The Civil Discussion Thread

Fox Mulder said:
I think the firing squad should be a voluntary option for all criminals convicted of capital crimes.
Click to expand...
Okay so this is slightly less serious but if I'm going to be executed firing squad is how I want it. Easily superior to hanging, electric chair, euthanasia.

And it's arguably the most humane method,
2257 said:
is life inherently valuable
Click to expand...
I like to think that it is. If life isn't inherently valuable, then how do we define a valuable life over a worthless one? Who's going to define that? What happens to the people whose lives are devalued?
 
pluto sucks

I see your point, but I think what was actually meant is that human life is inherently valuable.
 
Yes, but why then support capital punishment if you think human life is inherently valuable?

Also, I take pains to make the distinction between a human thing and a person. Just because something is alive doesn't make it worth preserving. A fetus is a clump of cells with no brain activity despite being, maybe, a developing human. The woman biologically has most of the control of the fate of this entity, so I think it would make sense if the laws respect that, especially if the woman cannot or does not want to support a child in the future.

This is the reason I oppose capital punishment but support abortion. One involves a person capable of thought and emotion (or had been if the person is brain-damaged; the person probably has relatives and friends though), the other involves a potential, but still simplistic human entity that is mostly dependent on the woman to survive.
 
Because those humans took other humans' lives. Granted, an effective system of life imprisonment without parole would be better (and even possibly cheaper), but while that could work in more developed countries (to call them somehow), in countries with not such effective jail systems, there are often escapes, bribes to get someone out, and the list goes one.

The difference is the murderer has committed a major crime, a fetus' has done nothing.
 
Well, the saying goes, "if an eye for an eye works, everyone would be blind". The human took other humans' lives, but this person probably has familial and friend ties, and I think it's a bit tragic as well for someone who has the urge to kill other people. Considering that most people who are executed have economic troubles, it further exemplifies it. Finally, the executioners themselves get hallucinations and even bouts of PTSD so it's an emotional burden for everyone involved. I think it's more of a psychological burden than abortion.

In poorer countries, I'd advocate a more effective government and more effective jail systems rather than capital punishment, but I understand that that may be much more difficult to achieve because it's pretty much an overhaul.
 
Yes, we can define lives as more valuable than others, definitely. If I had the choice between saving my mother or a stranger, I would save my mom without any shadow of a doubt, and I wouldn't expect anyone to question me. In my opinion, it is indeed entirely possible and justifiable to choose between two lives; but, when applied directly to abortion, it isn't always one or the other, so when both can live (and it doesn't fall in the exceptions that can't be mentioned), I think it's entirely justifiable to ban abortions.
 
Fox Mulder said:
I think the firing squad should be a voluntary option for all criminals convicted of capital crimes.
Click to expand...
Fun Fact Herman Goering killed himself partially because they refused to execute him by firing squad like a soldier.
 
Hobbes said:
Yes, we can define lives as more valuable than others, definitely. If I had the choice between saving my mother or a stranger, I would save my mom without any shadow of a doubt, and I wouldn't expect anyone to question me. In my opinion, it is indeed entirely possible and justifiable to choose between two lives; but, when applied directly to abortion, it isn't always one or the other, so when both can live (and it doesn't fall in the exceptions that can't be mentioned), I think it's entirely justifiable to ban abortions.
Click to expand...
But what about the conditions after birth? Life might be valuable, but everyone who grows up deserves a quality life, right? If the couple wants an abortion to alleviate the huge burden of having a child or wait until later to have a child, wouldn't that be a wise choice?
 
The couple doesn't have any authority to decide if the child should die because it would be a burden to them.


On another topic we all may have more common ground, nationalism! I think it's quite dumb, to be honest. I can understand being proud of the culture of the country you were born in, even rooting for national teams, but those people who blindly defend everything their country does and go around saying their country is the best at everything it does? Nope, I don't get it.
 
Hobbes said:
The couple doesn't have any authority to decide if the child should die because it would be a burden to them.


