for the destruction of Hinduism as the originator and sustainer of the vile, slave making caste system.Nothing in your post or link points to religion or Hinduism specifically as the cause for the caste system in India.
There are advantages in the Nazi system too when seen as a purification module.But there are advantages in the caste system when seen as a division of labour.
Correctly your law minister said about you - "Virtue has become caste-ridden, and morality has become caste-bound. There is no sympathy for the deserving. There is no appreciation of the meritorious. There is no charity to the needy. Suffering as such calls for no response."
Luckily India saw no advantages and outlawed the caste system. But by [your] absence of conscience the Hindu is a great obstacle in the path of the removal of untouchability.
No one wants to have someone who cleans toilets to be his dentist or cook his food. The thought is repulsive enough.
Lol. First you restrict them to poverty, and then blame and punish them for being poor! Just as your law minister said, "The Hindus do not want a system in which nobody will be anybody. They also do not want a system in which everybody may be somebody. They want a system in which they will be somebodies and others will be nobodies.
But African slavery is a direct product of Christianity.
Your law minister spoke about the Hindus need to have a class "lower" than he, "It gives them a class which they can look down upon. I guess that must be why you are now trying to compare. The caste system has made you need to compare everything as if the world was a caste system.
I'd rather stay on topic. Christianity has nothing to do with Hinduism or African slavery. The OP asked if Hinduism was a religion. Ambedkar an Indian, a Hindu, and an intellectual did not think so.
He called Hinduism evil and advocated its destruction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@855h01E
The reason there are unisex bathrooms in the first place is that transgender people are creating protests about it (at least in my area).
What area would that be? San Francisco?
Created:
Posted in:
Castin is not an idiot. And I doubt if that is what buddamoose meant to convey.
Castin is one of the most objective posters I know. She has always been able to see the other side of a story, and is always open to other points of view.
She thought bsh1 made a mistake, and as such, absolved him on intent. What she questioned was whether it was PC culture behind the hysterics.
I lobbied hard for Castin being on the mod team because knowing bsh1, I knew someone like Castin would be a stabilizing force.
Long ago, castin noted that her stay as mod would be over soon, and did not really want to be mod anyway.
This board doesn't deserve Castin, and that you can publicly insult someone with her fairness and objectivity, highlights all that is wrong with the internet.
Created:
Posted in:
Arguments are built, not asserted all at once. To make a credible theistic argument, one must first make a logical deistic argument.
There are very good arguments for both deism and theism, proof of this is how atheism has had to change and adapt in order to address and or answer those arguments.
Created:
Here are some of mine...
1. If the bible was true, everyone would believe it.
2. We cannot find out what is true because everyone has a different claim of what is true.
3. Abiogenesis must be true because no other viable theory exists.
4. Since God doesn't just show Himself, He cannot exist.
5. Atheists tend to be objective, original thinkers.
Honorable mention:
Extraordinary claims need extraordernary evidence.
Just illogical. Each and every one of them.
Created:
Posted in:
To better answer the OP's question, we need an opinion from first an Indian, and then a Hindu. Second, he should be educated and intelligent enough to make people not familiar with Hindu custom and culture understand it.
That person is...
Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (14 April 1891 – 6 December 1956), popularly known as Babasaheb, was an Indian jurist, economist, politician and social reformer who inspired the Dalit Buddhist movement and campaigned against social discrimination towards Untouchables (Dalits), while also supporting the rights of women and labour.
He was Independent India's first law minister, the principal architect of the Constitution of India and a founding father of the Republic of India.
Ambedkar was a prolific student, earning doctorates in economics from both Columbia University and the London School of Economics, and gained a reputation as a scholar for his research in law, economics and political science.
In his early career he was an economist, professor, and lawyer. His later life was marked by his political activities; he became involved in campaigning and negotiations for India's independence, publishing journals, advocating political rights and social freedom for Dalits, and contributing significantly to the establishment of the state of India. In 1956 he converted to Buddhism, initiating mass conversions of Dalits.
On 9 May, 1927, he presented the thesis paper Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development before a seminar conducted by the anthropologist Alexander Goldenweiser.
The caste problem is a vast one, both theoretically and practically. Practically, it is an institution that portends tremendous consequences. It is a local problem, but one capable of much wider mischief,...
....if Hindus migrate to other regions on earth, Indian caste would become a world problem."
Indeed the ideal Hindu must be like a rat living in his own hole, refusing to have any contact with others. There is an utter lack among the Hindus of what the sociologists call "consciousness of kind." There is no Hindu consciousness of kind. In every Hindu the consciousness that exists is the consciousness of his caste. That is the reason why the Hindus cannot be said to form a society or a nation.
The effect of caste on the ethics of the Hindus is simply deplorable. Caste has killed public spirit. Caste has destroyed the sense of public charity. Caste has made public opinion impossible. A Hindu's public is his caste. His responsibility is only to his caste. His loyalty is restricted only to his caste. Virtue has become caste-ridden, and morality has become caste-bound. There is no sympathy for the deserving. There is no appreciation of the meritorious. There is no charity to the needy. Suffering as such calls for no response. There is charity, but it begins with the caste and ends with the caste. There is sympathy, but not for men of other castes.
