Two Teens Hanged.

[Brasil]

[quote name='Gavin][size=1]But that doesn't give you the right to tell the people of Iran and other Muslims to "[i]Grow Up[/i']" because you disagree with their laws. [/size][/quote] Gavin...you're still missing the point. All of what you said regarding religion here is utterly irrelevant, because as history has shown us time and time again, a theocracy--and truly, any faith-derived government--is going to base its laws off of religion-derived moral values and not from common sense.

I'm not saying common sense and religious moral values are mutually exclusive ("be excellent to each other" can be found on both "sides"), but in many ways, religious doctrine and common sense are at opposite ends of the spectrum to an absurd degree.

You've expressed a view that attempts to be compassionate yet true to your religious upbringing. You condemn homosexuality. You condemn executing someone for being homosexual. You condemn execution in general. And then to close it you express how it still doesn't give anyone the right to tell Iran and other Muslims to "Grow Up" because they don't agree with their laws?

It's almost as if you're hiding behind religious doctrine (or perhaps moral relativity) so you don't have to come to terms with what the truth of the matter is:

They don't agree with their laws because their laws are unjust...[i]even from a theocratic perspective[/i].

Some of the only times in the history of the human race where we've seen this type of judicial proceedings are things like the Inquisition. People love bringing up the Crusades here...but I don't think people realize just how insane the Inquisition was. One side of my ancestoral tree ends at the Inquisition. There's no other history before that.

You seem to be treating this Iran thing as the norm when it comes to religious doctrine/theocracy, because that's simply what their religion says. Things like that are not the norm and largely, have never been the norm.

After hearing about stuff like this, people tell Iran to grow up for a very valid reason: because the law is childish and infantile and represents a rather naive worldview one would find in a three-year-old. Nobody here is insulting Iran for the sake of insulting Iran, and nobody here is insulting Chabichou for the sake of insulting her.

People are insulting them because what they're saying and doing are downright absurd and echo more elementary schoolyard sentiments than respectable political governance.

[quote name='Gavin][size=1]So taking the position of "[i]Ya, well, I don't particularily like that, but they can do whatever they want?[/i']" isn't acceptable.[/size][/quote]
I don't want to point out the irony there, but...you've been telling us we have no right to criticize a clearly twisted government that's violating all sorts of human rights, seemingly because we have no place there, because it isn't our place to judge. Gavin, you're a smart guy, so you know where I'm going with this.

[Lafleur]

[QUOTE]
Ilium there's a huge difference between a "fundamentalist" and someone who is just expressing their opinion based on their religious beliefs. And for you to just label Chabichou as a fundamentalist because you don't agree with her opinion is ignorance of the highest calibre. I also take offence to you claiming that Catholicism has "never made the big great leap out of the Middle Ages", again just because the dogma of the Catholic Church doesn't mirror your beliefs, such as a young person suffering from depression should turn to drugs to help get them through it.
[/QUOTE][COLOR=DarkRed]

You may be right, I may have jumped the gun and used Fundamentilist a bit quickly. But that is hardly intolerence. When I say it failed the make the great leap out of the middle ages, I say so because, back then, Human Rights meant nothing. Women were treated as second class citizens, handicapped children were killed outright or beaten, and that is the type of thing that I would have hoped was left behind with the Monarchy and Capital Punishment. But Islam (And on a much, much lesser extent Catholisism, not meaning to offend) never left that behind. I don't think that Religion should ever come before Human Rights. Islam is, unfortunatly, based on Intolerence (Ya know, the whole women cannot be seen thing, and the whole Death to the Infedels thing. I know it's not always interpreted like that, but it was written in the Qu'ran.) and it's not intolerence to be intolerent of the intolerent. Catholisism, on a MUCH lesser extent, puts Religion in front of Human Rights and that, on a humanitarian level, is intolerence itself.[/COLOR]

[eleanor]

[QUOTE=Chabichou][COLOR=#004a6f]You know, Iran is a muslim country, so it follows islamic law, which muslims believe is the law of God. According to islam, people who perform homosexual acts are supposed to be executed.

If you don't like the laws of a country, well, leave.

I don't want to say anything offensive to gays, but well, a lot of people (including myself) believe that homosexual acts are are sinful, that they are hated and forbidden by God, and with very good reason I might add. So no matter what you say, no matter how hard you try, you're not going to make them (including myself) accept that homosexual acts are okay.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[color=darkslateblue] I only quoted Chabichou just to say that his last sentence is true. At least, partly. They won't accept homosexual acts for a very long time, as homosexually is a sin against God, as as Siren said, most laws are based off of religious morals. Now, I don't really agree with Chabichou's opinion on homosexualiy, but it's not exactly something you would flame. Many Christians don't like homosexuality and gays because it's a sin, simple as that. Of course, I'd have to say that God tells people to love everyone, but whatever. If those people want to go on hating gays, they'll eventually die and modern society will shape future generations' belief on the whole thing. No biggie.[/color]

[QUOTE=Dagger]
To draw an analogy, I don't think that adultery (heterosexual or otherwise) is okay, but this doesn't mean I necessarily want it to be punishable by torture and/or death. Siren's post about what constitutes a just law is perhaps the clearest and most relevant argument which has appeared in this thread so far, I think. From a religious perspective, wouldn't it be better to treat "wayward" sexual tendencies with attempts at rehabilitation?

~Dagger~[/QUOTE]

[color=darkslateblue] Yes, but I think you missed everything I wrote about cultural differences. I tread cautiously as I even call it cultural. Maybe, just more like different governments. They beleive in execution.

You must know by now that even if rehabilitating would be the ideal religious perspective (I do agree with that as well), [b]people pervert religion.[/b] This is why they're executing instead of helping. Or my take on it. Whatever.[/color]

[QUOTE=Siren]
I don't want to point out the irony there, but...you've been telling us we have no right to criticize a clearly twisted government that's violating all sorts of human rights, seemingly because we have no place there, because it isn't our place to judge.[/QUOTE]

[color=darkslateblue] And it is "clearly twisted"...why? You have no right to universally create the 'theocratic perspective'. I find it impossible that there would ever even be a common ground base for theocracy.

I don't believe Gavin is hiding behind some religious doctrine or moral relativity. He believes in the Christian faith. What do I conclude about the Christian faith when it comes to these things? Christians are supposed to be against homosexuality (as it IS a sin in their religion), but also to believe that everyone can be forgiven and redeemed without dying. What is the problem here? Gavin is simply following his faith, I have no idea where you're coming from.

