Let's split the USA in half...

[psychoslice]

Do you think that is a good answer - learning to live together? It creates plenty of problems, queer-straight, race, etc, why not live apart and leave one another alone? Why must we all bite our tongue and be quiet? Eventually, someone explodes and then you get abuse of one sort or another, or worse still , death.

How far would this end, those who like coffee and those who like tea, and all the other differences we have, should we be split over these also, na, its just a childish idea.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Do you think that is a good answer - learning to live together? It creates plenty of problems, queer-straight, race, etc, why not live apart and leave one another alone? Why must we all bite our tongue and be quiet? Eventually, someone explodes and then you get abuse of one sort or another, or worse still , death.

Living apart is what creates queer-straight, race, etc. Groups integrating is the best way to end such conflicts, as more people will see just "us" instead of "us and them."

 

[Robert.Evans]

How far would this end, those who like coffee and those who like tea, and all the other differences we have, should we be split over these also, na, its just a childish idea.

But if you take it to extremes, then how about mixing all races up in US. How would that go? I think there would be a lot of unrest and fighting. Don't you?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Living apart is what creates queer-straight, race, etc. Groups integrating is the best way to end such conflicts, as more people will see just "us" instead of "us and them."

That seems okay, but in reality, when I think about England, I see Pakistanis living in some areas, blacks in others, queers in others. That is not because they have been forced there but because each pull to their own. Birds of a feather flock together. So our supposedly 'multicultural society' which those who wish to look modern speak about, doesn't really exist. We just have small pockets of people, groups within other groups - and as they move in, others move out because they don't want to live with them. I say stay in your own country. I think that was what the tower of Babel was all about was n't it

 

[Sees]

But if you take it to extremes, then how about mixing all races up in US. How would that go? I think there would be a lot of unrest and fighting. Don't you?

A lot of the big cities here are pretty much that - all races mixed up together. Depends on the subcultures involved more so than the races. Vast majority of crime here doesn't cross any racial boundaries, aside from theft.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That is not because they have been forced there but because each pull to their own. Birds of a feather flock together.

We often force birds to flock together. Humans have a very long history of xenophobia, but when an other group becomes integrated, we don't see them as an other, but rather as normal. Normalization is what reduces problems against the others, as it reduces and eliminates the status of other.

I think that was what the tower of Babel was all about was n't it

It was about those pesky humans needing to learn their place, and that even though we were supposedly created in god's image and likeness, we have to obey authority just because bad things happen when we don't.
Some would sum this up as the moral of the story being about human arrogance. But, regardless, it has nothing to do with keeping groups apart.

 

[Robert.Evans]

We often force birds to flock together. Humans have a very long history of xenophobia, but when an other group becomes integrated, we don't see them as an other, but rather as normal. Normalization is what reduces problems against the others, as it reduces and eliminates the status of other.

It was about those pesky humans needing to learn their place, and that even though we were supposedly created in god's image and likeness, we have to obey authority just because bad things happen when we don't.
Some would sum this up as the moral of the story being about human arrogance. But, regardless, it has nothing to do with keeping groups apart.

But that's the problem. I don't see "intergration", I see groups of people living with one another. Do you really see what you are saying, or is that just wishful thinking?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But that's the problem. I don't see "intergration", I see groups of people living with one another. Do you really see what you are saying, or is that just wishful thinking?

We see integration happening all the time. Irish immigrants used to be the hated immigrant group, much like Mexicans are today, but the Irish have become integrated and nobody cares or notices. Homosexuals have went from a hated fringe group during my childhood to being accepted group that is just someone else by many in America before I reach 30. The black community as well as seen improvements over the past few centuries. Women are being accepted more into education and business. We all have urges and desires to be with similar people, but on a social level, when we keep people segregated, it creates an "us and them" mentality that instills levels of otherness, but without this segregation you do not have this "us and them" which cannot create the otherness in the first place.

 

[Robert.Evans]

We see integration happening all the time. Irish immigrants used to be the hated immigrant group, much like Mexicans are today, but the Irish have become integrated and nobody cares or notices. Homosexuals have went from a hated fringe group during my childhood to being accepted group that is just someone else by many in America before I reach 30. The black community as well as seen improvements over the past few centuries. Women are being accepted more into education and business. We all have urges and desires to be with similar people, but on a social level, when we keep people segregated, it creates an "us and them" mentality that instills levels of otherness, but without this segregation you do not have this "us and them" which cannot create the otherness in the first place.

