Why not? I'm still responding to you.
Last time I flew out of the Middle East, the women on board just chilled in their chocolate chips like the rest of us.
It's not like you to miss a point as completely as you apparently missed Lord Zuul's.
What is wrong with a two tier health system?
- Thread starter AMKiller
- Start date
Why not? I'm still responding to you.
It's not like you to miss a point as completely as you apparently missed Lord Zuul's.
I have yet to observe what you state... Guess that the practice is significantly different in the econo seats
Funny... All I can think in reading your comment is the idea that you think in 1 dimension
It don't get much more "econo" than the cargo bay of a C-130.
In my experience, Lord Zuul is right. In any area where's there's just one religion, or culture, or political system, or whatever, people are pretty much relaxed about it, generally. They figure a whole bunch of work-arounds. It's when that religion or culture or whatever is in the minority, and the target of suspicion and hate, that folk tend to get real ultra about it.
Interesting observation although I will suggest that in reviewing this issue, it makes a lot of sense to look at it on a generational basis.
The potential that folks come to accept the circumstances when in an environment that allows for little or no latitude makes sense, however, the suggestion that folks (in general) get ultra about things does not recognize the notion that people now in a new culture with an abundance of alternatives do not alter their practices when they come to learn that options exist.
This is where the generational changes can occur, as the children are now in an environment wherein their exposure to a 1 option circumstance exists only in the home.
(Insert mandatory shot about how your European ancestors didn't work real hard to fit in in North America.)
Which is why I ain't real fond of "multiculturalism." It's a good idea in theory, but in practice it leads to many folks closing themselves off from different experiences. Seems like we had the right idea in the 60s, 70s, and 80s: you can stick turkey feathers up your ass and mumble your pleas to The Great Gazoo in your home or your church, but the rest of the time you'll fit into the very broad range of general American or Canadian behaviour.
This is the perfect example of the nature of each culture being so dramatically different that it was almost an impossibility that a common ground could conceivably exist
In terms of where we are today (relative to the example we are talking about) the various parties do have enough in common and exposure to each other that the opportunity for any common ground to be found has a fighting chance.
This is where the generational analysis will be very interesting
Agreed
Helps when 98% of one "party" is dead.
Historically, subsequent generations wonder what the f*ck all the yelling was about. I'm currently reading Ken Follett's new historical novel about the Elizabethan period. The amount of blood and treasure those folk shed over what language they were gonna mumble to The Great Gazoo in is staggering. Never really got on track until they all got their heads around the notion they had a common interest in slaughtering. . . um. . . make that "bringing the blessings of civilization and Christianity" to the natives in Africa and the Americas.
Ya, Muslims are so laid back in the Middle East and Pakistan (sarcasm). I guess that's why they riot when someone draws a cartoon or when someone writes a book criticizing Mohammad and Islam. I guess that's why they have blasphemy laws as well (end sarcasm).
The younger Muslim generation are only getting more radical and easily brainwashed.
He did write that Muslims aren't as ferociously religious in their Muslim countries. If that's the case then why the need for blasphemy laws and religious police?
Tell me again how you never judge people.
If you're correct, then why the need for blasphemy laws and religious police in Muslim countries?
The apologist and resident Muslim will tell you it's not about religion.
I flew out of Dubai, Islamabad and Cairo, I couldn't get in the bathroom because of the long lines of women.
True. They should riot over really important stuff, like hockey games.
The only part of it you pay attention to is, anyhow.
Same reason Europeans hanged and burned folks and went to war over which language they were gonna pray to their God of love in, I guess.
I'm not sure I ever said that. For that matter, I'm quite sure I didn't say that. But your delusions notwithstanding, I'm a pretty live-and-let-live kinda guy, though I do get a lot of entertainment mileage watching the monkeys fling turds at each other.
I think we covered this.
It was said by the resident Muslim. I believe I posted it to him?
Ya, hockey riots are dumb but at least they aren't trying to suppress free expression and speech like Muslims try to do through acts of violence.
Europeans hanged and burned people in the dark ages. Are they still doing it today? No, the Enlightenment took over, while today we are seeing less and less enlightened people because they don't want to offend Muslims.