No one does have the right to tell Muslims to 'grow up'. Muslims take religion seriously. People have a tendency to pervert religion. We can connect two and two, right?[/color]

[ChibiHorsewoman]

[QUOTE=Rasetsutaisho]i think marylin manson would punch you in the face... honestly laws are only restrictive when you go against them... i belive that country is trying to preserve a more pure and simple way of life... if you know anything about history you'd know that just about every civilization falls apart right after or when their about to reach their peak... just look at the roman empire... and look how much it mirrors our own!

i know this is off topic but... i think their really wise in doing things like keeping women covered up all the time! i mean take an honest look back in your life... how many of your problems had something to do with some girl that you liked? and did you even really like her? ... that whole problem wouldnt have even happend if the girl was covered!

im not saying we need to switch to that what im saying is its sickning to see some one be so double minded... you accept gays? but not ppl with a different way of life?

besides that its not like they live anywhere near us... we dont have to worry about it that much[/QUOTE]

[color=darkviolet][b]Off Topic[/b]I have a ten month old who is gtting her top canines in (Drix or Siren if you read this do either of you know pediatric stuff? Nothing major I'm just wondering if it's normal) so she's teething and waking me up at all hours of the night so I'm tired and this may not make too much sense.

[b]On topic[/b] You my friend are an idiot and you have my sympathies.

Who exactly [i]is[/i] Marilyn Manson and why would she punch someone?

I don't understand how keeping homosexuals out of the mainstream can keep a society in a more pure and simple way of life. Killing people for any reason makes a society as a whole more complicated because the communities are constantly wondering what infraction will cause a severe penalty next.

As for the hajib (where is Chaibachou (sp?) when you need her?) and other articles of clothing, those are worn out of respect for their religion. Both men and women of the Muslim faith are not allowed to show their arms or legs. At least I think I'm getting this right. Man I need a book on Islam right now!

I'm going to refrain from adding anything else to this person.

This is the same country that allows honor killings if the woman is raped. It doesn't matter that the woman is the victim it's advocated anyway. The society as a whole is corrupted by extremists prtraying their violence as part of a religion.[/color]

[Brasil]

[quote name='Lunox][color=darkslateblue']And it is "clearly twisted"...why? You have no right to universally create the 'theocratic perspective'. I find it impossible that there would ever even be a common ground base for theocracy.[/color][/quote]
It's "clearly twisted" because people are being executed simply because they're gay. Is a woman getting stoned to death for not covering her entire body not "clearly twisted"? I suppose lynchings in the South aren't "clearly twisted"?

I honestly can't believe you actually asked me why this current issue is "clearly twisted," Lunox. It worries me, quite frankly, that you would ask that, because the question carries two implications:

1) You just don't see a problem with it...which would make me wonder what you would have a problem with, because based on what you're using in your argument here...any Fascist movement and actions could easily be condoned. After all, Hitler's extermination squads did target gays, Jews, blacks, etc.--basically all those who did not conform to the so-called "Aryan" ideal.

2) You're taking the Devil's Advocate angle far enough so that you can't even make a reasonable argument anymore.

Which is it?

[quote][color=darkslateblue]I don't believe Gavin is hiding behind some religious doctrine or moral relativity. He believes in the Christian faith. What do I conclude about the Christian faith when it comes to these things? Christians are supposed to be against homosexuality (as it IS a sin in their religion), but also to believe that everyone can be forgiven and redeemed without dying. What is the problem here? Gavin is simply following his faith, I have no idea where you're coming from.[/color][/quote]
Lunox, when you know something is wrong, like Gavin has said (you can go and read through his posts about how he dislikes executing someone for anything), but then in the same paragraph say nobody has the right to criticize it because it's a different culture or religious belief...that's hiding behind moral relativity or religious doctrine. It's just a decorated way of saying:

[quote][size=1]"[i]Ya, well, I don't particularily like that, but they can do whatever they want.[/i]"[/size][/quote]
...it's a cop-out of the worst kind...and we all know what Gavin had to say about those kinds of cop-outs.

[quote][color=darkslateblue]No one does have the right to tell Muslims to 'grow up'. Muslims take religion seriously. People have a tendency to pervert religion. We can connect two and two, right?[/color][/QUOTE]
Good idea: Being excellent to each other.

Bad idea: Executing each other.

Lunox, taking religion seriously is one thing. Adhering to a religious moral code to the extent that you're executing 4,000 people, subjugating entire portions of the population, and ruling through fear and Fascism...is something completely different. Don't imply they're anywhere remotely close to each other, because they aren't.

[Baron Samedi]

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet]Who exactly [i]is[/i'] Marilyn Manson and why would she punch someone?[/color][/quote][size=1]...

Priceless, priceless. [url=http://www.mansonusa.com/][u]Go here[/u][/url], and learn all about 'her'.[/size]

[Sandy]

Okay, I shouldn't probably write this reply, because I will have to do my very best not to FLAME Chabichou's ignorant little butt to blisters!

*puts on a fake smile*

Let me delve into your "reasons", Chabichou.

[QUOTE=Chabichou]Oh, just the dozen or so reasons that have been pointed out repeatly in the past in other debates. Such as the fact copulation is naturally supposed to occur between a male and female, and no one is naturally gay, because as many have pointed out in the past, children of homosexuals don't turn out homosexual too, so it's not genetics folks.
[/QUOTE]

The fact that reproducion occurs only between men and women doesn't mean that sex between two men or two women is "unnatural" or "abnormal"! Huge majority of heterosexual couples have sex constantly without the intention of getting pregnant! You may call that "immoral" but no way is that unnatural. Besides, many animals have also been witnessed to practice same-gender sex, and although it's unusual, it's not unnatural as they are part of the nature.

Same goes with humans. We homosexuals, like it or not, are part of the nature, we were BORN like this despite your "evidence". So what if it's not inherited? If homosexuality was inherited, there wouldn't BE any homosexuals as we usually don't have children! Still, it's in our genes, just not in the ones that pass to our possible offspring.

So there goes your "evidence". POOF!


[quote]The thing is love and lust are two completely different things. In a romantic relationship, there is both love and lust. So yes, a man can love another man, that's okay. Like two best friends, or two brothers, or a father and son.[/quote]

OR as lovers! You simply can't deny that fact just because it doesn't fit into your belief! I know what I feel for my boyfriend, so how DARE you come to me and say that it's not real?! That it's just some perverted lust?! [I]You can't know that as you have no experience in it[/I]!!!