It is easier with time for the Irish as they will then be speaking with an American accent (assuming that is where you are Ms Wolf). But making one group then okay means another group who thinks they aren't are then cast out. Do you see. I think there is a lot of tongue biting going on, pretending that everything is fine when deep down we don't like it. In WWII, you soon found out who was on your side; those that were seperated soon found the thick end of the stick and they were always different for one reason or another. I still say stay in your own country is best. No race crime, no race wars etc

 

[psychoslice]

But if you take it to extremes, then how about mixing all races up in US. How would that go? I think there would be a lot of unrest and fighting. Don't you?

Yes the sad fact is that humans are the most stupid animal on the face of this planet, no matter what we do they will still find fault in just about everything.

 

[Penumbra]

At this point, we just need 2 different countries.

On one side you can have:

Liberals
Gays
Hybrid cars
Tofu
Vegetarians/vegans
No guns
Higher taxes
Outlawed religion
Abortions
Welfare providing a free ride for life
Pacifists that bow down to other countries



On the other side we can have:

Conservatives
Traditional marriage
SUVs and 4x4s
Steak
Omnivores
Guns for law abiding citizens
Lower taxes
Religious freedom
Anti-abortion
Welfare until you get back on your feet
Red bloods that kick other countries' asses if they attack us

I know where I would live!

I'll take the side that has affordable education, universal lower cost healthcare, a cleaner environment, bodily choice, religious freedom and freedom from others' religious beliefs, laws based on evidence-based principles rather than religious ones, legislation for more humane treatment of animals, welfare for disabled people, increased social mobility, a strong middle class, consumer protection to hold developers responsible for their products, financial regulation for FDIC insured corporations, and progressive taxation.

You can have the side that has the highest rate of gun death in the developed world, a theocracy, a polluted environment, higher per capita cost healthcare for fewer people, no protections for animals, wealth concentration into the top 1%, politicians that greatly conflict with scientific consensus, homophobia, corporate offshoring of jobs, decreased social mobility, poor education for poor people, elections bought by corporations and the top 1%, financial gambling, and flat or regressive taxation.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Do you think that is a good answer - learning to live together? It creates plenty of problems, queer-straight, race, etc, why not live apart and leave one another alone?

At which point do you forcibly remove a gay child from it's straight parents, or a straight child from it's gay parents. That may be construed as 'problems'.
In a similar vein, how long before domestic disputes between opposing viewpoints become international disputes between opposing viewpoints? This may also be construed as 'problems'.

 

[Robert.Evans]

At which point do you forcibly remove a gay child from it's straight parents, or a straight child from it's gay parents. That may be construed as 'problems'.

When it's an adult I guess

In a similar vein, how long before domestic disputes between opposing viewpoints become international disputes between opposing viewpoints? This may also be construed as 'problems'.

Don't quite understand that. The simple idea is, why not live with people that are likeminded. Is that so bad?
Also, if prisoners, let the murdererd live with the same. If they kill one another then, would that be so bad?

 

[Draka]

There are some people, believe it or not, that are evolved enough to not only accept differences in people, but choose to be friends and even family, spouses. Now, would someone actually propose that people who love each other, family, spouses, friends, should be split up into different areas merely because they are different races, religions, sexual orientations, or hold different political ideals? That seems to be the idea here. The unevolved, the bigoted, the ones unable or unwilling to peaceably get along with and accept people different than them, wanting to propose the idea that people should be separated from others based upon their own ideals and prejudices. That isn't accomplishing anything but moving society backwards. We move forward together, as a human race, or move backwards towards destruction as separate groups set against each other.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

When it's an adult I guess

Yuck. I am a pretty peaceful guy, but being forcibly separated from my children when they turn 18 is not something I would stand by and watch happen. Nor would I fail to support others in that instance.

Don't quite understand that. The simple idea is, why not live with people that are likeminded. Is that so bad?

It is, in my opinion, although I understand we won't agree, and that's fine.
But in simple terms, living only with those who echo our opinions merely reinforces our opinions without challenge. No learning takes place in such an environment. It ultimately leads only to MORE misunderstanding, less empathy, and an ever narrowing view of what it means to be different.

Also, if prisoners, let the murdererd live with the same. If they kill one another then, would that be so bad?

I shed no tears for murderers, but neither do I want to set up Thunderdome. We need to own our decisions through to conclusion, whatever they may be, rather than washing our hands once we set up a scenario where the impact to ourselves is limited.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

There are some people, believe it or not, that are evolved enough to not only accept differences in people, but choose to be friends and even family, spouses. Now, would someone actually propose that people who love each other, family, spouses, friends, should be split up into different areas merely because they are different races, religions, sexual orientations, or hold different political ideals? That seems to be the idea here. The unevolved, the bigoted, the ones unable or unwilling to peaceably get along with and accept people different than them, wanting to propose the idea that people should be separated from others based upon their own ideals and prejudices. That isn't accomplishing anything but moving society backwards. We move forward together, as a human race, or move backwards towards destruction as separate groups set against each other.

