In other news
In the current news climate we see that some figures and events tend to dominate the front-pages heavily. Still, there a
That was one of the more memorable admonitions by a Politics mod. Was that an original CN formulation? If so, congrats.
FWIW :
Is it your position that all religions, and all individuals that are religious, have the exact same beliefs? Perhaps you should do some more research.Let's go back to where I started this conversattion. (I know it wasn't you that made this comment, but it seems you are on board with it.My only objection is that this is an overly broad brush to paint with. And how can one's pers
Because its probably because it was in the middle
Of a discussion , some confusion about my pov got misinterpreted.
Yes there is moderate religious people , they are not a problem ..
But laws are usual for the moderate in general aren’t they ?
Despite w.e field those laws are for .
It got started from there :
Slow down ….Secularism doesn’t mix with theocracy .If someone is too fundamentalist to be unable to put aside his beliefs while doing his job in public office , an office that usually shouldn’t promote discriminatory beliefs ( which is what religion is) , then yeah me I have a problem .Like judge for instance.How can u trust a judge to use the secular law and
Hope my point is clearer with the beginning of my intervention .
You are using religion - and specifically Christianity - as a catch-all for things you find unacceptable. It is no different than others that think "illegals" are the cause of all their problems. It is shallow and simplistic thinking. Of course there are some, even many, religious adherents that show the traits you are talking about. But it is by no means exclusive to them, nor
I’m certainly not , no idea where you got that in my posting .
Christianity is less a problem then it use to be 50 years ago + but there is still some « pockets » here and there that are way too fundamentalist -> Aja jets teach the theory of creation in science ideas for examine ….
- so I figured you would call them moderate or even using a « weaker » term ?
Like I said in the beginning , the principle of secularism shouldn’t be aiming at them .
Usually laws aims at those that are on the extremes of the spectrum right ?
You have an incredibly distorted view of religion. If others showed such a prejudiced opinion on other topics you would rant and rave about how awful they were.
FTR: I do not deny that there are many that fit your view. Maybe even the dominate situation these days. But to brand all with your assessment is intellectually lazy.
This answer was towards gorgo but since we share the the same view I think we agree then ?
FWIW:
To make sure freedom of religion to be protected , you need the state to be secular . Unable to favour any religion over another .
And to protect a democracy from theocracy , you need the religions to be expelled out of the government duties .
Both are reciprocally enforcing each other value .
The Marjorie Taylor green of this world are as dangerous as the talibans .
I would have no problem acquitting Donald Trump, Chauvin, or anyone else if I thought the prosecution had failed to carry its burden of proof.
Exactly !
But people like Lucien that are intoxicated by hate towards the left and other lines of thinking can’t just conceive that ….
That is why Luciom easily can bring up violence to end people life’s while others are less prone to do it because of well you know -> freedom to be free ?
Luciom should read The Swerve. I think it would cause him to vibrate at a higher frequency.
FWIW I said previously he should read or watch “Les misérables”.
He fits perfectly the character of inspector javert .
Remember when covid came from a bat at the wet market and you were ostracized and banned for suggesting otherwise
Remember when covid came from a bat at the wet market and you were ostracized and banned for suggesting otherwise
lol just scanned that guys twitter feed. What a nutcase.
Ya maybe but there's articles on the Germans. Most of them are paid sites.
Here's some
https://globalnews.ca/news/11078297/germ...
Ya maybe but there's articles on the Germans. Most of them are paid sites.
Here's some
https://globalnews.ca/news/11078297/germ...
yeah i saw the reports are real, not making a comment on that (although not a smoking gun by any means and no new info). Neither source would really surprise me and I'm not sure it matters too much. Can't trust the Chinese state to be transparent.
there is a profound difference in the anglo victorian (or Confucian Chinese) ethos of elites actually believing the **** they say to a large degree, and Roman/southern Mediterranean "we obviously know how things actually work and as long as I can get by it's fine" ethos.it's like marital infidelity in France/Italy (which wasn't even a negative for a politician even 50 years ago
Victoria middle and high society was highly hypocritical, preaching family values, the cloaking of table legs and sexual abstention outside of procreation while having affairs and visiting prostitutes.
Its like you have fixed and inchoate ideas in your head about how some cultures were/are and wilfully break facts to suit them.
yeah i saw the reports are real, not making a comment on that (although not a smoking gun by any means and no new info). Neither source would really surprise me and I'm not sure it matters too much. Can't trust the Chinese state to be transparent.
Uh wait a sec. It isn't new info that german intelligence was pretty sure it came from a lab in 2020? That's new to me. It means they had some exceptionally relevant information and they suppressed it. This wasn't something we knew before, did we?
Victoria middle and high society was highly hypocritical, preaching family values, the cloaking of table legs and sexual abstention outside of procreation while having affairs and visiting prostitutes.
Its like you have fixed and inchoate ideas in your head about how some cultures were/are and wilfully break facts to suit them.
Yes, which wasn't the case for the other examples i provided.
You posted about Anglo Victorian "elites actually believing the **** they say to a large degree"
Do you even believe the **** you say to any degree?