On another topic we all may have more common ground, nationalism! I think it's quite dumb, to be honest. I can understand being proud of the culture of the country you were born in, even rooting for national teams, but those people who blindly defend everything their country does and go around saying their country is the best at everything it does? Nope, I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Then who does? Would you rather the child gets immediately sent to adoption?

I don't get nationalism either. How can I like the U.S. when it has dismal numbers in those who accept evolution, is crazy about gun control, and has one of the crappiest health care in the developed world?
 
Mario Party Δ said:
I don't get nationalism either. How can I like the U.S. when it has dismal numbers in those who accept evolution, is crazy about gun control, and has one of the crappiest health care in the developed world?
Click to expand...
I enjoyed reading through this, personally. Take it as you will.

I certainly don't think that NOTHING IS WRONG IN AMERICA, OBEY PEASANTS, but there's still a great deal of good that we're just completely used to since we haven't known anything else.
2257 said:
Hobbes said:
I see your point, but I think what was actually meant is that human life is inherently valuable.
Click to expand...

maybe, but there's differential valuation of human beings too. in fact, we've already all agreed on that

so far nobody is arguing that, when there is a choice between saving a woman's life or saving her fetus's life, there's any real choice to be made. we've all decided that the woman is more valuable. but clearly the fetus isn't somehow less alive than the woman, so the fact that we can ascribe different values to the two of them shows that the value they carry is not a function of their aliveness, but of something else entirely
Click to expand...
Fair point. If we're dealing with life vs life cases, then we may have to choose one based on other factors.

I'm not sure how that holds up in circumstances that aren't life-or-death scenarios, though. Is aborting a fetus that's "alive" okay if the mother doesn't have the financial means to raise a child? That's not comparing two lives.
Hobbes said:
Mario Party Δ said:
Would you rather the child gets immediately sent to adoption?
Click to expand...
Yes.
Click to expand...
Adoption seems preferable to death, if we're talking about an "alive" fetus.
 
^ Where do you find all these good articles? I'm honestly curious.

I'll try and make a tl;dr for people who don't want to read it: basically it's saying nationalism is a trait of the Red Tribe (conservative stereotype group) and it's a good thing when you're part of the Red Tribe and a very bad thing if you're a part of the Blue Tribe (the liberal stereotype group). Reds like it because everyone in their group likes it, and also because the Blues (their enemies) don't like it; in the same vein Blues hate it because everyone in their group hates it, and also because the Reds (their enemies) like it.
The Red Tribe is most classically typified by conservative political beliefs, strong evangelical religious beliefs, creationism, opposing gay marriage, owning guns, eating steak, drinking Coca-Cola, driving SUVs, watching lots of TV, enjoying American football, getting conspicuously upset about terrorists and commies, marrying early, divorcing early, shouting “USA IS NUMBER ONE!!!”, and listening to country music.

The Blue Tribe is most classically typified by liberal political beliefs, vague agnosticism, supporting gay rights, thinking guns are barbaric, eating arugula, drinking fancy bottled water, driving Priuses, reading lots of books, being highly educated, mocking American football, feeling vaguely like they should like soccer but never really being able to get into it, getting conspicuously upset about sexists and bigots, marrying later, constantly pointing out how much more civilized European countries are than America, and listening to “everything except country”.

(There is a partly-formed attempt to spin off a Grey Tribe typified by libertarian political beliefs, Dawkins-style atheism, vague annoyance that the question of gay rights even comes up, eating paleo, drinking Soylent, calling in rides on Uber, reading lots of blogs, calling American football “sportsball”, getting conspicuously upset about the War on Drugs and the NSA, and listening to filk – but for our current purposes this is a distraction and they can safely be considered part of the Blue Tribe most of the time)
Click to expand...

If that makes no sense then too bad, so sad; go read the article.
 
The thing that annoys me the most are the people who get irrationally mad if you say you're not proud to be American/Mexican/Canadian/Whatever. So what if you like another country better than yours? That shouldn't earn you so much shit.
 
Going by the thoughts from that article, it would mean that they're not exactly mad about you not being patriotic; rather, they've started to identify you as part of the other tribe, the group that isn't patriotic.