[quote]Sex is based on both love and lust (well at least lust). So yes it's wrong for lust to occur between people of the same gender, (according to Islam). Now I believe there's several non religious reasons homosexual acts are wrong (both moral and scientific). But for me and other muslims, ultimately, it all comes down to the fact that God says it's forbidden.[/quote]

Again, what might those "several non-religious reasons" be?

It's wrong because some people don't like to watch two guys getting it on? So what, it's our business!

Scientific reasons? I point to my reply on the genetic part. If the laws nature was against homosexuals, there simply wouldn't be any!

And homosexuality isn't just the latest trend, there has been recordings of homosexuals throughout the history, despite the culture or location!

I'm a full fledged atheist, so to me God hasn't said anything, but some ancient writing written by an ancient homophobe. I'm sorry that your lives are dictated so much by that (same goes to every other religion, so I'm not just bashing Islam).

[quote]All these arguments about homosexuals loving eachother may be true. But God doesn't care if you love eachother, homosexual acts are still forbidden and hated. I know, it's the hard truth.
[/QUOTE]

Well, frankly speaking, I don't care about your judgmental, hypocrite god. To me, it isn't the truth!

It's because of people like you, Chabichou, that my type of people get persecuted, tortured and killed like the two boys in this topic, and I [I]loathe[/I] you because of it.

[Gavin]

[quote=Siren]Gavin...you're still missing the point. All of what you said regarding religion here is utterly irrelevant, because as history has shown us time and time again, a theocracy--and truly, any faith-derived government--is going to base its laws off of religion-derived moral values and not from common sense.

I'm not saying common sense and religious moral values are mutually exclusive ("be excellent to each other" can be found on both "sides"), but in many ways, religious doctrine and common sense are at opposite ends of the spectrum to an absurd degree.[/quote]

[size=1]I'm going to disagree with you here Alex, in my own mind religious moral values and common sense aren't at all on the "opposite ends of the spectrum" and certainly not to an "absurd degree". It could of course depend on someone's view of what is correct morally and their idea of common sense but I don't at all see how someone could claim that they are. In my own case things that are morally correct go hand in hand with what I would call common sense, and I personally think that morals and common sense are very closely linked in most people. Take for example stealing, Seventh Commandment states that "Thou shalt not steal", and most people would hold a very similar view through common sense saying that stealing is wrong.

Your own "be excellent to one another" (a very Bill & Ted styled quote) would also apply here. Fifth Commandment states "Thou shalt not kill" and most people would agree that that is simple common sense. In fact Alex I put it to you that there are very, very few instances where what is morally correct (from a religious point of view) and what people would consider common sense are on opposite sides. And in truth much of what we consider to be common sense today, such as our opinions on crime and honourable behaviour (for examples) comes from religion-derived moral values passed down from generation to generation. Again it all comes down to our own point of view on what is moral and our opinion of what common sense is, so what I consider to be moral as well as typical common sense might not be the same as what you would consider to be moral and common sense.

But I also think most people would disagree with you on your view that common sense and religiously derived moral values are at the opposite end of the spectrum over what is right. Homosexual behaviour just happens to be one of a few areas where it does come into contention, but for the most part I think they are very similar in what's right and wrong. Again it's all down to your own point of view on the subject.

In regard to theocracies, I can only accept that yes they more than likely base what they consider to be right and wrong off their religious beliefs, but as I've stated in the above paragraphs that doesn't mean that it's mutually exclusive to common sense.[/size]

[quote name='Siren']You've expressed a view that attempts to be compassionate yet true to your religious upbringing. You condemn homosexuality. You condemn executing someone for being homosexual. You condemn execution in general. And then to close it you express how it still doesn't give anyone the right to tell Iran and other Muslims to "Grow Up" because they don't agree with their laws?[/quote]

[size=1]Alex what you must understand here is that I am as appalled at the execution of these two youths as anyone else here, and perhaps I haven't been as vocal in that respect as I have with other parts of the issue but that doesn't change the fact that I am appalled at their execution. Simply put Alex there are many things I disagree with about many governments across the world, many of which I've already given, but in my mind it all comes down to the simple statement from Christ "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Yes some of the practices in Iran and other theocracies are very wrong, but there are plenty of practices by other non-theocracies and parts of the civilised world that are just as wrong, but we seem to be content to ignore them because it's convenient or we don't consider them to be as wrong as they are. It's a case of the slightly burned pot calling the incinerated kettle black, there's black on both of them, one far more so than the other but the slightly burned kettle can't ignore that it's got a little black on it too. I'm not saying that people shouldn't condemn this act, but they must first look at the wrongs going on in their own country before they can point at Iran's wrongdoings. I hope that explains it, it's nothing to do with letting Iran get away with this kind of brutal and excessive justice, it's merely that people need to look at their own sins before getting all high and mighty. [/size]

[quote=Siren]It's almost as if you're hiding behind religious doctrine (or perhaps moral relativity) so you don't have to come to terms with what the truth of the matter is:

They don't agree with their laws because their laws are unjust...[i]even from a theocratic perspective.[/i][/quote]


[size=1]And I agree with you one-hundred percent Alex, it is unjust to execute someone because they're different, whether that be a physical/gender/sexually oriented/physically or mentally handicapped/age/race or any other kind of difference. Actually it's not just "unjust", it's utterly wrong. It's wrong to cut off someone's hand because they steal, it's wrong to kill someone because they've committed a sin, regardless of how grievous. But as I've said before people looking in at the situation must first accept that they're not exactly the pinnacle of moral authority, and must accept their own wrongdoings as well.

I'm not hiding behind my religious beliefs or doctrine, I'm just saying what I believe, just as others are, though perhaps now I've expanded it enough to make proper sense. I don't in any way support such acts but I don't agree with people lording their so called civilised beliefs when in their own country felons are executed with poison or electricity and a woman who doesn?t want to keep the child she?s carrying can just have it killed. I hope now people understand what I was getting at.[/size]

[quote name='Siren']Some of the only times in the history of the human race where we've seen this type of judicial proceedings are things like the Inquisition. People love bringing up the Crusades here...but I don't think people realize just how insane the Inquisition was. One side of my ancestoral tree ends at the Inquisition. There's no other history before that.[/quote]

[size=1]I?m not denying that the Spanish Inquisition was wrong, I shudder to think how Catholic dogma could be twisted so far as to allowed people to break the Fifth Command, go against all the teaching of Christ and still feel like they were doing his work. But I can offer you similar circumstances throughout political history where acts mass murder and near genocide were considered right, in Ireland the Famine killed over 2.5 million people and forced that same number to emigrate or die as well.

