Majority of Danes want to ban burqa: survey

[pateuvasiliu]

Which religion is needed? Do you have a specific one in mind?

It's not needed, it's a coping mechanism, and it's a means to control other people. How many wars have been fought over religion? How many people have tried to use religion to justify atrocities?

It's not needed, it's wanted.

- - - Updated - - -



So does forcing your culture onto others.

I can name you a few wars fought over ''democracy'', do we ban that too?

It's not needed.

You're a fool if you think Religion's to blame for those wars. They'd just find another excuse.

Which religion is needed? Do you have a specific one in mind?

Christianity has been doing okay.

[Machismo]

I can name you a few wars fought over ''democracy'', do we ban that too?

It's not needed.

You're a fool if you think Religion's to blame for those wars. They'd just find another excuse.



Christianity has been doing okay.

That's the thing, I have no desire to ban religion. I'm just not blind to the negative impacts it can have on society hen wielded by self-serving assholes.

Christianity really hasn't been doing okay. You have the systematic cover up of tens of thousands of sexual assaults, pushing to restrict the freedoms of gay people, and a desire to exterminate other religions. That is all recent issues in the "most free" country on the planet.

Besides, I'll stick with that whole freedom of religion thing, I'm a big fan of the government not trying to push religion onto people.

[Halyon]

Once again, it's still a restriction of free expression, as you pointed out. Otherwise, it would not be restricted to the home.

Is it? Expressing religion is one thing, which is again, unrestricted at home, but in public, for certain safety concerns, restrictions to how much expression can be exhibited is warranted. You can conceal quite a lot under one of those, so it's a valid concern.

There are many other 'expressions' that we also ban, or are already pretty fucking illegal...like honor-killings.

[Freighter]

Machismo doing his If you don't agree with me you're against freedom and you're authoritarian-shtick again? How surprising. He doesn't even believe in it himself since he can't actually substantiate how he'd stop people who would destroy others in his supposed ideal society since he doesn't want to stop people from forming groups to do it. He basically favors a society ruled by who can do the most violence.

[Machismo]

Is it? Expressing religion is one thing, which is again, unrestricted at home, but in public, for certain safety concerns, restrictions to how much expression can be exhibited is warranted. You can conceal quite a lot under one of those, so it's a valid concern.

There are many other 'expressions' that we also ban, or are already pretty fucking illegal...like honor-killings.

Well, one causes actual harm, the other is wearing something to cover your face. Like I've been saying, it's a restriction of free expression, an action that causes no harm.

- - - Updated - - -

Machismo doing his If you don't agree with me you're against freedom and you're authoritarian-shtick again? How surprising. He doesn't even believe in it himself since he can't actually substantiate how he'd stop people who would destroy others in his supposed ideal society since he doesn't want to stop people from forming groups to do it. He basically favors a society ruled by who can do the most violence.

Actually, that's the opposite of what I believe. People should be free to do what they want, so long as they do not harm others.

[Freighter]

Actually, that's the opposite of what I believe. People should be free to do what they want, so long as they do not harm others.

No, you'd be letting people gather up in enough numbers to control an area because they're not hurting anyone yet at that point but the moment they start hurting someone then you're against it even though at that point it's already too late since they'll be in control. So much for your ideal society. Instead of stopping them from taking control you'd just be like It's cool guys, you're free to gather up which leads to a society ruled by violent groups.

Your ideal society is flawed and violent.

[Machismo]

No, you'd be letting people gather up in enough numbers to control an area because they're not hurting anyone yet at that point but the moment they start hurting someone then you're against it even though at that point it's already too late since they'll be in control. So much for your ideal society. Instead of stopping them from taking control you'd just be like It's cool guys, you're free to gather up which leads to a society ruled by violent groups.

Your ideal society is flawed and violent.

Isn't that exactly what every government tries to do, be the most powerful and most authoritarian? I guess your ideal society is flawed and violent.

[Freighter]

Isn't that exactly what every government tries to do, be the most powerful and most authoritarian? I guess your ideal society is flawed and violent.

Far less so than warlords who will arbitrarily kill people because they didn't like how they looked at them.

[Machismo]

Less so than warlords who will arbitrarily kill people because they didn't like how they looked at them.

Nope, not at all. Your model has been shown to be able to kill millions at a time. No thanks. Your model supports those warlords.

[Freighter]

Nope, not at all. Your model has been shown to be able to kill millions at a time. No thanks. Your model supports those warlords.

If governments had control in Africa then Africa would be far more stable than it is with the warlords ruling.

No, my model hasn't been shown to be able to kill millions at a time, there has never been millions killed at a time here in Singapore.

[Machismo]

If governments had control in Africa then Africa would be far more stable than it is with the warlords ruling.

You mean like government had control in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Soviet Union, and under Mao?

It's a good thing I don't support any of that.

[Freighter]

You mean like government had control in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Soviet Union, and under Mao?

It's a good thing I don't support any of that.

None of them are like the Singaporean societal model.

[Machismo]

None of them are like the Singaporean societal model.

Why not, they are the same paradigm...

I'll stick to people being free to do what they want, so long as they do not harm others... thanks.

[Freighter]

Why not, they are the same paradigm...

Nope. Nazi germany was far into eugenics, racial purity, something that Singapore is not with multiculturalism being embraced. Communist countries are far detached from Singapore too in societal model, in fact if you're propagating for overthrowing the government here like communists usually do, you'll find your ass in prison.

I'll stick to people being free to do what they want, so long as they do not harm others... thanks.

You'd let people group up to take control over an area by means of violence. No thanks.

[Machismo]

Nope. Nazi germany was far into eugenics, racial purity, something that Singapore is not with multiculturalism being embraced. Communist countries are far detached from Singapore too in societal model, in fact if you're propagating for overthrowing the government here like communists usually do, you'll find your ass in prison.




You'd let people group up to take control over an area by means of violence. No thanks.

There's one problem, you support the same mentality, the ruling government is allowed to suppress things it deems to be a possible future threat. That same fear and paranoia is prevalent, so the results could inevitably end the same way. It's the same paradigm, so all you can say, is that it hasn't happened to your country, yet.

I'll go ahead and stick with freedom, enjoy your nationalism and oppression. It's not like we don't have thousands of years of proof to show how often it ends in bloodshed.

[Freighter]

paradigm

I think you do not know what that word means. Nazi germany and communist countries are not the same paradigm as Singapore.

I'll go ahead and stick with freedom, enjoy your nationalism and oppression. It's not like we don't have thousands of years of proof to show how often it ends in bloodshed.

It seems that you do not know what nationalism nor oppression is.

[Machismo]

I think you do not know what that word means. Nazi germany and communist countries are not the same paradigm as Singapore.



It seems that you do not know what nationalism nor oppression is.

The mentality of nationalism and authoritarianism is the same. Luckily for me, I don't support oppression, it's a shame you seem to be such a big fan. But don't worry, I'm sure nothing bad will come of it.

[Freighter]

The mentality of nationalism and authoritarianism is the same. Luckily for me, I don't support oppression, it's a shame you seem to be such a big fan. But don't worry, I'm sure nothing bad will come of it.

Lmao, that's a lie. You'd have warlords ruling your ideal society.

[Machismo]

Lmao, that's a lie. You'd have warlords ruling your ideal society.

Not at all, that's what exists in the current paradigm.

[Freighter]

Not at all, that's what exists in the current paradigm.

I see no warlords ruling here. Your society would have them on the other hand.