Young Muslims run off to fight FOR ISIS. What I'm not seeing is them running off to fight AGAINST ISIS.
You're right. My bad.
If they think rioting in Beirut and Riyadh is gonna suppress free speech in Amsterdam, I say let 'er buck. This goes with the part about monkeys throwing turds at each other.
History's not your long suit, is it?
Would that be the Enlightenment of genocide or the Enlightenment of chattel slavery?
But they aren't imposing their will over there. Remember the Hebdo attacks? Theo Van Gogh? Salmon Rushdie? Most newspapers and tv stations wouldn't print the cartoons because they offend Muslims. It's happening in our part of the world, and it will only get worse the more we let in.
You're right on your last point, my bad. But I think Europe has learned from it's past transgressions, this is why they have open borders today, which imo is also a mistake.
The Nazis would have never gained power if the allies had not laid all the blame of WW1 at their feet. Notice how Tsarist Russia started the war but got off scot-free, well, except for their own civil war.
What happened in the Balkans in the 90's was in response to Muslim atrocities committed there 100 years earlier by the Ottomans.
With today's pc run amok, free speech is under attack. What's most disturbing is if one disagrees with someone else's point of view, they are labeled haters and fascists. One can no longer express a pov without being fired for it like that guy from Google who wrote about diversity. It's alarming.
Last edited:
You won't find too many Canadians who don't respect Christianity. Christmas and Easter seem to remain big holidays.
First, I'm not sure "most newspapers and TV stations wouldn't print the cartoons because they offend Muslims." In my European experience, most newspapers and TV stations don't print cartoons that are patently and deliberately offensive to a race or religion as a matter of policy. They don't need the heat.
Secondly, I was in Germany in the 1980s. Remember the Red Army Faction? The Red Brigades? The PIRA? Terrorism is nothing new in Europe This time around it's Muslims. In the 80s it was self-proclaimed communists. In the 50s it was colonials. In the 30s it was Germans. It's not an apocalyptic clash of cultures. It's down to the point where it's a small handful of chronic malcontent wackaloons running cars into crowds and setting off badly-made homemade bombs. Drunk starlets and cops kill more innocent people.
You would have thought they learned about religious tolerance from the Reformation Wars. You'd be wrong. Witness the 1930s and 40s.
It doesn't matter what their grievance was. It don't justify, or even mitigate, their crimes.
I see you're an adherent of the "single-cause" theory of history. I consider that either hopelessly naive or axe-grinding. Got no time for it either waky.
Maybe in Canada. Down here it's alive and well.
Free speech means other people get to speak freely, too.
First off, that's argument by anecdote. Secondly, free speech applies to the government. Your employer is not the government. Employment is at-will unless you have a for-cause clause in your contract, which means your employer can fire you for your political opinions, your taste in music, or just cuz yer ugly. It's been going on all my life. People got fired for their hairstyles in the 60s and 70s, for their opinions on race in the 50s and 60s, for "immoral" relationships in the 30s and 40s (it was actually ILLEGAL in many states for an unmarried man and woman to live in the same residence), and for their fashion choices ever since Og showed up for the flint-knapping in a bear fur instead of wolf.
You can't effectively bitch about free speech until you understand what it is. Here's a couple of hints, recapping the aforementioned: you have no right to a job, and freedom of speech allows others to call you a racist and a fascist just as it allows you to label all members of a certain religion as terrorists.
I'd suggest making Yom Kippur and Eid statutory holidays, but y'all'd have to invest heavily in stroke treatment and rehabilitation.
We have enough statutory holidays. I say we go the opposite route and de-officialize all holidays and leave it to the free market to decide.
Nah, you're a Puritan. I'd replace the current bunch (we have 10 Federal holidays in the U.S.) with:
3 Jan - Humiliation Day
2 Feb - Groundhog Day
25 Feb - Pistol Patent Day
29 Feb - Leap Day (every 4 years)
14 April - Ex Spouse Day
16 May - National Sea Monkey Day
1 Jul - International Joke Day
19 Sep - International Talk Like a Pirate Day
12 Oct - Moment of Frustration Day
13 Nov - Sadie Hawkins Day
23 Dec - Festivus