What?! I dont hide anything! Ok, you still don't see the difference between HAVING a reason to be in a car, ie. going to work and NOT having a reason.
Hahahahah. Yes, sure, of course. No, in truth, Gworld, as I have said to you numerous times in the past, you live in a world unto yourself, and you don't rise to the level of discourse, at least not to me; so it isn't worth it to me to exchange thought with you. Feel free to continue, of course.
Now, I'll repeat, one of a million scenarios: a realtor, a woman, unknown to a prospective male client - a stranger - driving that client to show him some buildings. She is to be whipped as a "slut." No, you're making perfectly reasonable sense. A good codus to live by, today.
your just twisting my words now, but i dont really care. Tell yourself my views are monstrous, medevil, wrong, w/e. The statistics speak for themselves. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita
And yet another disclaimer, the now classic refrain..."what I wrote isn't what I meant...." You know, I've ignored the broader implications of what you are saying. Namely, accepting what I strongly feel is your ignorant proposal - that any woman getting into a car with a stranger is "a slut," by your own code, if she should be raped, somehow, then it's her damn fault - as she shouldn't have been getting into the car with whatever morals really rocks you world, is that about it? Hence, someone of "low moral character" to you should be whipped? I hold the belief that women are not to be whipped for doing what they wish, nor raped for not doing what another wishes. Call me barbarian.
Oh, and Gworld, attempting a bad rep with the comment "owned." I realize it hurts. It will get better with time.
Do you mean the world that has the same rules for everyone and doesn't let my emotions and bigotry control me? Please continue with being the "intellectual" version of bogart or proteindude.
Bro, the punishment was totally un islamic if anything these days the Saudi goverment does not represent Islam...even one of the princes built a hotel in tel aviv. The Saudi royals need to sort themselves out,
Yes i agree bro, i am no fan of the saudi goverment, they're traitors, think what they could have achieved for the Muslim world with all that oil money, instead they're just flaunting it on garbage and usury.
I am very happy that they spend the money on garbage and usury instead of spending them on enforcing unhuman laws.
Right, if anything is unhuman its the 100,000 women that get raped in the US each year. Compared to about 80 a year in Saudi arabia, even with the population difference. Anywho I was talking about the Muslims in poverty. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7099497.stm Unhuman, eh? You might want to ask yourself why MOST converts to Islam are women.
Its incredible that a woman can get raped and get punished for being raped lololol. Now why arent the muslim world putting a death wish on them the same way they put one on the cartoonist and salman rushdie?
I conclude: the ability to categorize "freedom of choice" as "bigotry" is genius, in an oxymoron kinda way.
A lot of nonsense to avoid some simple questions. As I previously mentioned, in many ways, you are no different than bogart or proteindude. The same way that some of those "university professors" are the room clean version of skin heads and try to give a respectability to same nonsense, you are basically saying the same things as other bigots but with "intellectual" makeup. May be it was too much to ask from you to think about 3 separate questions, so let's start with number one and continue from there. 1) Do sovereign countries have the right to make their own laws or should they get USA and yours approval before? Try to give an straight answer instead of the usual blah, blah.
Gworld, I understand you would like to feign sophistication, but when you try, I'm sorry, it really does just come off silly, in my mind. That said, since you can't seem to get some rest until you are responded to, I didn't reply to your original set of three questions as they were utterly not germane to the discussion with Aceday, who took a personal position I found deeply offensive. He was not arguing on the sovereign right of states but on the moral justice in lashing a woman who found herself gang-raped after getting in a car with "strangers." Perhaps you can understand better this elemental difference between questions of state sovereignty and personal creed, if I place it in your own language: When you conflate bigotry with a defense of a woman's right to live her life as she would wish, free from violence and utter subjugation, your stand truly attenuates to nothing - your points are meritless, in my opinion. You have often vociferously mentioned in the past that you are an "honest intellectual," but I must again reiterate I find you neither honest, nor intellectual, and so I do not find use in responding, generally. Better? Get some rest, buddy.
Obviously you are not going to give a straight answer to a simple question and instead try your usual nonsense. I think we both know why.
Brother, I understand you can't see a straight answer when it doesn't fit your need. In other words, enough bullshit. My contention is with the mindset that blames a woman for being raped, and would torture that victim further on the basis of some dictated morality from another. If you wish to defend such crap, feel free, but your attempts at mere obfuscation are tiresome - I see Aceday is no longer with us, so this end of the debate is closed, in my mind, unless you'd like to more fervently take up his mantle. As much as it seems to me this kind of useless banter fulfills some sort of need you have to be paid attention to, I'm sincerely not interested - I find that you do not raise interesting questions, you make no valid points, and you do not seek honest debate. I don't enjoy arguing for the sake of scratching an itch, Gworld, so if you do feel like continued playing, please feel free to continue playing with yourself.