Australian Politics Forum - the right to choose what to wear

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48871
At my desk.

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #105 - Apr 25^th, 2011 at 9:59pm

Quote:

But soren has demonstrated time and again that you cannot choose when you are being coerced to do the thing you claim as a choice.

Soren has demonstrated no such thing. Why would he bother with such nonsense? We have a choice about whether the government coerces people to dress a certain way. Hence this debate. This is not Afghanistan. We can choose freedom, if we have the balls.

Quote:

I can't think of one false step in this video. It just sums it all up well. Addresses all your points and shows them to be baseless.

So you can't make a rational argument, but you think a video can? Is this debate too complicated for you?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21701
A cat with a view

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #106 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 1:52am

freediver wrote on Apr 21^st, 2011 at 8:54pm:

I've been thinking, if they ever try this crap in Australia, I will organise a protest where everyone wear's burqa's. Just burqas.

Infection or cancer, cannot take hold and spread in vital, healthy flesh.
We remain healthy while our body remains vital and 'clean'.
We remain healthy while our body has the capacity to clease itself of the toxins produced by the processes that occur within a living organism.
Infection and cancer, take hold in a 'polluted' body ['polluted' usually due to overconsumption].
Infection and cancer will kill the host, when a body no longer has the capacity to clease itself of those toxins produced by the processes that occur within a living organism.

+++

FD,

And i repeat....

The 'logic' you embrace, is that you propose to defend the rights of those, who's only intent is to destroy YOUR rights, and intend to become your oppressor.

It is as though you hold a box of matches in your hands, and declare;

"It is wrong to burn down a house. And that is why i will not burn down this house."

But then, you choose to give your box of matches to a person who wishes to burn down the house.
Illogical.

FD, you are expressing a false virtue.
In that you seem to see nothing wrong with giving moslems the means, to destroy the political 'environment' which facilitates, your own right of 'individual choice'.
When i say 'false virtue', i mean to convey the total lack of 'proper' discernment, in your worldview.

When we choose to 'gift' to moslems, the right of 'individual choice', moslems will begin to express that right of 'individual choice', in a way which they [moslems] will seek to remove that same right of 'individual choice' from others.....as per;
IMAGE...

All good moslems express the view, that the right of 'individual choice' must not include the right to scrutinize, or criticise, or to reject ISLAM

n.b.
That last image DOES display moslems engaging in their right of 'freedom of expression',
...because, TO ALL GOOD MOSLEMS, the right of 'freedom of expression', also DOES embrace the moslem right to promote incitement to murder those who 'insult' ISLAM!

FD, [whether you will admit it, or not] in defending the right of 'individual choice' for moslems, you are implicitly defending a right of moslems, to murder those who reject ISLAM's authority.

FD, you are sick ['polluted'].
The proof that you are sick, is that you are happy to defend, and to host the contagion, that would destroy the body which gives you life.

+++

FD,

Always 'tolerance', and never judgement [of intent],
....is that what liberty and 'rights', 'encapsulates' for you ???

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."

Karl Popper

"Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil."

Thomas Mann

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21701
A cat with a view

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #107 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 2:39am

freediver wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 6:59pm:

Right. You cannot sell your fundamental human rights. But you can choose to cover your face. Not sure why this is such a sticking point for you Soren.

Of course you can.

Men have often sold their 'fundamental human rights' [and their liberty], for the promise of [continued] life, or the promise of 'peace'.

And that is exactly the bargain which ISLAM offers to all of mankind.

ISLAM is 'peace'.
....the 'peace' of being a slave to ISLAM's evil.

And imo, people such as yourself, FD, would sell your liberty, for a [false] promise.

For a compromise [...with what is evil].

Liberty costs blood, and sometimes to be maintained, it will cost our own blood.

To be true to liberty, is better, than to live as the slaves of evil men.

+++

The appeasement of evil men, does not lead to peace.

IMO, this generation has lost the ability to discern between good and evil, between truth and falsehood.

As individuals, we all know, or as adults, we should know by now!, that if we walk away from truth, we will [always!] reap confusion in our lives.

Peace comes from justice.
Justice comes when *we* respect, and defend, free and open truth.
With justice comes peace.
Justice comes from facing up to, and embracing, TRUTH.

We [who seek peace] are kidding ourselves [we are living in la la land!], if we believe that aggression, or violence, is 'overcome', by our surrender to it!

Or if we believe that the appeasement of evil and wicked men, is a way to peace.

The appeasement of evil [men], does not lead to peace.

The aggression and violence of evil men, is not overcome, by our surrender, to the designs of those evil men.

That path leads only to slavery, and death.

How is peace achieved, in the real world?

Peace comes through sacrifice, and our willingness to fight for truth, and to fight for what is right[eous].

And, from judgement.

Peace among men comes as a consequence of righteous judgement.

Peace among men comes when wicked men are judged, and when their fellows [other wicked men] come to understand that their wicked actions, will bring judgement upon them.

+++

None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
Goethe

None can love freedom so heartily, but good men; the rest have not freedom, but licence.
John Hamilton

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin

Liberty has never come from Government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of it.The history of Liberty is a history of resistance. The history of Liberty is a history of limitations of Governmental power, NOT the increase of it. Woodrow Wilson

Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.
George Bernard Shaw

The difference between a free man and a slave is that a slave values his life more than his freedom...
John Norman

Matthew 16:25
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48871
At my desk.

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #108 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 7:49am

Quote:

The 'logic' you embrace, is that you propose to defend the rights of those, who's only intent is to destroy YOUR rights, and intend to become your oppressor.

Yes Yadda, I will even defend the rights of people like you, while you are calling for the denial of my right to choose what to wear. I will even provide a website for you to sprout your garbage on. That's just how it works. Remember, they are not out to destroy my rights, but everyone's rights, including theirs. I am on the side that is defending rights. The Muslims, and you, are trying to strip those rights away, using each other as an excuse. Both of you must be stopped. I don't care what label you put on your campaign to deny me my rights, it does not change what you are attempting.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #109 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 11:04am

freediver wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 9:59pm:

Quote:

But soren has demonstrated time and again that you cannot choose when you are being coerced to do the thing you claim as a choice.

Soren has demonstrated no such thing. Why would he bother with such nonsense? We have a choice about whether the government coerces people to dress a certain way. Hence this debate. This is not Afghanistan. We can choose freedom, if we have the balls.

Quote:

I can't think of one false step in this video. It just sums it all up well. Addresses all your points and shows them to be baseless.

So you can't make a rational argument, but you think a video can? Is this debate too complicated for you?

AS you very well know what I meant was that all the arguments againt the burqa are presented succintky (all of them have been raised on the various threads by me and others) as well as all the arguments in its defence you propose are addressed and shown to be wide of the mark.

Dyslexia is not an argument, FD, don't cultivate it as if it was.

Back to top

IP Logged

LifeMasque Full Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 223 Gender:	Re: the right to choose what to wear Reply #110 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 11:12am Hey Yadda, is that the John Norman who wrote the Gor books? I read those as an adolescent (soon outgrew them). He sure did like the idea of (female) slavery. d.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48871
At my desk.

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #111 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 11:42am

Quote:

AS you very well know what I meant was that all the arguments againt the burqa are presented succintky (all of them have been raised on the various threads by me and others) as well as all the arguments in its defence you propose are addressed and shown to be wide of the mark.

I have no idea what you meant. All I know is that despite watching the video, you are still incapable of making a rational argument.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30072
Gender: male

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #112 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 12:28pm

Soren wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 1:12pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 11:06am:

Have you so little pride in yourself as a man that you would harass women and then complain of your own fear of other men sticking up for them?

When Jack Straw dared to state the obvious in 2006 by saying that the burka and the niqab were “visible statements of separation and of difference” before asking politely that women visiting his constituency surgery consider removing them, it provoked angry protests from Islamic associations and the British liberal- Left, always inclined, it seems, to defend the rights of liberty's enemies.

Quote:

Quote:

If we can critically appraise and riducule Islam and all its stupid manifestations (and not just be restricted to the brazen lie that it is a religion of peace), we might be getting somewhere. But at present the criticim is allowed only one way. That is not freedom.

Tell us Soren, who uis preventing you from speaking your mind?

Why do we keeping bring this sh.t here ??

Is this part of the skills migration ?

What possible job prospects other than a life of crime could these imbeciles ever have ??