Yeah...I can just imagine losing all my friends of different ethnicities, or religions, etc. But at least I'd gain...the...I mean...I'd be able to....meh...buggered if I know what I'd gain.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Yuck. I am a pretty peaceful guy, but being forcibly separated from my children when they turn 18 is not something I would stand by and watch happen. Nor would I fail to support others in that instance.

Sin is sin. It should not be encouraged as we do in the west.

It is, in my opinion, although I understand we won't agree, and that's fine.

But in simple terms, living only with those who echo our opinions merely reinforces our opinions without challenge. No learning takes place in such an environment. It ultimately leads only to MORE misunderstanding, less empathy, and an ever narrowing view of what it means to be different.

You make a good point. Though the deeper I think about it, I am not so sure. There is knowing right and wrong; and wrong cannot be accepted (whatever it might be) just so we might learn from it or have something to talk about. Empathy is great in living apart. It allows someone to express themselves as they will without anyone saying they are wrong. There of course would still have to be the core values to know what is right and wrong. Now I guess you will ask, Whose core values?

I shed no tears for murderers, but neither do I want to set up Thunderdome. We need to own our decisions through to conclusion, whatever they may be, rather than washing our hands once we set up a scenario where the impact to ourselves is limited.

At one time in England, life meant life, literally for murder. Then it meant life in prison. Now it is close to a joke.

I don’t think that murderers should be killed (as per commandment) but they should also have nothing to do with the society they blighted. The family involved should know that they will never ever under any circumstances, see that person again. I think that would be welcomed. Seeing something through to its limit with someone who just doesn’t care, doesn’t work. Some people do not want to listen to reason. Don’t be mistaken in thinking that a good argument and empathy will help some, it will not.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Sin is sin. It should not be encouraged as we do in the west.

I'd see separation of family as 'sin', homosexuality not. Your 'objective' morality is not universal, so short of theocratic law...*shrugs*

You make a good point. Though the deeper I think about it, I am not so sure. There is knowing right and wrong; and wrong cannot be accepted (whatever it might be) just so we might learn from it or have something to talk about. Empathy is great in living apart. It allows someone to express themselves as they will without anyone saying they are wrong. There of course would still have to be the core values to know what is right and wrong. Now I guess you will ask, Whose core values?

Are we talking right or wrong, here, or are we talking separation of different groups, be they determined via ethnicity, religion, etc?
I thought it was the latter?

At one time in England, life meant life, literally for murder. Then it meant life in prison. Now it is close to a joke.

I'm Australian. The English justice system at one time meant transportation for theft of bread, removal of the mentally ill from society, and the ability of the peerage to escape justice entirely. Be careful with rose-coloured glasses.

I don’t think that murderers should be killed (as per commandment) but they should also have nothing to do with the society they blighted. The family involved should know that they will never ever under any circumstances, see that person again. I think that would be welcomed. Seeing something through to its limit with someone who just doesn’t care, doesn’t work. Some people do not want to listen to reason. Don’t be mistaken in thinking that a good argument and empathy will help some, it will not.

Actually I'm much harder and less forgiving than you might expect. Despite having all the hallmarks of a leftie, for example, I'm actually not against the death penalty in certain circumstances. My issue isn't really with punishment for crimes committed. It's punishment by association. Belonging to the wrong group leading to prejudice and judgement, regardless of the actions of the individual. That seems to be the logical extension of your argument.

 

[Draka]

Sin is sin. It should not be encouraged as we do in the west.

Since only certain religions recognize "sin", and then only some of the adherents of those religions actually have problems with certain people's sin rather than realize that all are guilty of some sin and try to live in peace with each other (that whole love thy neighbor thing rearing its head again) then it would seem to stand to reason that the certain religious adherents that have issues should be the ones to wilfully remove themselves from society and stay together so they don't have to interact with those "sinners". Rather than force their perceptions of who should be separated upon others. But then, that sounds quite a bit like cult mentality doesn't it? Makes more sense than everyone else bending to the opinion of a few though, right?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sin is sin. It should not be encouraged as we do in the west.

Sin is only sin to you, and not to others. Just because you disapprove of certain actions doesn't mean others, who do not adhere to your religious dogma, should be expected to adjust their lives because you don't like what they are doing. If a homosexual couple wants a child, why prevent that or take the child away at the age of 18? Shouldn't it be sinful to deny a loving home to a child?