Keep in mind that this article was written with America in mind, though; there might be different kinds of "tribes" in other countries, or the analogy could simply not apply.
 
I do like America, but I do also like most other countries in the world. The only ones I don't like are, like, the fundamentalist or the women-hating ones. Or both.
 
I think America is rad. It's my favorite country and I love it here. It would take extreme circumstances to make me "hate" my country.
 
I have a very difficult time actively disliking other countries, unless it's ISIS. It's understandable if you dislike countries that do things you don't agree with, but I rarely do, since it's counteractive to do so and generally isn't even what is actually meant by the statement 'I dislike [country]'. What disliking a country generally means is that you dislike the current government and/or culture. I find myself very indifferent towards foreign affairs like this, unless it's very dangerous propaganda. I still feel hopeful for the countries whose government decides to spread dangerous propaganda, in hopes of that it will stop eventually. Examples of countries like this would be Russia (the Crimean involvement is still very deplorable, but I remain hopeful that it'll eventually end and learn from its mistakes), China and North Korea.
 
2257 said:
Javelin said:
^ Where do you find all these good articles? I'm honestly curious.
Click to expand...

haha, i don't really remember? it's just that when i happen to read something that seems insightful i usually remember it. i didnt even realise i had posted articles before now
Click to expand...
I just remember you posting a really good article that had something called "Ostracizers are Evil" or something awhile back, and then you have this one.

What's next? : P
Pi said:
I have a very difficult time actively disliking other countries, unless it's ISIS. It's understandable if you dislike countries that do things you don't agree with, but I rarely do, since it's counteractive to do so and generally isn't even what is actually meant by the statement 'I dislike [country]'. What disliking a country generally means is that you dislike the current government and/or culture. I find myself very indifferent towards foreign affairs like this, unless it's very dangerous propaganda. I still feel hopeful for the countries whose government decides to spread dangerous propaganda, in hopes of that it will stop eventually. Examples of countries like this would be Russia (the Crimean involvement is still very deplorable, but I remain hopeful that it'll eventually end and learn from its mistakes), China and North Korea.
Click to expand...
I personally haven't seen anything to discredit the Crimean elections. Seems to me more like the West just can't believe that anyone would want to join Russia.

I certainly don't support Russia on everything (or even most things), but there's definitely a lingering Cold War bias against Russia from the West; I seem to recall hearing that Russia recently pressed a claim for Arctic territory that's completely within their rights under the UN but the US complained anyways.
 
Javelin said:
Pi said:
I have a very difficult time actively disliking other countries, unless it's ISIS. It's understandable if you dislike countries that do things you don't agree with, but I rarely do, since it's counteractive to do so and generally isn't even what is actually meant by the statement 'I dislike [country]'. What disliking a country generally means is that you dislike the current government and/or culture. I find myself very indifferent towards foreign affairs like this, unless it's very dangerous propaganda. I still feel hopeful for the countries whose government decides to spread dangerous propaganda, in hopes of that it will stop eventually. Examples of countries like this would be Russia (the Crimean involvement is still very deplorable, but I remain hopeful that it'll eventually end and learn from its mistakes), China and North Korea.
Click to expand...
I personally haven't seen anything to discredit the Crimean elections. Seems to me more like the West just can't believe that anyone would want to join Russia.

I certainly don't support Russia on everything (or even most things), but there's definitely a lingering Cold War bias against Russia from the West; I seem to recall hearing that Russia recently pressed a claim for Arctic territory that's completely within their rights under the UN but the US complained anyways.
Click to expand...
I apologise for being unclear with my wording. What I meant was initiating the Crimean crisis to begin with (although this is debatable as well — and I don't trust many sources on this one). I get your point, though.