A Hindu is born in a caste and he dies as a member of that caste. There is no Hindu without caste, cannot escape caste and being bounded by caste from birth to death he becomes subject to social regulations and traditions of the caste over which he has no control.
Not having conscience, the Hindu has no such thing in him as righteous indignation against the inequities and injustices from which the Untouchable has been suffering. He sees no wrong in these inequities
and injustices and refuses to budge. By his absence of conscience the Hindu is a great obstacle in the path of the removal of untouchability.
Untouchability may be a misfortune to the Untouchables. But there is no doubt that it is a good fortune to the Hindus. It gives them a class which they can look down upon.
The Hindus do not want a system in which nobody will be anybody. They also do not want a system in which everybody may be somebody. They want a system in which they will be somebodies and others will be nobodies. The Untouchables are nobodies.
This makes the Hindus some bodies. The system of untouchability sustains the natural pride of the Hindus and makes them feel as well as look big.
I have, therefore, no hesitation in saying that such a religion must be destroyed, and I say there is nothing irreligious in working for the destruction of such a religion. Indeed I hold that it is your bounden duty to tear off the mask, to remove the misrepresentation that is caused by misnaming this Law as Religion. This is an essential step for you. Once you clear the minds of the people of this misconception, and enable them to realize that what they are told is Religion is not Religion, but that it is really Law, you will be in a position to urge its amendment or abolition.
This great Indian and Hindu would answer the question of the OP with a resounding, "No".
Created:
Posted in:
It's no secret I was never a fan of bsh1, but he doesn't hold all the blame.
Since this board began, bsh1 has been sexually out of control. The man had naked boys on his profile page, called himself lascivious, and spoke openly about having dildos for his ho-ha.
He disdained anyone who didn't kowtow to his homoerotic agenda as a bigot, and brought in gay parades and gay months to Dart. He even surrounded himself with young gay men on his mod team.
We all saw this. Many of us, trying to show how PC and tolerant we were, went along with it, giggling heartily at the inappropriate gay jokes.
All of a sudden, we're angry? How is what bsh1 did different from the character he showed all along? Because the kid was 16? Did any of you think bsh1 was not attracted to 16 year olds? The fact that he was 16 is what attracted him in the first place.
But now, we are up in arms. Why? Bsh1 rightly thought his behavior would be tolerated because we tolerated and enabled all his other inappropriate behavior in the name of open mindedness and tolerance.
I will be called a homophone, but a guy with the exact same lascivious behavior towards females would be just as immoral and creepy.
There are people on the mod team now who know even better how wanton bsh1 was, but kept their mouths shut, and are still doing so now.
Yeah, what he did was wrong, but he grew in our garden. We watered him. All this righteous indignation now smells a little rotten.
Created:
Posted in:
-->@LordLuke
What're you talking about though? I thought I answered them all.What points? Might you explain?
You addressed things I didn't say. There is no need for that, so I just answered, "I know".
You said, "I never blamed the patriarchy for unisex bathrooms." I never said you did.
You said, "I never said we ought to blame a matriarchy for it, either." I never said you did.
You said, "Not everything has to be "matriarchy" and "patriarchy," you know.." I never said it did.
You don't have to say "I know" to this.
I didn't. I said "It wasn't, ....but OK"
Patriarchy is from the words Patron (matron) and hierarchy. It means that status and authority in a society is held by males. It has nothing to do with how that authority is used.
Societies are either matriarchal, patriarchal, or a mixture of both. Societies are composed of men and women.
There are people who see no problem with unisex bathrooms being in high school. Are they wrong?
Created:
Posted in:
-->@LordLuke
First of all, I was simply stating it's absurd that such didn't, not that they did.
I know.
And I never blamed the patriarchy for unisex bathrooms.
I know.
...actually implementing unisex bathrooms was your idea.
It wasn't.... but OK.
And I never said we ought to blame a matriarchy for it, either.
I know.
Not everything has to be "matriarchy" and "patriarchy," you know.
I know.
Patriarchies are males acting in the interest of males, and matriarchies are females for females.
Untrue..... but OK.
...everybody was happy where they belonged.
LGBT, Blacks, Jews, and Women may have a slightly different opinion, ....but OK.
But thanks for denying every point that was not mentioned in my post to you.
Created:
Posted in:
I have to admit it. Drafterman, a liberal, was completly right. Hell, he was prescient.
Created:
Posted in:
And poof! Just like coinkidinky magic, Airmax pops up just as bsh1 leaves.No wonder they pine for AirMax so much. He was their BMOC.
Virt, are you paying attention?
Created:
Posted in:
Is it just me, or has Mike been conspicuously quiet during the whole bsh1 revelation?
Was he in favor or opposed to a change in moderation? Does anyone know?
Created:
Posted in:
-->@LordLuke
I don't think it's all that obvious to drafterman, ResurgetExFavilla, or Casual_Leftist.
there wasn't any patriarchy that said they didn't want to watch girls use the bathroom! That would've been sexy!
Could patriarchy really be the reason we don't have unisex bathrooms in high schools?
If our society happened to be a matriarchy, would our bathrooms be unisex?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@855h01E
-->@855h01E
Transgender people don't need special attention.
What did you mean by this?
Created: