Thread: Outrage as Egypt plans 'farewell intercourse law'

Originally Posted by f_socialism

Why would you quote my question then not answer it and then ask me a question presumably expecting me to answer it?

I'm trying to get into that bubble, it is very tough, you proved it with your response...

Originally Posted by SiliconMagician

First off.. "freedom" is not necessarily synonymous with "democracy". Get it? Many on the left would support a "benevolent dictatorship".. like Chavez for instance.

A bad society is a bad society, whether under a dicatatorship or a democracy.

The idea is to support a society that is least damaging to the USA's interests. As an American, I could care less how other people rule each other as long as they aren't screwing with us and our allies, and that includes Israel.

Realpolitik is evil. You are effectively saying "I don't want to live under a dictatorship where my family could be disappeared and murdered at any time, but if it serves my interest I'll happily fund and arm a dictator over you who will murder your family."

Or to be more dramatic: "I don't beat and rape my kids and I won't stand for it! Neither does my friend Israel. But his roommate Egypt does so I keep giving him cash and condoms so he'll stick to his own kids instead of my friend's."

Originally Posted by Serlak2007

1. So if 50 people decide to declare their sovereignty - this is great. But if those people decide to impose laws they seem fit - they are evil? You are very confused my friend....

2. LOL, so us raping women is good - them raping women is very bad..... Typical conservative.

1. Imposing laws that violate the sovereign rights of others is wrong. Full Stop.

2. Hey guys! Here this? I'm a Conservative now! Awesome right?

Here what your pea brain seems not to be getting: I oppose both. If one doesn't see the world through 100% partisan eyes like you seem to, you'd see that it isn't a mutually exclusive debate. The correct stance is to oppose both rapes. All rape in fact.

Originally Posted by Questerr

Why would I? In context it still doesn't say what you claim it does.

Islamism is no less a dictatorship than Mubarak's. Both are evil and should be opposed.

Have you condemned this practice in the thread yet?


_

Originally Posted by Serlak2007

I'm trying to get into that bubble, it is very tough, you proved it with your response...

Perhaps, instead of "trying to get into that bubble" you could actually address the debate the topic of the thread. That is, after all, the whole point of this forum.

Originally Posted by DonGlock26

Have you condemned this practice in the thread yet?


_

I called it abhorrent. Is that good enough?

Isn't the default position that a person does support something unless they say they support it?

Originally Posted by Questerr

1. Imposing laws that violate the sovereign rights of others is wrong. Full Stop.

2. Hey guys! Here this? I'm a Conservative now! Awesome right?

Here what your pea brain seems not to be getting: I oppose both. If one doesn't see the world through 100% partisan eyes like you seem to, you'd see that it isn't a mutually exclusive debate. The correct stance is to oppose both rapes. All rape in fact.

Sorry for calling you conservative, you acted like one lol. I don't really want to go into sovereignty of right with you, I just think that if government does something and people don't revolt - that government acts on the behalf of its citizens. Did it ever occurred to you that maybe those egyptians DO want to have sex with their dead wives?

Originally Posted by f_socialism

Perhaps, instead of "trying to get into that bubble" you could actually address the debate the topic of the thread. That is, after all, the whole point of this forum.

That is what I'm trying to do. So my question to you is why are you upset about egyptians having sex with their dead wives and not upset about live women being sexually assaulted by ultra-sound?

Originally Posted by Serlak2007

Sorry for calling you conservative, you acted like one lol. I don't really want to go into sovereignty of right with you, I just think that if government does something and people don't revolt - that government acts on the behalf of its citizens. Did it ever occurred to you that maybe those egyptians DO want to have sex with their dead wives?

Even if that is case, the sex would stand as a violation of personal sovereignty. This is much like how 99% of the population no matter how much they want to cannot vote away the rights of the remaining 1%. People has inalienable rights. Those do not end at death.

Originally Posted by Questerr

Even if that is case, the sex would stand as a violation of personal sovereignty. This is much like how 99% of the population no matter how much they want to cannot vote away the rights of the remaining 1%. People has inalienable rights. Those do not end at death.

Would you consider burying the dead as a violation of personal liberty of the dead?