On the topic of a lingering Cold War bias against Russia from the West, I must share something that happened during the last Eurovision Song Contest. Basically, every time Russia's song, which was a somewhat decent song about peace, got points, the audience booed like crazy. Eventually, they had to use anti-booing technology to muzzle the booing to the best of their abilities. Since the Eurovision Song Contest is apolitical, the hosts of the show also reminded everyone when 25% of the countries had voted that, indeed, the Eurovision Song Contest is apolitical, and that only the songs mattered. The booing still prevailed throughout the rest of the show, but it's definitely noteworthy that something like the Eurovision Song Contest had to adjust for something only affected by political agendas and the like, when it is supposed to be apolitical.
 
Javelin said:
Mario Party Δ said:
I don't get nationalism either. How can I like the U.S. when it has dismal numbers in those who accept evolution, is crazy about gun control, and has one of the crappiest health care in the developed world?
Click to expand...
I enjoyed reading through this, personally. Take it as you will.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. I do have to say America has its perks, but in a lot of aspects, I really want it to have universal healthcare. No country is perfect, I guess. I like Europe and America, to be honest.

I think the cost of living in Europe (such as France) is generally higher, although I think it has a higher standard of living thanks to mandated minimum 4-5 week paid vacations (I think in U.S. you're lucky to have 2 weeks).
 
Pi said:
What disliking a country generally means is that you dislike the current government and/or culture.
Click to expand...
THIS.

I'll say it openly, why not. I actually like the US better than Mexico. People give me shit all the time for saying that, but they don't even want to listen to arguments. There are many people worldwide who say they "hate everything to do with the US", while they listen to an American pop singer on their phone from a California-based company. Those comments saying you hate everything about a country are the most ignorant one can make, in my opinion. Say you hate the government, yes. Maybe even the culture. But to me it's the epitome of intolerance when someone says that.

Mario Party Δ said:
I think the cost of living in Europe (such as France) is generally higher, although I think it has a higher standard of living thanks to mandated minimum 4-5 week paid vacations (I think in U.S. you're lucky to have 2 weeks).
Click to expand...
I'm definitely not a French citizen but I lived there for a year so I think I can give my opinion. The cost of living is much more expensive than in other countries with less welfare systems. Systems are extremely bureaucratic and the incredibly lax work policies have put its economy into a stagnant state.

Higher standards of living? Sure, but a very high cost. For a newcomer in the country, the mere costs of social security, mandatory insurances, additional taxes, and more, can be very burdensome.

On that point, I actually prefer living here than there.
 
Hobbes said:
I'm definitely not a French citizen but I lived there for a year so I think I can give my opinion. The cost of living is much more expensive than in other countries with less welfare systems. Systems are extremely bureaucratic and the incredibly lax work policies have put its economy into a stagnant state.

Higher standards of living? Sure, but a very high cost. For a newcomer in the country, the mere costs of social security, mandatory insurances, additional taxes, and more, can be very burdensome.

On that point, I actually prefer living here than there.
Click to expand...
Exactly, higher standards of living come with a cost. That's a downside. But if I had a choice, I'd go with a smaller income and more modest living, but with better government nets like social security, job security, etc. compared to a bigger income but a more convoluted healthcare. I think people like it when it's guaranteed. Also, I just have a soft spot for a lot of things French (other than nationalism) simply because of my heritage.

But I love SoCal too!

I think U.S. is better off than Mexico IMO although I don't live in your country so I'm not certain and I don't know if I'll offend you or not. I like France a lot (I really like its culture and language and its secular nature), but it's highly nationalistic sometimes (such as during Charlie Hebdo), but my maternal ties are within the Alsace-Lorraine region, which isn't as nationalistic thanks to the shifting borders between Germany and France.

I think it's American to criticize America when appropriate. After all, it's a fundamental Constitutional right. Hell, I think reasonable criticism is healthy and it's sad that there are a lot of countries that don't allow certain criticism.
 
Alsace <3 <3 <3

It may not be French-nationalistic, but it certainly has a very strong Alsatian identity (I don't know about Lorraine, however). Some people even refuse to speak French (granted, only a few, but they exist).

That is one thing to be admired about the US, freedom of speech. This would get you jailed in many countries.

EDIT 2: nvm, it's not even a necessary image to link
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back