You posted about Anglo Victorian "elites actually believing the **** they say to a large degree"
Do you even believe the **** you say to any degree?
Yes, they behaved "immoraly" (bad from the pov of the masses morality) far less than catholics. Those who did were ultra-hypocrites and shocked others when it was found. There was this whole shaming culture, even among elite.
While others elite i use as examples were just proud of their different moral sets of rules that didn't apply to the masses.
But anyway as usual you want to argue in bad faith, so let's not waste time and move on
Uh wait a sec. It isn't new info that german intelligence was pretty sure it came from a lab in 2020? That's new to me. It means they had some exceptionally relevant information and they suppressed it. This wasn't something we knew before, did we?
Correct, but it's cool that governments suppress that it came from a lab, so no material new information here.
Yes, they behaved "immoraly" (bad from the pov of the masses morality) far less than catholics. Those who did were ultra-hypocrites and shocked others when it was found. There was this whole shaming culture, even among elite.While others elite i use as examples were just proud of their different moral sets of rules that didn't apply to the masses.But anyway as usual you want to
Quoting your own gibberish back at you is bad faith in la la Lucy land.
Correct, but it's cool that governments suppress that it came from a lab, so no material new information here.
The new info that they suppressed the lab leak is a very important proof of bad faith.
Because if the lab leak was the hypothesis most people considered the default one, then OF COURSE chinese-style lockdowns would never have been an option for any western country.
We wouldn't have copied any of their strategy nor take any suggestion from them nor believed any of their videos (remember the people dropping dead in the streets in china, pushed to grotesquely exaggerate the fear of covid?) nor believed any of their data (3% fatality rate remember?).
Proof of chinese cover up of the disease would have moved the whole western world against china in full, including not trusting the WHO.
(here for proof the WHO was in bed with China)
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/chi...
Basically the suppressing the fact that the lab leak was actually by far the most likely hypothesis had a domino effect of gigantic proportions, and now we know for a certainty they did that ON PURPOSE in Germany.
And that's not new info? that Germany on purpose acted to push a false propaganda to justify following anti-scientific practices spearheaded by China for the first time in the history of the world?
The new info that they suppressed the lab leak is a very important proof of bad faith.Because if the lab leak was the hypothesis most people considered the default one, then OF COURSE chinese-style lockdowns would never have been an option for any western country.We wouldn't have copied any of their strategy nor take any suggestion from them nor believed any of their videos (re
wait a minute, why would you have different response if it came from a lab or a bat?
It's like saying we know how to contain ebola but this time actually it comes from a yogurt so we need to change protocole.
Why you need to change protocole once the virus is out there?
wait a minute, why would you have different response if it came from a lab or a bat?
It's like saying we know how to contain ebola but this time actually it comes from a yogurt so we need to change protocole.
Why you need to change protocole once the virus is out there?
Because from a bat, with the breakthrough in jan, you could believe the chinese were building up their best response possible so given they were "first in line" with the problem their attempted solution, especially if you believed wuhan cases crashed down to 0 in march 2020, were simply something you might believe could work.
From the lab in november 2019, massive attempt to cover it up, spread of months once seeded, then a lot of lies about the cases, the lethality and so on, you woulnd't have believe ANYTHING AT ALL from feb on since you knew they lied to you and acted very differently from what they tried to convince you they did.
There was no protocol to lockdown in case the spanish flu came back.
Spanish flu lethality was 2% and all countries had pandemic plans and none had lockdowns at all. Schools were to be close (BRIEFLY, 4-6 weeks at most) in basically all such plans (because the spanish flu kills kids though, not to "save granma"), how to manage cases varied country by country (some had quarantines of the infected in their plans, a few quarantine of them + their strict contacts, some had no quarantines). Some had closure of big events.
Not a single one had closure of all restaurants or "work from home requirements". Not a single one had "non essential businesses get closed", not a single one had "access to beaches or parks should be closed".
So , we DID CHANGE THE PROTOCOLS BECAUSE WE BELIEVED THE CHINESE. If instead, we got told they ****ing lied to us , we wouldn't have believed them, and we would have... used the protocol, like Sweden, Japan and others did.
We changed protocols because by believing chinese data we thought it was possibly worse than the spanish flu (when it was exceptionally less dangerous as the life of a child is worth hundreds of over 80s, and covid does nothing to the under 40 in some countries, under 30 in others). We changed data because we believed their lockdowns brought cases to 0 (absoluetly no reason to believe that actually happened, do you realize it now?). They lie about the lab you have to start from the idea they almost certainly lied about *everything covid related*.
Sweden did for different reasons, Japan simply structurally never ever believes China about anything so they were immune from that
Because from a bat, with the breakthrough in jan, you could believe the chinese were building up their best response possible so given they were "first in line" with the problem their attempted solution, especially if you believed wuhan cases crashed down to 0 in march 2020, were simply something you might believe could work.From the lab in november 2019, massive attempt to cov
It's very naive to think
we DID CHANGE THE PROTOCOLS BECAUSE WE BELIEVED THE CHINESE
.
spanish flu as in 1918 flu?
