Debate Newsweek's 2010 World Predictions

[Kobal2]

ETA : this is a response to post #79

Hey, don’t blame me, I didn’t make semantics up.
But no matter how hard you say it ain’t so, you can’t make a comparison in a vacuum. And making a judgment call on only one element of an ensemble is an implicit comparison with the other elements. “Bad” has absolutely no meaning if nothing is “Good”. So, yes, categorically saying “A is bad” does imply “B, C or D are better than A”. That doesn’t mean B, C or D are good in absolute. But better than A.

Example : if I say “chocolate ice cream sucks”, the subtext is that I like some ice cream flavors, just not chocolate. Otherwise I would have simply said “ice cream sucks”.

But if linguistic wankery isn’t your game (more’s the pity), there’s an quick and dirty way to cut the shit : Excuse me Mr. Oakminster, sir, do you think Christians are more tolerant than Muslims, more respectful of the freedom of expression and aren’t as sure theirs is the one true faith ?

(Note : be careful. I lumped.)

[Oakminster]

@Kobal2

ETA : this is a response to post #79

Hey, don’t blame me, I didn’t make semantics up.
But no matter how hard you say it ain’t so, you can’t make a comparison in a vacuum. And making a judgment call on only one element of an ensemble is an implicit comparison with the other elements. “Bad” has absolutely no meaning if nothing is “Good”. So, yes, categorically saying “A is bad” does imply “B, C or D are better than A”. That doesn’t mean B, C or D are good in absolute. But better than A.

Example : if I say “chocolate ice cream sucks”, the subtext is that I like some ice cream flavors, just not chocolate. Otherwise I would have simply said “ice cream sucks”.

But if linguistic wankery isn’t your game (more’s the pity), there’s an quick and dirty way to cut the shit : Excuse me Mr. Oakminster, sir, do you think Christians are more tolerant than Muslims, more respectful of the freedom of expression and aren’t as sure theirs is the one true faith ?

(Note : be careful. I lumped.)

I’m not falling for this crap. Apparently you are unable to refute what I actually said, so you’re making shit up, pretending I said it, and arguing against what I didn’t say. That’s pathetic.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@Der_Trihs

Ban other religions? Try “brutally repress” or “exterminate”. I’ve been listening to the far right Christian loons for longer than you’ve been alive, and I’ve heard quite a bit of rhetoric about everything from bringing back stoning, to the virtues of hatred, to how they are going to kill “all of you people”, to how great a nuclear war would be. The important difference between them and the Taliban is that they’ve never had the power to do what they want; not that they are nicer.

None of those types will ever get into power and perhaps you should link those cites. The Evangelicals that do have a political chance such as Rick Warren are not like that.

[Kobal2]

@Oakminster

I’m not falling for this crap. Apparently you are unable to refute what I actually said, so you’re making shit up, pretending I said it, and arguing against what I didn’t say. That’s pathetic.

I did refute. You ignored.
ETA : just as you ignored Svejk’s excellent post. TL;DR ?

Besides, with regards to the last part of my post, it doesn’t matter what you said or tried to say or didn’t say. It’s a direct, honest question. How is that making shit up or arguing against what you didn’t say ?

[mswas]

@Curtis LeMay

None of those types will ever get into power and perhaps you should link those cites. The Evangelicals that do have a political chance such as Rick Warren are not like that.

But Rick Warren wants to murder homosexuals. You know this because he said, “No Comment”, when asked about the new Ugandan anti-Homosexual legislation! Right Der Trihs?

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@mswas

But Rick Warren wants to murder homosexuals. You know this because he said, “No Comment”, when asked about the new Ugandan anti-Homosexual legislation! Right Der Trihs?

The Uganda anti-homosexual laws actually mandate death only for AIDS victims to stop the spread of that scourge. They mandate life in prison for homosexuals. Plus “No Comment” does not equal “I wanna kill all the fags.”

[toofs]

@Gyrate

Honestly, this is like complaining how those damned Amish are going to force us all to give up our cars and ride in horse-drawn buggies.

The Amish don’t have a history of bombing mass transportation. You know, buses in London, trains in Spain, airplanes everywhere.

[Oakminster]

@Kobal2

I did refute. You ignored.
ETA : just as you ignored Svejk’s excellent post. TL;DR ?

Besides, with regards to the last part of my post, it doesn’t matter what you said or tried to say or didn’t say. It’s a direct, honest question. How is that making shit up or arguing against what you didn’t say ?

You did not refute, you posted an uncited assertion.
The question you posted is irrelevant to, and a continued hijack of, this thread.

[kaylasdad99]

@Oakminster

I have never used the phrase “destroying our culture”. However, Islam is not, and never has been, a religion of tolerance. They believe their religion is the one true faith, and they have no respect for freedom of expression.