What most people don?t know is that there was no real famine, the potato crop failed yes, but Ireland produced far more than just potatoes in terms of agricultural produce. Unfortunately the British government at the time saw fit to export everything but the potato crop from Ireland and leave the people starve to death. An entirely economic and political decision which resulting in the death and mass emigration of over 5 million people, part of my ancestral tree ends at the famine, quite a large part in fact but the Famine isn?t considered an act of genocide, because it was covered over with the excuse of a famine.

How many Japanese people?s family line ended at Hiroshima and Nagasaki ? Over one hundred and fifty thousand people killed with two bombs, how many more irradiated and left sterile ? How many more would give birth to disabled children because of that same fall-out ? I know it's slightly off what you were talking about, but we can all pick out events in history where the decision at the time was considered right and we now look back on it and see it as being so wrong.[/size]

[quote=Siren]You seem to be treating this Iran thing as the norm when it comes to religious doctrine/theocracy, because that's simply what their religion says. Things like that are not the norm and largely, have never been the norm.

After hearing about stuff like this, people tell Iran to grow up for a very valid reason: because the law is childish and infantile and represents a rather naive worldview one would find in a three-year-old. Nobody here is insulting Iran for the sake of insulting Iran, and nobody here is insulting Chabichou for the sake of insulting her.

People are insulting them because what they're saying and doing are downright absurd and echo more elementary schoolyard sentiments than respectable political governance.[/quote]

[size=1]I'm not treating Iran as though it were the norm when it comes to theocracies or religious doctrine, because there are other theocracies like Vatican City for instance where law is derived from religious-based morals and the worst you hear about is some women complaining they have to cover themselves a little more, in Vatican City or more precisely the Vatican itself clothing must cover down to the calves and to elbows, which you have to admit isn't a huge request.

As for the "grow up" statement, well Alex I could easily turn round and tell the Americans to "grow up" and stop executing their felons for crimes, that they should have a more civilised way of dealing with their worst offenders rather than just poisoning or electrocuting them to death. I could turn round and tell them to grow up and stop killing their unborn children by allowing women to have abortions, because regardless of impinging their much vaunted right to choose it's murder, plain and simple and just as horrific as the murders in Iran. I could turn round and tell them to grow up and actually implement some decent laws regarding firearms when so many people are killed every year through gun violence. I could label more than few American laws as being childish and infantile in their nature Alex, and really childish and infantile would be the polite way to put it as there are much stronger and more accurate words that could be used. I'm more than well aware that America has executed murders judged to be mentally disabled with only the mental age of a child, as I recall the last case took place under "the Governator" in California and Texas is one of the few states that executed minors. So really there are more than few instances of disrepute in the American justice system.

Yes Alex it may be downright absurd to agree with the murder of people who have a different sexual orientation, but is it not also downright absurd to agree with the execution of criminals with the mental age of a seven year old ? Is it not also downright absurd to agree with the execution of minors ? Is it not also downright absurd to agree with the murder of an unborn child simply because the mother doesn't want it ? Again I'm not agreeing with what happened and continues to happen in Iran, but I don't agree with people lording their own set of principles over someone else where there are plenty of instances where the law is not so civilised in their own nation and may be better compared with elementary schoolyard sentiments than respectable political governance. Chabichou believes that the law in Iran is correct because it's Islamic law, thus God's law and cannot be wrong, this is her opinion and even if it sounds to you Alex like something said by a child in elementary school it's her right to believe it's correct. [/size]

[quote name='Siren']I don't want to point out the irony there, but...you've been telling us we have no right to criticize a clearly twisted government that's violating all sorts of human rights, seemingly because we have no place there, because it isn't our place to judge. Gavin, you're a smart guy, so you know where I'm going with this.[/quote]

[size=1]Yes, I do appear to have gone an contradicted myself here, though that single quote was taken slightly out of context it does still hold it's own relevance. I never meant, despite what I said that people have no right to criticize what happens in Iran, if they disagree with a system of government or the laws of another country they have the right to disagree with them, but do they have the right to demand that Iran and other countries with Islamic Law to change because they do not accommodate their personal beliefs on morals, right, wrong and common sense ? Do I have the right to demand the Britain and America and all other countries that allow abortion to make it illegal simply because I and people of the same opinion consider it to be wrong ? I have the right to disagree with the law, I have the right to call the law a hundred discourteous names, but do I have the right to demand it be changed simply because I disagree with the law when other, and perhaps even the vast majority of those in the country itself agree with it ?[/size]

[eleanor]

[QUOTE=Siren]It's "clearly twisted" because people are being executed simply because they're gay. Is a woman getting stoned to death for not covering her entire body not "clearly twisted"? I suppose lynchings in the South aren't "clearly twisted"?

I honestly can't believe you actually asked me why this current issue is "clearly twisted," Lunox. It worries me, quite frankly, that you would ask that, because the question carries two implications:

1) You just don't see a problem with it...which would make me wonder what you would have a problem with, because based on what you're using in your argument here...any Fascist movement and actions could easily be condoned. After all, Hitler's extermination squads did target gays, Jews, blacks, etc.--basically all those who did not conform to the so-called "Aryan" ideal.

2) You're taking the Devil's Advocate angle far enough so that you can't even make a reasonable argument anymore.

Which is it?


Lunox, when you know something is wrong, like Gavin has said (you can go and read through his posts about how he dislikes executing someone for anything), but then in the same paragraph say nobody has the right to criticize it because it's a different culture or religious belief...that's hiding behind moral relativity or religious doctrine. It's just a decorated way of saying:


...it's a cop-out of the worst kind...and we all know what Gavin had to say about those kinds of cop-outs.


Good idea: Being excellent to each other.

Bad idea: Executing each other.

Lunox, taking religion seriously is one thing. Adhering to a religious moral code to the extent that you're executing 4,000 people, subjugating entire portions of the population, and ruling through fear and Fascism...is something completely different. Don't imply they're anywhere remotely close to each other, because they aren't.[/QUOTE]

[color=darkslateblue] *bleh* I admit defeat! You've topped me. :) It didn't come to mind to me that just the fact that people perverted religion made all of its consequences twisted in at least one way or another. So, yeah, a humble surrender or whatever you want to call it.