One day it will be a poli or a member of their family who gets the sh.t kicked out of them by some black idiot. Yes and he can always use the lame excuse that he has had such a hard life so the judge will let him off. Poor black idiots. You've got to feel sorry for them Sad

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30072
Gender: male

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #113 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 12:44pm

freediver wrote on Apr 26^th, 2011 at 11:42am:

Quote:

AS you very well know what I meant was that all the arguments againt the burqa are presented succintky (all of them have been raised on the various threads by me and others) as well as all the arguments in its defence you propose are addressed and shown to be wide of the mark.

I have no idea what you meant. All I know is that despite watching the video, you are still incapable of making a rational argument.

He means why should exceptions be made for impractical clothing attire based on some irrational belief in some imaginary God or interpretation of that God ??

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Online www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 48871 At my desk.	Re: the right to choose what to wear Reply #114 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 2:38pm It is not an exception. There is no law saying that clothing worn in public must be practical or that your choice may only be based on a limited set of mental prcesses. The exception is for you lot who want to put aside a basic freedom of choice because you get yourselves all wound up over the issue.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #115 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 10:34pm

freediver wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 11:06am:

[quote]
Tell us Soren, who uis preventing you from speaking your mind?

A Jordanian court has begun blasphemy proceedings against Danish artist Kurt Westergaard for a controversial cartoon he drew of the Prophet Mohammed.

“A court in Amman began today the trial in absentia of those who insulted the Prophet, including Westergaard and Danish newspapers which published his offensive cartoon,” said Tareq Hawamdeh, lawyer for local journalists and activists who brought the suit. The proceeding started on April 25.

A Jordanian prosecutor summoned Mr. Westergaard for questioning that year after 30 independent newspapers, Websites and radio stations in Jordan sued him over the cartoon, which was published in at least 17 Danish dailies, sparking violent protests in a number of Muslim countries, including Jordan.

“These judicial steps should serve to prevent future attempts to insult Islam and stir up racial hatred towards Muslims across the world, particularly in Europe,” said Zakarya Sheikh, a spokesperson for the group of local media who is suing Mr. Westergaard.

Mr. Sheikh, who is the editor of an Islamic weekly newspaper in Jordan, sued Mr. Westergaard in 2008, saying: “I will do everything in my power to bring him to trial. He deserves the harshest punishment available within the law.”
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/04/26/146762.html

Will they convict him? Of course. Will he go to prison. No. Will others think twice about "speaking their minds"? Of course.
Do you not realise what the point of all these various court cases and trials about 'blaspheming Islam' are about?

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #116 - Apr 26^th, 2011 at 11:13pm

freediver wrote on Apr 26^th, 2011 at 2:38pm:

The exception is for you lot who want to put aside a basic freedom of choice because you get yourselves all wound up over the issue.

Muslim Council: women cannot debate wearing veil

The body which claims to be the voice of Britain's Muslims has told women that wearing the veil is "not open to debate".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8455955/Muslim-Council-women-cannot-deb...

You are defending the Islamic right of these bearded pr!cks to dictate to your fellow citizens because they are Muslims.

Back to top

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21701
A cat with a view

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #117 - Apr 27^th, 2011 at 9:06am

freediver wrote on Apr 26^th, 2011 at 7:49am:

Quote:

The 'logic' you embrace, is that you propose to defend the rights of those, who's only intent is to destroy YOUR rights, and intend to become your oppressor.

Yes Yadda, I will even defend the rights of people like you, while you are calling for the denial of my right to choose what to wear. I will even provide a website for you to sprout your garbage on. That's just how it works. Remember, they are not out to destroy my rights, but everyone's rights, including theirs. I am on the side that is defending rights. The Muslims, and you, are trying to strip those rights away, using each other as an excuse. Both of you must be stopped. I don't care what label you put on your campaign to deny me my rights, it does not change what you are attempting.

FD,

Ouch!

I sincerely thank you for your tolerance, in that.

And i acknowledge that, in my experience, OzPol is a very rare online forum.

And i acknowledge that OzPol is truly, a liberal online forum, in the true sense of that word, 'liberal'.

Dictionary;
liberal = = respectful and accepting of behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas. Ø (of a society, law, etc.) favourable to individual rights and freedoms. Ø Theology regarding many traditional beliefs as dispensable, invalidated by modern thought, or liable to change.

