We define 'biological roots' differently. Also, the abrahamic faiths absolutely codify a certain component of patriarchal thinking.
Shooting at San Diego Synagogue
- Thread starter AmazonQueen
- Start date
We define 'biological roots' differently. Also, the abrahamic faiths absolutely codify a certain component of patriarchal thinking.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,024
But, they're certainly not the only ones. In fact, Ancient and Medieval cultures and religions, of all types and around the world, that DON'T codify such Patriarchal thinking somehow, and strongly, were rare exceptions, frankly.
Lexicus
Deity
No doubt. But it's got sociological roots, it's not like it was decided randomly or arbitrarily and then people followed it for centuries purely as a matter of dogma.
100% agree. But that doesn't change the fact that some people think the words are magic, and that can slow people's evolution on LGBT thinking
Lexicus
Deity
I dunno. Seems plausible, but then why do the same people seem to have no problem with violating other bits of the Bible at will?
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
Sorry, I didn't say what I meant there, got confused between convictions and accusations during the thought process. I agree that shoplifting's cost proposition and reporting cost would favor shopkeepers not lying about it typically, barring separation of ownership --> shopkeeper takes and reports it as low key shoplifting as a cover.
These pressures are different when it comes to sexual assault/rape. Accusations outside of criminal court (or well timed with it) are a tactic in custody disputes, it can be used as a cover for cheating (somewhat high profile case of college FB players getting accused this way a few years back), or to avoid social stigma (if say intoxication isn't sufficient), or as a sheer revenge tactic. These factors aren't the same for shoplifting.
The difficulty of proving it makes it a more attractive crime to commit relative to others, too, for those with dark enough intent to actually do it premeditated.
H4run
Deity
People's belief are diverse. Some faith prohibit the consumption of alcohol, some prohibit the consumption of beef, some prohibit sex before marriage and so on. Now if people start to force their own version of truth to other's throat, that's the core of the problem.
A 68 years old Muslim get lynch and force to eat a pork because some Hindus suspicious that he sold beef, the solution for this conflict shouldn't be "how can I convince these guy not to take the Vedha literally and convince them that eating cow is actually good for their health" I don't think that will solve the problem. I think my main focus should be how to make them understand that what is wrong in their perspective can be totally "normal" or even "good" to other, and they should live with that.
If you want a Abrahamic believer not to consider their Holy Book as Holy, it is the same like you want a Republican not to be nationalist, or a socialist to give up the idea of state interference in the nation economy, that is impossible because it is what make them who they are. I think that as an atheist utopia that will push forward the Anti-Lgbt agenda in the respective community because it stained the LGBT movement with anti-Religion movement.
However solving this with dialog, to make the intolerance understand that people hold difference moral set and they cannot choke their own set of moral to other people's throat is a way to end the anti-LGBT behavior, unless if you want to mount the agenda to your own ideological struggle. The source of the conflict is when people from difference set of ideology try to fought, undermine and overcome one and another.
Last edited:
I think that this is often also coming from a pre-emptive defense... from protecting "your own" children from having the risk to marry with people of another religion (or non-religious) and the risk of them being converted.
When for example the people of the Mayflower fled first from England to Holland (the city Leiden). Holland in general tolerant enough for religions, but the parents got worried that their children, playing on the streets with other children, would become likewise tolerant and as "consequence" could "change". => They moved on to the US... in splendid rural isolation. (That they came from a rural part of England played for sure a role as well).
Tolerance as culture, even when not assertive, can still be felt as a threat to more restrictive cultures.
In Holland the issue of tolerance and cultural protection of the various religious streams was "solved" by a "pillar structure" that functioned until the 60ies.
At public level full tolerance, but every religious stream (incl the non-religious) had in my youth its own schools, universities, political parties, youth associations, newspapers, TV, sportclubs, etc. Up to WW2 incl favorable effects on jobs in smaller companies.
It was precisely my generation that started to ignore these borders in socialising. More so in the urban than in the rural areas. And often because of the inflow in urban areas of young people for their higher education.
Because some parts of the Bible are hard to do, and some parts are easy to do
The same person can easily use the Bible to justify LGBT discrimination while at the same time convincing themselves that the Golden Rule doesn't apply in a specific situation
It's like asking why people who read The Fountainhead can become jerks even if they don't strive to be independent
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,024
You just spew bad stereotypes and toxic demographic myths (especially about women) as casually and constantly as Andrew Dice Clay or Sam Kinnison used to - except you're not even TRYING to be funny.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,024
You're qualitive terms here still reek of your obnoxious bias, and in a snide way. I haven't seen you give ANY advice on these forums I would give to anyone I would want to even have a chance of succeeding in ANYTHING in life...
Moderator Action: metatron, Patine, to separate corners please and cool off before this gets out of hand.
Narz
keeping it real
Does that mean people who write in small snippets are the opposite of mass-shooters?
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,024
Does that mean people who write in small snippets are the opposite of mass-shooters?
No, they're just lazy mass-shooters - or in a big hurry to just get shooting...
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,637
Probably not a great source since it says only around 5% of shoplifters have a psychiatric condition.
It's a terrible phrasing for the underlying statistics. Some shoplifters are serial shoplifters. Serial shoplifters do a larger portion of shoplifting, so while they (say) only represent 5% of shoplifters they'll be responsible for 50% of the shoplifting incidents.
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,637
Ah. Well there's a lesson there 
Importantly, I have no idea what they actually mean with what they're saying. It's just bad writing.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,024
That is properly called a "screed."