But I guess I could raise another question of how one would go about if they tried to change their government (note to self: never go into politics *head/desk*)[/color]

[Sandy]

[QUOTE=Chabichou][COLOR=#004a6f]
I would simply like to ask where the hypocricy is.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]


Oh [I]sure[/I], skip all the relevant parts and cling onto one word! Phooey...

I haven't studied the Islamic god that much, but I thought it's in Islam's nature as well that love is a good thing. So how come love between two men or two women isn't a good thing, while love between a man and a woman is, although it's the same emotion? If that's not hypocricy then I don't know what is...

And it's not flaming if I say I loathe you. [I]It's the hard truth[/I]. I have no respect for people who think they are above others, who have the nerve to undermine somebody else's feelings, who judge others without better knowledge etc.

I mean, [I]honestly[/I], do you know any homosexual personally? Do you know what being a homosexual feels like? You are quick to condemn something you have absolutely no knowledge on!

So, I'm not flaming you, I am simply angered and saddened by your ignorance and apparent lack of empathy for the feelings of other people!

[Break]

[quote name='Patronus']What is this world coming to?[/quote]

Well, while I admit that this is a abhorrent crime against human life, there have been things like this happening for years - centuries even. Iran is a theocracy and therefore a lot their laws are from ([i]certain[/i]) verses in the Islamic holy book; I'm sure somewhere in there it says "Homosexuality Is Wrong" and if this is adopted as law, we cannot - especially as outsiders - interfere with how this country is run. If it keeps the country stable and keeps the people under control, then making examples of certain people, such as these boys, will continue, unfortunately.

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR=#004a6f][QUOTE=Sage]Oh [I]sure[/I], skip all the relevant parts and cling onto one word! Phooey...

I haven't studied the Islamic god that much, but I thought it's in Islam's nature as well that love is a good thing. So how come love between two men or two women isn't a good thing, while love between a man and a woman is, although it's the same emotion? If that's not hypocricy then I don't know what is...[/QUOTE]Well, actually islam isn't all about love. God isn't love, and he does not love those who do not worship and obey him. So it's not hypocricy.

And sexual relations are only allowed between a husband and wife.


[quote name='Sage]And it's not flaming if I say I loathe you. [I]It's the hard truth[/I']. I have no respect for people who think they are above others, who have the nerve to undermine somebody else's feelings, who judge others without better knowledge etc.[/quote]I am not judging you, and if you look back at all my posts, I have taken great caution in choosing my words very carefully. I did not in any way claim that I was "better than you". I am not to judge. And I do not hate you either.

And since you claim that you love your boyfriend, then I will take your word for it. I'm just saying I still believe the action is wrong, because I believe in my religion.

[QUOTE=Sage]I mean, [I]honestly[/I], do you know any homosexual personally? Do you know what being a homosexual feels like? You are quick to condemn something you have absolutely no knowledge on!

So, I'm not flaming you, I am simply angered and saddened by your ignorance and apparent lack of empathy for the feelings of other people![/QUOTE]I am only quick to condemn it because it is forbidden by God. There's something called obedience without question. And you're right, I probably don't know what a homosexual feels. But regardless of that, God says it's forbidden, so I condemn these actions. If you can't help the way you feel, God still expects you to obey him. It's a challenge you must face. And personally, I don't think abstinence is the biggest challenge.

Even for heterosexuals. If a man has a burning passionate desire for a certain woman, he is still forbidden to touch her, unless he is married to her. It doesn't matter how he feels. He still has to obey God.[/COLOR]

[Sandy]

[quote name='Break']...we cannot - especially as outsiders - interfere with how this country is run.[/quote]

Well, you're partially mistaken. See, [I]we[/I] - as in you and me and others in this forum - cannot interfere with it, but there are such things as United Nations and other international organizations that can put a certain pressure on the countries that violate basic human rights in such a horrible way.

Again, I'm not saying that they should start a war or anything, but make them see that there are less brutal ways of punishment - and that there are things that shouldn't even be punished. It's one of the upsides of globalism - people everywhere have the same rights.

Of course, the change won't happen overnight, but I wish dearly that eventually people everywhere can live free from oppression and persecution coming from their own government.

And I wouldn't worry too much about "intervening with the culture". Imagine how we all would live if there had been no revolutionary steps in the history. We would still live from the land, hunting and gathering, struggling to survive in the wild nature. On the other hand, it wouldn't be that bad a thought... But the world progresses, and so must we.

[quote]
I am only quick to condemn it because it is forbidden by God. There's something called obedience without question. And you're right, I probably don't know what a homosexual feels. But regardless of that, God says it's forbidden, so I condemn these actions. If you can't help the way you feel, God still expects you to obey him. It's a challenge you must face. And personally, I don't think abstinence is the biggest challenge.[/quote]

[B]Chabichou:[/B] I'm sorry to say such an offending thing, but you've got one [I]sucky[/I] religion there! Don't you see that you aren't thinking things yourself?! You obey blindly, and that is one of the most dangerous things that a human can do!

Guess what makes Islamic extremists blow themselves up in a crowd of innocent people? They didn't stop to question their actions, they just did as they were told!

You, Chabichou, are being oppressed and diminished and controlled and forbidden to be yourself by your religion! I find it extremely sad that you do not see it yourself...

[Lafleur]

[QUOTE=Sage]
And I wouldn't worry too much about "intervening with the culture". Imagine how we all would live if there had been no revolutionary steps in the history. We would still live from the land, hunting and gathering, struggling to survive in the wild nature. On the other hand, it wouldn't be that bad a thought... But the world progresses, and so must we.[/QUOTE]
[COLOR=DarkRed]
This is the only real problem with Islam. Because Islam preeches unquestioned obedience, they can't revolutionize, they can't make great strides in tech as they are now, they can't even leave the Middle Ages as they are now. Islam teaches blind faith and that's it's single, defining flaw. Even the reward for a faithful life sucks; 7 virgins. Woop-de-doo, 7 virgins... Who wants seven virgins when you can pick up 14 hookers on St.Catherns street for about 15 bucks? [/COLOR]

[Break]

[QUOTE=Chabichou][COLOR=#004a6f]If you can't help the way you feel, God still expects you to obey him. It's a challenge you must face. And personally, I don't think abstinence is the biggest challenge.

Even for heterosexuals. If a man has a burning passionate desire for a certain woman, he is still forbidden to touch her, unless he is married to her. It doesn't matter how he feels. He still has to obey God.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Exactly. Self control is key, not only in religion, but everywhere: Think, if we were to act on impulse all the time we would be ruined as a people. It is this quality to think and judge what would be better that makes us valuable as humans. We have an ability to supress our [i]Id[/i], the animalistic part of our brain, whereas animals do not.