Remember these lovely pictures:

Behead those that insult Islam

Be Prepared for the Real Holocaust
There were similar protests all over the world after the Danish cartoon incident.

@Der_Trihs

As opposed to the tolerance of Christians? The same Christians who, for example, keep passing anti-gay laws here in America? Change “Islam” for “Christianity” and your statement is just as true.

@Oakminster

Cite for anywhere I’ve ever defended anti-gay laws? Not that this thread has anything to do with that issue…

What a strange thing to say to someone who hasn’t accused you of defending anything at all; and whom you haven’t even bothered accusing of defending the cartoon-protesters.

The fact that both of you are avowed atheists makes it all the more bemusing…

[kaylasdad99]

@Aji_de_Gallina

Castro will never die.

Not until we find and destroy all of his Horcruxes…

[kaylasdad99]

@Oakminster

What part of “I am not saying anything about Christianity, whether positive or negative” are you not understanding?

Perhaps trying to get through a post without saying something negative about Christianity is something that Der Trihs interprets as “praising with faint damnation.”

Well, if there can be such a thing as “damning with faint praise,” why the hell not?

[kaylasdad99]

[quote=“Kobal2, post:78, topic:522942”]

nm. Apparently, my whoosh detector is mis-calibrated.

[Kobal2]

@Oakminster

You did not refute, you posted an uncited assertion.

Poker’s not your game, is it ? Here’s a tip : don’t call when you’re bluffing, and don’t play the cite game unless your position is rock solid. I was merely referring to watercooler talks with actual, live Muslim coworkers, blog posts and the like, but if you insist…

Quoth Ali Al Sistani, the Grand Ayatollah of Iraq and apparently the closest thing Sunnis have to a grand poobah :

[Sistani] made no call for protests and suggested that militant Muslims were partly to blame for distorting Islam’s image.

He referred to “misguided and oppressive” segments of the Muslim community and said their actions “projected a distorted and dark image of the faith of justice, love and brotherhood.”

(AP piece cite).
So.

The question you posted is irrelevant to, and a continued hijack of, this thread.

I’m not the one who started slinging disparaging remarks about Muslim immigrants, the ominous threat they posed to [del]Christendom[/del] Western nations and the eeeevil nature of their religion at large - which is exactly the kind of attitude that fueled the fire in the cartoon debacle, and one of the root causes behind Newsweek’s fifth bullet point (and weeeee’re back on topic, sports fans !).

Hence my dogging you.

[Oakminster]

@Kobal2

Hence my dogging you.

That’s one word for it.

[Kobal2]

(correction. In our latest publication, the phrase “apparently the closest things Sunnis have to a grand poobah” should have read “apparently the closest thing Shias have to a grand poobah”. Perceptive readers will have made the correction themselves, we apologize for the mistake, no offense or disrespect meant, etc)

[Gyrate]

@toofs

The Amish don’t have a history of bombing mass transportation. You know, buses in London, trains in Spain, airplanes everywhere.

They haven’t shot abortion doctors or blown up towns in Northern Ireland either. All of which is entirely irrelevant to the point being discussed, which is whether immigrants are overwhelming our “native” culture (hint: they’re not).

[MrDibble]

@Gyrate

All of which is entirely irrelevant to the point being discussed, which is whether immigrants are overwhelming our “native” culture (hint: they’re not).

Rubbish - of course they are. Since at least 1564 (1492 in the Caribbean)

[BrainGlutton]

@Ximenean

I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. A hung parliament would be an unusual and possibly turbulent situation in British politics, but I don’t see what it would have to do with the Long/Rump parliaments of 400 years ago.

:o Take a very broad interpretation of “evolve into.” Connect this with variant connotations of “Long” and “Rump.”

@Ximenean

I wonder if you are thinking of words such as “liberal” and “conservative” in their polarised American senses? Those terms are not as charged here. The LibDems stand somewhere between Labour and the Conservatives.

My understanding was that the LibDems started out that way, but are now to the left of Labour.

[BrainGlutton]

@mswas

This is true of so many regimes these days. The revolutions of the Baby Boom generation are not long for this world. And yet people imagine them to go on forever. People seem to find the whole concept of ‘generations’ difficult to deal with.

For a (perhaps excessively) thoroughgoing attempt to deal with it, see here, here, here, here, and here.

[mswas]

@BrainGlutton

For a (perhaps excessively) thoroughgoing attempt to deal with it, see here, here, here, here, and here.

Strauss and Howe straddle that line between New Age mysticism and sociology. There work is interesting, but it does have a bit of hippy stank on it. They are certainly optimistic about millenials, which for the most part I am too.

But the bottom line is the Old Guard of the Cuban regime has ten years more at most, and the Old Guard of the Iranian regime has 15 years more at most.