View Single Post
Old 10-01-2010, 02:22 PM
Lord Fedora's Avatar
Lord Fedora Offline
ASB Official
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Y'all stay off my property!
Posts: 8,469
Send a message via AIM to Lord Fedora
Default Re: Islaamic Extremists.

Originally Posted by Hassan_Descartes_AbdAllah View Post
Now the flaw that comes to mind once I look at this paragrap and those following it about liberalism is: you are considering the polar opposite of liberalism and proving it wrong from conceptual basis, and concluding from that premise that liberalism should be our way forward. Like you said meaning you are saying liberalism is justified just because its polar opposite is not. However Im not a proponent of extreme conservatism, neither have I placed any philosophical paradigm which would subsitute liberalism (at least not yet).

Again, we are going to extremes. Just because the polar opposite is wrong, doesnt mean liberalism is right.
We aren't saying that the polar opposite is wrong, therefore liberalism is right. We're saying that liberalism (again, the philosophy, not the ideology) is better than its polar opposite. In a system where all citizens, regardless of who they are, where they come from or how they were born are treated equally and have all laws applied equally to them, there is a lesser chance of conflict within that society as inequality is often a basis for such conflicts. Remove inequality and you remove that basis, thus giving less cause for social conflict.

Another thing that needs to be pointed out is this: I have basically two points against this, first off race and gender arent the same thing. Racial differences and Gender-based differences are in two leagues, so generalising between the two doesnt give the proper picture here. Secondly, any non-liberalistic philosophy doesnt necessarily imply that one gender (lets talk only about the gender issue here because you and I both agree that racial differences arent, well, differences) needs to have "leverage" above the other. It can even be so that both the genders are equal, meaning they perform their proper roles and enjoy their proper rights (not identical roles and identical rights, necessarily).I personally do not think neither equality nor superiority or inferiority even applies here, since men and women are different, therefore they have different roles and different rights. A man is not as motherly as a woman, this doesnt mean the man is inferior. Similarly just because in certain cases (clothing for instance) the rights of both the genders arent identical, doesnt mean anyone is inferioror or superior. Just that they are different and therefore have different laws and rules attached to them.
Yeah, I'm calling bull here. A man can easily be as motherly as a woman. A woman can easily be as strong as a man. This is the entire point of liberalism, that it's the content of one's character and the choices one makes that determine who you are and what you can do, not the nature of your birth, not the color of your skin and not even what gender you are. There are women in the roles men traditionally fill in this country and they do just as good a job of it. There are men who fill the traditional roles of women and they do just as good a job of it. The evidence that liberal countries which treat men and women exactly the same have provided render your argument moot.

Id like to stress that we need to point fingers at all the guilty parties though. So-called Islaamic terrorism is evil, no second doubt about that. But so is the imperialist Foreign Policy USA has adopted, if not more.
Supporting the state of Israel and pressuring Arab states on policies we disagree with is not as evil as mass murder, setting off multiple bloody and often pointless wars which only make things worse for both sides, and creating ethno-religious conflict. Not nearly.
98% of teens won't stand up for God. Repost this if you think that statistic is the most laughable thing ever.
My new AIM username is GrayFedora12. Do not respond or click on links from any IMs from LordKhajmer.