Are we animals?

[Sandy]

[QUOTE=Chabichou][COLOR=#004a6f]I dunno.... disobeying seems more dangerous to me, as the result is hell.
...
I [B]choose[/B] to obey God. Disobeying has consequences on the day of judgement.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

That's EXACTLY my point!! You are driven by fear! You fear that if you don't do [I]exactly[/I] what you are told to, you will suffer punishment in the afterlife!

Well, here's a newsflash: you are [I]already[/I] living in hell! Living in constant fear is the most horrible thing I can ever imagine!

How can you not question your god, if believing in him does nothing good to you? You choose to suffer in a mindless fear, for what? To get to heaven? How can you be sure you are going to go to heaven? Have you seen it?

No, you believe you are going to go to heaven [I]because you were told so[/I]. You are jammed in a vicious cycle, and the only way out of it is to open your eyes to [I]this[/I] world you are living in!

I'm not trying to convert you out of your religion, I am trying to get you to realize that there is so much more life has to give to you than religion! Can you ever achieve happiness if you choose to live under oppressing rules and obey everything others dictate to you? Isn't the point of living to be happy?

I believe you aren't living for this life, you are living for a [I]possible[/I] next life. I'm extremely sad for you, and for all the people who feel the same as you...

On the other hand I think you have chosen the easy route through life, but on the other hand I think you've chosen the most hardest route of them all.

[Brasil]

[QUOTE=Gavin][size=1]I'm going to disagree with you here Alex, in my own mind religious moral values and common sense aren't at all on the "opposite ends of the spectrum" and certainly not to an "absurd degree". It could of course depend on someone's view of what is correct morally and their idea of common sense but I don't at all see how someone could claim that they are. In my own case things that are morally correct go hand in hand with what I would call common sense, and I personally think that morals and common sense are very closely linked in most people. Take for example stealing, Seventh Commandment states that "Thou shalt not steal", and most people would hold a very similar view through common sense saying that stealing is wrong.

Your own "be excellent to one another" (a very Bill & Ted styled quote) would also apply here. Fifth Commandment states "Thou shalt not kill" and most people would agree that that is simple common sense. In fact Alex I put it to you that there are very, very few instances where what is morally correct (from a religious point of view) and what people would consider common sense are on opposite sides. And in truth much of what we consider to be common sense today, such as our opinions on crime and honourable behaviour (for examples) comes from religion-derived moral values passed down from generation to generation. Again it all comes down to our own point of view on what is moral and our opinion of what common sense is, so what I consider to be moral as well as typical common sense might not be the same as what you would consider to be moral and common sense.

But I also think most people would disagree with you on your view that common sense and religiously derived moral values are at the opposite end of the spectrum over what is right. Homosexual behaviour just happens to be one of a few areas where it does come into contention, but for the most part I think they are very similar in what's right and wrong. Again it's all down to your own point of view on the subject.

In regard to theocracies, I can only accept that yes they more than likely base what they consider to be right and wrong off their religious beliefs, but as I've stated in the above paragraphs that doesn't mean that it's mutually exclusive to common sense.[/size]

[size=1]Alex what you must understand here is that I am as appalled at the execution of these two youths as anyone else here, and perhaps I haven't been as vocal in that respect as I have with other parts of the issue but that doesn't change the fact that I am appalled at their execution. Simply put Alex there are many things I disagree with about many governments across the world, many of which I've already given, but in my mind it all comes down to the simple statement from Christ "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Yes some of the practices in Iran and other theocracies are very wrong, but there are plenty of practices by other non-theocracies and parts of the civilised world that are just as wrong, but we seem to be content to ignore them because it's convenient or we don't consider them to be as wrong as they are. It's a case of the slightly burned pot calling the incinerated kettle black, there's black on both of them, one far more so than the other but the slightly burned kettle can't ignore that it's got a little black on it too. I'm not saying that people shouldn't condemn this act, but they must first look at the wrongs going on in their own country before they can point at Iran's wrongdoings. I hope that explains it, it's nothing to do with letting Iran get away with this kind of brutal and excessive justice, it's merely that people need to look at their own sins before getting all high and mighty. [/size]

[size=1]And I agree with you one-hundred percent Alex, it is unjust to execute someone because they're different, whether that be a physical/gender/sexually oriented/physically or mentally handicapped/age/race or any other kind of difference. Actually it's not just "unjust", it's utterly wrong. It's wrong to cut off someone's hand because they steal, it's wrong to kill someone because they've committed a sin, regardless of how grievous. But as I've said before people looking in at the situation must first accept that they're not exactly the pinnacle of moral authority, and must accept their own wrongdoings as well.

I'm not hiding behind my religious beliefs or doctrine, I'm just saying what I believe, just as others are, though perhaps now I've expanded it enough to make proper sense. I don't in any way support such acts but I don't agree with people lording their so called civilised beliefs when in their own country felons are executed with poison or electricity and a woman who doesn?t want to keep the child she?s carrying can just have it killed. I hope now people understand what I was getting at.[/size]

[size=1]I?m not denying that the Spanish Inquisition was wrong, I shudder to think how Catholic dogma could be twisted so far as to allowed people to break the Fifth Command, go against all the teaching of Christ and still feel like they were doing his work. But I can offer you similar circumstances throughout political history where acts mass murder and near genocide were considered right, in Ireland the Famine killed over 2.5 million people and forced that same number to emigrate or die as well.

What most people don?t know is that there was no real famine, the potato crop failed yes, but Ireland produced far more than just potatoes in terms of agricultural produce. Unfortunately the British government at the time saw fit to export everything but the potato crop from Ireland and leave the people starve to death. An entirely economic and political decision which resulting in the death and mass emigration of over 5 million people, part of my ancestral tree ends at the famine, quite a large part in fact but the Famine isn?t considered an act of genocide, because it was covered over with the excuse of a famine.

How many Japanese people?s family line ended at Hiroshima and Nagasaki ? Over one hundred and fifty thousand people killed with two bombs, how many more irradiated and left sterile ? How many more would give birth to disabled children because of that same fall-out ? I know it's slightly off what you were talking about, but we can all pick out events in history where the decision at the time was considered right and we now look back on it and see it as being so wrong.[/size]

[size=1]I'm not treating Iran as though it were the norm when it comes to theocracies or religious doctrine, because there are other theocracies like Vatican City for instance where law is derived from religious-based morals and the worst you hear about is some women complaining they have to cover themselves a little more, in Vatican City or more precisely the Vatican itself clothing must cover down to the calves and to elbows, which you have to admit isn't a huge request.

