Gender Apartheid

[Ignatius A]

For the sake of discussion, let's say history is as one-sided as you're painting it to be. (I don't buy it, but for the sake of discussion...)

How does that justify the horrific, widespread misogyny that's occurring every day?

I'm not the US government. I'm a concerned citizen. I believe in the Golden Rule. I believe that humans are headed for a mad max world if we don't make some huge shifts right quick-like. And treating women as equals to men, is an essential aspect of the shifts we need to make.

Equal to men in all ways? Not arguing just wondering how equal to men do people really want women to be treated. I think there tends to be a myopic view of how men are treated.

 

[icehorse]

Equal to men in all ways? Not arguing just wondering how equal to men do people really want women to be treated. I think there tends to be a myopic view of how men are treated.

Equal as a rule of thumb perhaps? Certainly equal enough to end all of the policies outlined in the OP.

 

[Ignatius A]

Do you understand the difference between "killing civilians as a consequence of collateral damage" and committing war crimes?


They do? Last I heard they were explicitly genocidal towards Jews broadly.


Why on earth are you asking me this question when I am not defending Hamas or have ever claimed they make any distinction between civilians and non-civilians? You are the one defending war crimes against civilians.

Yes hamas does claim to have no problem with jews. Why don't you know this? You're commenting on things you know nothing about? The thing is they "claim" to have no problem with Jews but they clearly took no pains to avoiding killing Jews on oct 7 yet people whine that Israel is responding in kind in their own defense. Do I really have to explain hypocrisy not you?

 

[Ignatius A]

Equal as a rule of thumb perhaps? Certainly equal enough to end all of the policies outlined in the OP.

That won't happen. It's a different culture. There are cultures that see no redeeming qualities in western cultures you know that right? I'm not saying who is right and who is wrong just that the cultural differences are deep

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yes hamas does claim to have no problem with jews. Why don't you know this? You're commenting on things you know nothing about?

Sigh. Stop with the histrionics and pretense. It is widely known that Hamas are broadly anti-semitic.

Do you or do you not believe there is a difference between killing civilians as a result of collateral damage and committing war crimes?

The thing is they "claim" to have no problem with Jews but they clearly took no pains to avoiding killing Jews on oct 7 yet people whine that Israel is responding in kind in their own defense.

So you acknowledge that Israel are "responding in kind" and making no attempt to distinguish between civilians and military personnel in their attack on Gaza, and are therefore committing acts of war crimes just like Hamas did?

So, why are you defending them?

Do I really have to explain hypocrisy not you?

You think it's hypocritical to hold the position that "committing war crimes is bad when both Hamas and Israel do it"? Rather than your position, which seems to be "it's wrong to kill civilians and commit war crimes, except when Israel do it", which... isn't hypocritical at all?

Or are you directing this accusation at Hamas? Because, if so, congratulations. You realised that the terrorists who kill civilians are a bit spotty with the consistency of their position.

How does this justify committing war crimes against civilians, again?

 

[Ignatius A]

Equal as a rule of thumb perhaps? Certainly equal enough to end all of the policies outlined in the OP.

That won't happen. It's a different culture. There are cultures that see no redeeming qualities in western cultures you know that right? I'm not saying who is right and who is wrong just that the cultural differences are deep

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What I think I HAVE seen in this thread has surprised me:

- posters pushing back against the Golden Rule (because "subjective morality" ?)
...

Well, the Golden Rule is to simple in a sense and yes, it is still subjective morality. I don't push back against it because it is subjective. I subjectively don't like it, because some people understand in effect how to treat other humans differently than I do.

The joke is there is no objective standard for harm, even from you. And I don't claim one.

 

[icehorse]

That won't happen. It's a different culture. There are cultures that see no redeeming qualities in western cultures you know that right? I'm not saying who is right and who is wrong just that the cultural differences are deep

I would agree that it will damned hard. But if it doesn't happen, humanity is doomed.

 

[icehorse]

Well, the Golden Rule is to simple in a sense and yes, it is still subjective morality. I don't push back against it because it is subjective. I subjectively don't like it, because some people understand in effect how to treat other humans differently than I do.

The joke is there is no objective standard for harm, even from you. And I don't claim one.

The Golden Rule is a good way to avoid all that confusion. Before you make your wife live in a burlap sack, live in one yourself.

 

[Ignatius A]

Sigh. Stop with the histrionics and pretense. It is widely known that Hamas are broadly anti-semitic.

