Extremism and racism in Saudi Arabia

[Sand]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior. This is the 21st century. The time of arranged marriages and the thought of women being inferior to men are so 16th to 19th century.

 

The rights of an individual is greater than centuries old traditions or scripture.

Edited April 30, 2007 by Sand

[Walsingham]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior.

 

You mean like honour and chivalry, patriotism, anarchism, egalitarianism... Help me out here, Meta.

[Pidesco]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior.

 

You mean like honour and chivalry, patriotism, anarchism, egalitarianism... Help me out here, Meta.

 

Your own traditions and ideologies are never useless or stupid. Only the ones that belong to other people are.

[Sand]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior.

 

You mean like honour and chivalry, patriotism, anarchism, egalitarianism... Help me out here, Meta.

 

I am thinking more along the lines of bigotry and hatred based on traditions/scriptures, arrange marriages, stupid dress codes, God, and the like.

[Gorgon]

God doesen't have to be intrusive. I mean no one ever goes to church for anything other than marriage and funeral, and yet we call ourselves a christian country.

 

Thats the difference, do these hereditary constructions place unreasonable restrictions on people's lives or noy.

[Walsingham]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior.

 

You mean like honour and chivalry, patriotism, anarchism, egalitarianism... Help me out here, Meta.

 

I am thinking more along the lines of bigotry and hatred based on traditions/scriptures, arrange marriages, stupid dress codes, God, and the like.

 

You mean simply you disapprove strongly of things you disapprove of.

[Sand]

Tell me when bigotry is a good thing, Walsh? Obviously if you are arguing against me that bigotry is useless, then you must have some use for it and therefore support it, so tell me what use is treating others with hatred and contempt is a good thing?

Edited April 30, 2007 by Sand

[Walsingham]

I mean you came on strong talking about how you hated people guiding their lives by ancient principles, when what you really meant was that you hate people guiding their lives by any principle you dislike. Democracy, equality, habeus corpus, honour, chivalry are all old. I'm just saying you should be clearer in your targets, and not blame either tradition or religion. Your beef is with the violent and the ignorant, not the religious.

[Sand]

The key word here is "USELESS." Old USELESS traditions. USELESS!

 

Edited April 30, 2007 by Sand

[Walsingham]

*equally slowly and clearly*

 

USELESS TO WHOM?

 

To an unscrupulous politician or queasy homophobe some traditions may seem quite handy.

[Sand]

Walsh, you know exactly what I am talking about so I am ending this discussion right here and now.

[Gorgon]

You have to qualify what differs useless traditions from non useless traditions, it's not enough to just list them according to your tastes.

[Jorian Drake]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior. This is the 21st century. The time of arranged marriages and the thought of women being inferior to men are so 16th to 19th century.

 

The rights of an individual is greater than centuries old traditions or scripture.

The rights of an individual were first written or created in 'centuries old traditions or scripture'-s

[Jorian Drake]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior.

 

You mean like honour and chivalry, patriotism, anarchism, egalitarianism... Help me out here, Meta.

 

Your own traditions and ideologies are never useless or stupid.

 

 

true

 

 

(atleast the quoted part, not the deleted one)

[Sand]

Oh, nevermind.

Edited April 30, 2007 by Sand

[Walsingham]

Oh, nevermind.

 

It seems I'm not not the only one who can't quite grasp the fullness of yor position.

[Sand]

I can grasp it just fine because I know what I meant by it and it is futile to explain anything to you, Walsh, or the others because you would just pick it apart to belittle me. I am not playing that game, Walsh. Not any more.

[Enoch]

Here is a somewhat more literate version of what I think Sand is trying to say.

 

(Not that I necessarily agree on all points.)

[Sand]

No. Interesting read, but no.

[metadigital]

I hate theocracies.

not theocracies or faiths are evil, some people are

It's not the faith that is the problem, it is that a theocracy is a political system where a small group, or individual, gains the ability to interpret holy law on Earth. Which provides an enormous incentive for the less-than-scrupulous to use fear and hate to gain advantage, riches, and more power at the expense of others.

 

A theocracy is a political system that cannot be argued with, ipso facto, because it is divine law. I have no problem with God ruling man, but I have a severe crisis of faith in men who say they are reliably implementing God's laws ...

[metadigital]

I will never understand why people let useless and stupid traditions run their lives or let antiquated idealogy influence their behavior.

 

You mean like honour and chivalry, patriotism, anarchism, egalitarianism... Help me out here, Meta.

Democracy is an ancient tradition, or rather based on the republican concept attributed to Cleisthenes in 500BC.

 

The "Golden Rule" of philosophy, i.e. "do unto others what you would prefer them to do to you" is from an equally ancient tradition, first being attributed in the sixth century before the Christian Era, to Confucius and Buddha, for example.

[Sand]

Are they useless?

 

Are they stupid?

 

I think those were the clarifiers I placed. Hmmm... Again it looks like someone can't read.

Edited May 2, 2007 by Sand

[Pidesco]

Who are you to say what's stupid and what's useless? Do you truly not understand that there's nothing absolute about those concepts?

Edited May 2, 2007 by Pidesco

[Jorian Drake]

Who are you to say what's stupid and what's useless? Do you truly not understand that there's nothing absolute about those concepts?

Exactly, if it's up to me then atheism is useless and stupid, but its not up to me to decide it anyway.

[Sand]

Who are you to say what's stupid and what's useless? Do you truly not understand that there's nothing absolute about those concepts?

If its stupid and useless to me then well that is what matters. I have no use for arranged marriages (marriages in general), jihads, God or Gods, and whatnot. If its not stupid and useless to you then good for you.