As for the "grow up" statement, well Alex I could easily turn round and tell the Americans to "grow up" and stop executing their felons for crimes, that they should have a more civilised way of dealing with their worst offenders rather than just poisoning or electrocuting them to death. I could turn round and tell them to grow up and stop killing their unborn children by allowing women to have abortions, because regardless of impinging their much vaunted right to choose it's murder, plain and simple and just as horrific as the murders in Iran. I could turn round and tell them to grow up and actually implement some decent laws regarding firearms when so many people are killed every year through gun violence. I could label more than few American laws as being childish and infantile in their nature Alex, and really childish and infantile would be the polite way to put it as there are much stronger and more accurate words that could be used. I'm more than well aware that America has executed murders judged to be mentally disabled with only the mental age of a child, as I recall the last case took place under "the Governator" in California and Texas is one of the few states that executed minors. So really there are more than few instances of disrepute in the American justice system.

Yes Alex it may be downright absurd to agree with the murder of people who have a different sexual orientation, but is it not also downright absurd to agree with the execution of criminals with the mental age of a seven year old ? Is it not also downright absurd to agree with the execution of minors ? Is it not also downright absurd to agree with the murder of an unborn child simply because the mother doesn't want it ? Again I'm not agreeing with what happened and continues to happen in Iran, but I don't agree with people lording their own set of principles over someone else where there are plenty of instances where the law is not so civilised in their own nation and may be better compared with elementary schoolyard sentiments than respectable political governance. Chabichou believes that the law in Iran is correct because it's Islamic law, thus God's law and cannot be wrong, this is her opinion and even if it sounds to you Alex like something said by a child in elementary school it's her right to believe it's correct.[/size]

[size=1]Yes, I do appear to have gone an contradicted myself here, though that single quote was taken slightly out of context it does still hold it's own relevance. I never meant, despite what I said that people have no right to criticize what happens in Iran, if they disagree with a system of government or the laws of another country they have the right to disagree with them, but do they have the right to demand that Iran and other countries with Islamic Law to change because they do not accommodate their personal beliefs on morals, right, wrong and common sense ? Do I have the right to demand the Britain and America and all other countries that allow abortion to make it illegal simply because I and people of the same opinion consider it to be wrong ? I have the right to disagree with the law, I have the right to call the law a hundred discourteous names, but do I have the right to demand it be changed simply because I disagree with the law when other, and perhaps even the vast majority of those in the country itself agree with it ?[/size][/QUOTE]
Gavin, I've read your post over a few times just to make sure I'm getting what you're saying...and I can distill your post into more or less one sentence:

"Americans shouldn't criticize because America is not much better."

You brought in things like abortion, execution to portray America as not quite as perfection. Okay. I don't think there's anyone on the planet who would say America is the perfect nation on earth.

But we're one of the best.

In some 230 years, America has accomplished more in civil rights, social liberties, economic growth, technological advancement, political freedoms, etc., than other nations have accomplished in over 2,000 years. That's saying something, Gavin. Very few nations in the world can say their citizens enjoy the same types of freedoms Americans possess. I can't think of any other nation on the globe where people like Bill O'Reilly and Michael Moore could routinely spout whatever nonsense they feel like.

I mean...don't you find it odd that Michael Moore hasn't left America yet? He apparently despises most things about it and it seems clear to me he'd probably be happier elsewhere. But he hasn't left. Why is that?

Because underneath that vitriolic rhetoric he spews about Terrorist in Chief...he knows that he'd get shot anywhere else.

The only reason abortion and execution--really, a deeper level of civil rights--is because America has knocked out a solid 80% of its problems already. In the past century, women have acquired the right to vote, segregation has been abolished, anti-discrimination laws have been written and solidly enforced (even in fast food chains).

You should check out the fast food chains around here if you ever get the chance, Gavin. Anti-discrimination laws are no joke and you're going to see multicultural crews, I guarantee it. Women, gays, blacks, asians...the list goes on. Even the handicapped work if they want to.

With the current state of Iran...you will rarely (if not never) see that.

In your post, you said that the problems in America are ignored or brushed under the rug, so to speak, because people don't see them as such a bad thing. But the fact of the matter is...they aren't as bad as say, a country in the Middle East that still operates under a brutal theocratic rule ripped right out of Henry VIII.

America has problems? Abso-freaking-lutely. We can barely agree on what kind of soda is better. We can't even agree on what to teach in our schools. It's like nobody has a good solution to the issue of abortion. It's like nobody has a good solution to unjust executions.

(Incidentally, I do have good solutions to those problems.)

But to say because America still hasn't banned abortion, or because there are still unjust executions being uh...executed, we shouldn't be telling other nations to shape up?

When it's very clear we're one of the leaders in terms of civil rights progression over the past century, when it's very clear that 4,000 people being executed for something as simple as being who they are...playing the "pot calling the kettle black" card just doesn't win the hand.

To play that card, you would essentially be establishing America as on the same level as Iran--and abortion, while disturbing surely, is nowhere near on the same level of severity as 4,000 people being executed, or the Inquisition, or any other full-blown mass genocides throughout history.

As a brief end-note, I'd assume that in bringing up Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you've read about the events leading up to it, and are somewhat knowledgeable about it, so I'd assume you're well aware of the inner conflict that Truman was suffering from when he had to decide whether to use "the bomb" or lose thousands upon thousands of American soldiers in a direct land/air assault.

I'd also assume you're well aware of the conflict within his own cabinet. Truman had some generals with total cold feet about it. Others were scared out of their minds. Others understood the need for "the bomb."

I'd also assume you're well aware that the Japanese Emperor would not have backed down, because pride was at stake. As far as I've read, the Emperor was to the Japanese what Jesus Christ is to Christians.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were "Us or them" situations in the most basic essence of the phrase.

I know you said how it's not quite related to my point...but those two instances of genocide were necessary. These two teens getting hanged wasn't necessary. And that's why your reasoning fails. Fundamentally and philosophically, they're apples and oranges.