Do you or do you not believe there is a difference between killing civilians as a result of collateral damage and committing war crimes?


So you acknowledge that Israel are "responding in kind" and making no attempt to distinguish between civilians and military personnel in their attack on Gaza, and are therefore committing acts of war crimes just like Hamas did?

So, why are you defending them?


You think it's hypocritical to hold the position that "committing war crimes is bad when both Hamas and Israel do it"? Rather than your position, which seems to be "it's wrong to kill civilians and commit war crimes, except when I say it's fine", which isn't hypocritical at all.

Or are you directing this accusation at Hamas? Because, if so, congratulations. You realised that the terrorists who kill civilians are a bit spotty with the consistency of their position.

How does this justify committing war crimes against civilians, again?

Do you have any clue whatsoever what hamas believes and what they have publicly stated? yes or No?

Yes there is a difference the problem is you're assuming that the actions taken by Hamas on Oct 7 werent war crimes. I disagree. They claim to have no problem with jews but nothing shoes they took pains to avoid killing people they claim to have no problem with. If it's collateral damage for hamas it's collateral damage for Israel.

I never claimed otherwise regarding Israel the difference is I'm not a whiner.

I've explained why I defend them. This is a waste of time if you can't follow the discussion.

The same way to justify these crimes of Hamas.

 

[Ignatius A]

I would agree that it will damned hard. But if it doesn't happen, humanity is doomed.

I don't think so. Imposing one culture onto another will doom us not the differences between us

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Do you have any clue whatsoever what hamas believes and what they have publicly stated? yes or No?

Yes. Now stop with the distraction.

Yes there is a difference

Hallelujah!

So stop pretending their isn't and equating WAR CRIMES (the thing people have a problem with) and "defending themselves".

the problem is you're assuming that the actions taken by Hamas on Oct 7 werent war crimes.

That's false. I've explicitly stated that they were, multiple times, and have never once implied that they weren't. I even EXPLICITLY STATED IT in the very post you are quoting.

So you admit that you're arguing against a strawman.

They claim to have no problem with jews

Their leaders very explicitly talk of enacting genocide on Jews.

but nothing shoes they took pains to avoid killing people they claim to have no problem with.

So, to be clear, your problem is not when Hamas kill civilians. It's when they kill civilians who are Jewish despite claiming that they're totally not anti-semitic?

Eh?

If it's collateral damage for hamas it's collateral damage for Israel.

Never said it was.

I never claimed otherwise regarding Israel the difference is I'm not a whiner.

You seem to "whine" about Hamas a lot. The difference between us is that I think it's okay to "whine" about groups committing war crimes.

I've explained why I defend them.

Because you hypocritically believe it's fine when Israel commits war crimes but think Hamas doing so means it's fine to commit war crimes on Palestinian civilians?

This is a waste of time if you can't follow the discussion.

What discussion? Saint Frankenstein made a series of salient arguments and you failed to respond to a single one and just implied they supported Hamas (with no basis whatsoever). And now you've just done more-or-less the same thing with me: alleging that I assume October 7th wasn't a war crime while quoting a post in which I explicitly state that it was a war crime.

Seems to me you're the one not following the discussion.

The same way to justify these crimes of Hamas.

Speaking of "not following the discussion", the fact that you accused me of it and then IMMEDIATELY wrote this broke every irony meter.

 

[Ignatius A]

Yes. Now stop with the distraction.


Hallelujah!

So stop pretending their isn't and equating WAR CRIMES (the thing people have a problem with) and "defending themselves".


That's false. I've explicitly stated that they were, multiple times, and have never once implied that they weren't.

So you admit that you're arguing against a strawman.


Their leaders very explicitly talk of enacting genocide on Jews.


So, to be clear, your problem is not when Hamas kill civilians. It's when they kill civilians who are Jewish despite claiming that they're totally not anti-semitic?

Eh?


Never said it was.


You seem to whine about Hamas a lot.


Because you hypocritically believe it's fine when Israel commits war crimes but think Hamas doing so means it's fine to commit war crimes on Palestinian civilians?


What discussion? Saint Frankenstein made a series of salient arguments and you failed to respond to a single one and just implied they supported Hamas (with no basis whatsoever).

Seems to me you're the one not following the discussion.


Speaking of "not following the discussion", the fact that you accused me of it and then IMMEDIATELY wrote this broke every irony meter.