+++

Isaiah 32:1
Behold, a king shall reign in righteousness, and princes shall rule in judgment.
2 And a man shall be as an hiding place from the wind, and a covert from the tempest; as rivers of water in a dry place, as the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.
3 And the eyes of them that see shall not be dim, and the ears of them that hear shall hearken.
4 The heart also of the rash shall understand knowledge, and the tongue of the stammerers shall be ready to speak plainly.
5 The vile person shall be no more called liberal, nor the churl said to be bountiful.
6 For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work iniquity, to practise hypocrisy, and to utter error against the LORD, to make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail.
7 The instruments also of the churl are evil: he deviseth wicked devices to destroy the poor with lying words, even when the needy speaketh right.
8 But the liberal deviseth liberal things; and by liberal things shall he stand.

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Online

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48871
At my desk.

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #118 - Apr 27^th, 2011 at 6:12pm

Soren wrote on Apr 26^th, 2011 at 10:34pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 25^th, 2011 at 11:06am:

[quote]
Tell us Soren, who uis preventing you from speaking your mind?

A Jordanian court has begun blasphemy proceedings against Danish artist Kurt Westergaard for a controversial cartoon he drew of the Prophet Mohammed.

“A court in Amman began today the trial in absentia of those who insulted the Prophet, including Westergaard and Danish newspapers which published his offensive cartoon,” said Tareq Hawamdeh, lawyer for local journalists and activists who brought the suit. The proceeding started on April 25.

A Jordanian prosecutor summoned Mr. Westergaard for questioning that year after 30 independent newspapers, Websites and radio stations in Jordan sued him over the cartoon, which was published in at least 17 Danish dailies, sparking violent protests in a number of Muslim countries, including Jordan.

“These judicial steps should serve to prevent future attempts to insult Islam and stir up racial hatred towards Muslims across the world, particularly in Europe,” said Zakarya Sheikh, a spokesperson for the group of local media who is suing Mr. Westergaard.

Mr. Sheikh, who is the editor of an Islamic weekly newspaper in Jordan, sued Mr. Westergaard in 2008, saying: “I will do everything in my power to bring him to trial. He deserves the harshest punishment available within the law.”
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/04/26/146762.html

Will they convict him? Of course. Will he go to prison. No. Will others think twice about "speaking their minds"? Of course.
Do you not realise what the point of all these various court cases and trials about 'blaspheming Islam' are about?

Soren, this the comment that raised the question:

Quote:

If we can critically appraise and riducule Islam and all its stupid manifestations (and not just be restricted to the brazen lie that it is a religion of peace), we might be getting somewhere. But at present the criticim is allowed only one way. That is not freedom.

I agree that the examples you gave are limiting free speech, but none of them were in Australia, and none of them would be resolved by denying ourselves the right to choose what to wear. They all seem to have fairly obvious appropriate responses.

Quote:

You are defending the Islamic right of these bearded pr!cks to dictate to your fellow citizens because they are Muslims.

No I am not Soren. You seem especially confused about this issue. If I oppose attempts by anti-Islamists to take away our freedom of choice, that does not mean I support attempts by Islamists to take away our freedom of choice. I am not sure why this is so difficult to communicate. I have said it plenty of times. Perhaps you are creating a false dichotomy in your mind, where our freedom will be denied regardless and we can only choose the Islamic version or the anti-Islamic version. We do not need to do this. I choose neither. I choose freedom. It's that simple.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: the right to choose what to wear
Reply #119 - Apr 27^th, 2011 at 9:26pm

freediver wrote on Apr 27^th, 2011 at 6:12pm:

I agree that the examples you gave are limiting free speech, but none of them were in Australia.

Are you seriously suggesting that the murder of Rushdie's Japanese translator, the burning down of Danish and Norwegian Embassies because of ome cartoons, the seemingly endless London processions demanding the beheading of those who insult Islam have no effect whatsoever in Australia just because they did not actually take place in Australia??

No you can't be. Well, WTF are you suggesting then?

I said that I don't care what they wear as long as it can be subjected to the proper ridicule. Pat condell put it rather well: in a healthy society this kind of garb would have been ridiculed out of existence a long time ago and would not be respected any more than flares or ponchos. But criticism of anything Ilsamic is curtailed, most significantly by self-sensorship. Why?

Reading the Koran to the amusement of a Pentecostal congregation can get you convicted in Victoria of a hate crime or racial somethingorother. Police officers topping a niqabi risk being accused of racial discrimination.

Criticising or ridiculing Islam is immediatelly labelled racist or invites the death penalty in the form of a fatwah or just sparks exemplary, intimidatory violence.

Back to top

IP Logged