[Genzo]

To start off with my first post in a long time on the boards...
I FULLY AGREE WITH THE EXECUTION OF THE TWO HOMOSEXUAL TEENAGERS AND FURTHURMORE I ENCOURAGE THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT TO CONTINUE SUCH PRACTICES AS I AM IN FULL ACCEPTANCE WITH THEM.
In my opinion, Homosexuality is simply, a crime against nature, against humanity, and against God. Now I don't know how many of you are athiests, (you life is pointless by the way) but i believe that if you fear god and love him and wish to gain his pleasure, DO WHAT HE SAYS. Homosexuality is a sin in Islam and i Do not appreciate infidels such as your self, trying to impose your secular way of life upon a system that i find to be perfect. And since Homosexuality is a sin and i am a muslim and BELIEVE that my religion is right, I believe it to be appropriate for homosexuals to be executed, only if found of commiting homosexual practices. These two teenagers committed homosexual fornication and hence they paid a dear price for their actions.

[Break]

[quote name='Siren']political freedoms..enjoy the same types of freedoms Americans possess.[/quote]

Ha! Which Americans, the Native ones whom the American government exacted genocide on for four hundred years? Or the Afro-Americans who were slaves for hundreds of years before their life 'got better'? Or those Muslims who can now be arrested for pretty much nothing and detained in Guantanamo Bay? Oh, yes, [i]those[/i] freedoms!

[Zeekan]

[size=1]Well said, Sage.

I've always found it difficult to swallow the "It's a choice to be gay" line when there are gays being bullied, persecuted and killed because they happen to love someone of the same gender.

I don't believe it's a choice at all, It's the way you are born and, why should you die for that? I don't see how a loving God could place people on this earth, give them an affection for the same gender and then burn them in eternal hell for it. I believe in God, just not the big bully on a throne pointing the figner God.[/size]

[Brasil]

[quote name='Break]Ha! Which Americans, the Native ones whom the American government exacted genocide on for four hundred years? Or the Afro-Americans who were slaves for hundreds of years before their life 'got better'? Or those Muslims who can now be arrested for pretty much nothing and detained in Guantanamo Bay? Oh, yes, [i]those[/i'] freedoms![/quote]
I'd be one of the first to voice concern over the Patriot Act. I'd be one of the first to say inhumane treatment at Guantanamo is wrong. Slavery isn't a good thing, nor is subjugation/suppression of different people.

But to point to those and imply that America should still be considered similar to Iran--or at least no better than Iran?

Break, you're smarter than that.

And even in light of those issues above...America has [i]still[/i] made more progress in under 300 years than other nations have in 2,000 years.

[Lafleur]

[quote name='Break]Ha! Which Americans, the Native ones whom the American government exacted genocide on for four hundred years? Or the Afro-Americans who were slaves for hundreds of years before their life 'got better'? Or those Muslims who can now be arrested for pretty much nothing and detained in Guantanamo Bay? Oh, yes, [i]those[/i'] freedoms![/quote][COLOR=DarkRed]

Not to mention the foreigners who suffer at the hands of American Justice. I remember a Muslim from Canada was at JFK Airport when he was detained, get this, with absolutly no other evidence againts him except that he had brown skin and was shaven (Since apperently Muslims only go to Allah if they're clean-shaven) He was sent to an Iranian prison for reasons I shall never understand, where he was kept in a 'cell' (More of a cage, actualy) about as wide as a Computer Monitor and about 4 ft long. Than, when he was released by the US government (I still don't understand this part; but it's what happened) he was given NO reperation for this crime-againts-nature, and when he sued the US government he lost the case and was fined 25,000 $ US. Justice for all my ***.[/COLOR]

[Break]

[quote name='Siren]And even in light of those issues above...America has [i]still[/i'] made more progress in under 300 years than other nations have in 2,000 years.[/quote]

America progressed along with other nations, along with Britain, mainly. America was our colony and therefore it started from where we were in our progression, it did not progress from scratch.

I don't think America has more freedoms than Germany or Holland; or even Britain, for that matter. I think that there is a lot of negative freedom over there, as in any country (even then ballots mysteriously go missing...).

True freedom is a matter that isn't really considered, to be honest: in any democracy, when would you think we are actually "free"? Because we are never free, the only time we are free is when we vote for the candidate we want in elections. That is our one day of freedom.

As for the implications of what I said before, I apologise, I did not mean for them to have that effect. Of course, Iran is much more oppressive than America.

[Brasil]

[QUOTE=Break]America progressed along with other nations, along with Britain, mainly. America was our colony and therefore it started from where we were in our progression, it did not progress from scratch.

I don't think America has more freedoms than Germany or Holland; or even Britain, for that matter. I think that there is a lot of negative freedom over there, as in any country.

True freedom is a matter that isn't really considered, to be honest: in any democracy, when would you think we are actually "free"? Because we are never free, the only time we are free is when we vote for the candidate we want in elections. That is our one day of freedom.

As for the implications of what I said before, I apologise, I did not mean for them to have that effect. Of course, Iran is much more oppressive than America.[/QUOTE]
No apologies necessary. I figured you didn't mean for it to sound that way.

But one of my main points throughout this thread is that while America isn't perfect...it's still doing quite well and is a definite world leader when it comes to civil rights. Surely America has stumbled along the way, but the degree and severity (and amount of time) at which we've stumbled is a drop in the bucket compared to places like Iran and the former Taliban Regime, etc.

And honestly, I think Americans have much more freedoms than just a voting booth. We have freedom of speech--and that right is definitely still intact...just look at Michael Moore. People are free to practice their own religion because of religious freedom. We can dress largely however we want to. We can date whomever we want to. Women can go out in public by themselves.

Maybe it's just me, but all of that is music to my ears. And what makes it even sweeter is that it's true with a few rare exceptions now and again.

[AzureWolf]

[COLOR=teal]I know it's been four days and everyone probably would like to see this thread good and buried, but I want to touch upon something. Particularly, Dagger. I don't think she put herself across well enough.

I'd like to point everyone to [url=http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/taboo.htm]Taboo[/url], a fun game which will make you understand Dagger's position. Like her, I have a strong universality factor. I will impose what's right or wrong on other cultures or systems of beliefs because I do not think it matters - time or place - what is right or wrong. That's the essence of having universal morals. (impose is a strong word, and I wouldn't actually go there and force them to accept it, but you'll get the idea)

Anyway, take the test, Lunox and anyone else who was trying to correct (or elaborate their position to) Dagger. Because packing poultry is wrong, no matter what others say. :)[/COLOR]

I also recommend Battleground God for theists (it doesn't really work on atheists), and staying alive for anyone. ^^