You claim to know what hamas believes I don't believe it.

Hamas took no pains to avoiding killing people they claim to have no problem with, that's a war crime. So they either lied or are psychopaths. Israel has killed civilians in their defense, that's a war crime but I have less of problem with that because clearly hamas isn't pack of lying psychopaths

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The Golden Rule is a good way to avoid all that confusion. Before you make your wife live in a burlap sack, live in one yourself.

It is too simple. Because sometimes people have to be treated differently, because they are different. That is the point.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Hamas took no pains to avoiding killing people they claim to have no problem with, that's a war crime. So they either lied or are psychopaths. Israel has killed civilians in their defense, that's a war crime but I have less of problem with that because clearly hamas isn't pack of lying psychopaths.

Are you going to actually respond to the specific arguments I made, or are you going to continue circling your little wagon and wasting both of our time?

You can start by acknowledging that what you said earlier - about me "assuming what Hamas did wasn't a war crime" - was completely false. You going to acknowledge that?

 

[Ignatius A]

Are you going to actually respond to the specific arguments I made, or are you going to continue circling your little wagon and wasting both of our time?

Im addressing the only relevant point. Hamas committed war crimes. So has Israel. As a result I won't sit by and listen to the whining of hamas or their non informed supporters. If you don't like it you don't have to reply to me.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Im addressing the only relevant point. Hamas committed war crimes. So has Israel.

Do you believe group A committing war crimes justifies group B committing war crimes in response? Yes or no?

As a result I won't sit by and listen to the whining of hamas or their non informed supporters.

How about listening to the "whining" of people who oppose war crimes? And how about demonstrating that the people you allege to support Hamas actually support Hamas?

If you don't like it you don't have to reply to me.

It's a free forum, and debating you is incredibly fun and easy. So I'll reply as long as you keep making terrible, terrible arguments.

Or at least until you provide evidence that people you say support Hamas support Hamas.

Or until you provide an acknowledgement, correction and, while we're at it, an apology for your false accusation earlier that I didn't assume October 7th was a war crime.

 

[Ignatius A]

Do you believe group A committing war crimes justifies group B committing war crimes in response? Yes or no?


How about listening to the "whining" of people who oppose war crimes? And how about demonstrating that the people you allege to support Hamas actually support Hamas?


It's a free forum, and debating you is incredibly fun and easy. So I'll reply as long as you keep making terrible, terrible arguments.

Or at least until you provide evidence that people you say support Hamas support Hamas.

Or until you provide an acknowledgement, correction (and, while we're at it) an apology for your false accusation earlier that I didn't assume October 7th was a war crime.

Yes since hamas has the explicitly stated goal of eliminating Israel from the face of the earth.

Explain how Israel is suppose to defend itself if Hamas has no compunction about committing war crimes in order to achieve it's explicitly stated goal of eliminating israel from fhr face of the earth. If you won't answer then please stop bothering me.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yes since hamas has the explicitly stated goal of eliminating Israel from the face of the earth.

So, you believe it's okay to commit war crimes against civilians because... Hamas are bad?

Explain how Israel is suppose to defend itself if Hamas has no compunction about committing war crimes in order to achieve it's explicitly stated goal of eliminating israel from fhr face of the earth.

I have always supported a reasonable military response to Hamas. I don't support war crimes.

Do you understand that you can do one without the other? If not, then how can you possibly condemn Hamas? You're using identical logic to them.

If you won't answer then please stop bothering me.

"Bothering you"? It's a free forum.

I'd like you to apologize for your false accusations against me. You going to do that? Yes or no?

 

[Ignatius A]

So, you believe it's okay to commit war crimes against civilians because... Hamas are bad?


I have always supported a reasonable military response to Hamas. I don't support war crimes.

Do you understand that you can do one without the other? If not, then how can you possibly condemn Hamas? You're using identical logic to them.


"Bothering you"? It's a free forum.

I'd like you to apologize for your false accusations against me. You going to do that? Yes or no?

I didnt say it was ok. Try to keep up. You asked it it was justified I said yes given that in their defense against a rabid enemy Israel would be destroyed otherwise.

What does a "reasonable military response" by Israel look like given that Hamas has no compunction about committing war crimes against Israel. Be specific.

AGAIN what should Israel's defense look like?

Likely no but you didn't show any evidence of a false accusation?