Originally posted by jpmail
I so wish that one day all relgions will be the preserve of the individual and totaly seperate from goverment and local laws.

Many of us share that wish. While I disagree with what is going on in that video, those kids should respect it if they are going to that beach. The authorities could at least put up better signage though, citing examples of what not to do, etc...

Crazy world we live in.

Originally posted by jpmail
I so wish that one day all relgions will be the preserve of the individual and totaly seperate from goverment and local laws.

I too yearn for this day. I am tired of religion being applied to government actions, and tired of religion being shoved down the collective throats of the world. Don't you all see where this is going? A war between Islam and Christianity is brewing. I think we should find them all a nice, private place, and let them fight it out. Naked, with no weapons save what they can pick up from the ground. I guess when they all kill each other, us Pagans will have it wrapped up then, huh? Only thing is, we don't try to convert, and never threaten. We do, however, vote.

Originally posted by autowrench
I think we should find them all a nice, private place, and let them fight it out. Naked, with no weapons save what they can pick up from the ground.................Only thing is, we don't try to convert, and never threaten.

separating religious believers from non-religous believers? sounds like a threat to me.

leaving that aside, most governments routinely enforce lots and lots of laws that are related to morality. what makes one stupid set of laws better than another?

all cultures have codes to cover acceptable public behavior.

if it's unacceptable to you that people on a beach should be told that their clothes are too revealing then is it also unacceptable to you that you can't walk down the street naked?

if it's unacceptable that beach huts should have a sign saying "respect sharia law" then is it also unacceptable that a bar in your home town must have a sign up saying "no smoking"?

if it's unacceptable for a man and woman to be told to sit 3' apart, is it also unacceptable that they should be told they can't have sex?

The thing is.....where do we draw the line in the sand?

When does humanity say, "Enough? You're actions aren't acceptable?"

Yes, its societal standards. But if you want to change a society, then you have to speak out. Make yourself heard.

Lots of folks who do that will hear the standard reply, "It's their culture, let them have it."

It was the American culture to keep blacks "separate but equal". But some brave folks spoke out against that, and things changed.

Who decides what the new moral code should be? Just a guess, but if you have to use a gun to enforce your viewpoint it might not be you......

I'm pretty quick to call Shenanigans on religion, but did you watch the video you posted?

Those fellas didn't seem terribly unreasonable. They seemed to want to ensure that everyone knew the law and was reminded often so no sneak attack could happen.

Personally, without incriminating evidence, this is a non-issue for me. It's their country. Let's em have it and run it their way.

The UK police as a whole except for the armed responce unit manage to do there jobs without guns so no its not prudent.

Use of force to imposse a goverments will is not morally justifiable just because its the only tool they have.

To overthrow there goverment would mean major political reform which is very hard to do without bloodshed and even then the populace is not armed so its a one sided fight.

I pointed out myself that eating babies was unlikley but it does not change my point that just because its there country anything they do is acceptable.

Take that down to the level of your next door neighbour. Say he beats his wife and kids but does in on his privatly owned land inside his own home, does that make it right because its his way of doing things? more so is it ok because is does not impact on you?

I like your idea of education and help for goverments that want to improve but what do you do when the goverment does not want to change the status quo but the population does and they have no means of taking on there goverment.

[edit on 11-2-2010 by jpmail]

Originally posted by jpmail
The UK police as a whole except for the armed responce unit manage to do there jobs without guns so no its not prudent.

While I wouldn't take that one as the rule, it's the countries prerogative. The fact that they have guns is a non-issue.

Use of force to imposse a goverments will is not morally justifiable just because its the only tool they have.

This is not a defensible position, at all. Governments use force all the time, and many times I'd suggest you think it's just fine. By the way, because a government uses force (which they all do by definition), does not mean it is oppressive.

To overthrow there goverment would mean major political reform which is very hard to do without bloodshed and even then the populace is not armed so its a one sided fight.

I don't know the gun laws in the area, but of course revolt is bloody. They normally are. The point, is you either risk it, live with it, or try to adjust it over time (normally long) from the inside.

I pointed out myself that eating babies was unlikley but it does not change my point that just because its there country anything they do is acceptable.

I'm not saying I think many things nations do domestically is what I would consider "acceptable", but it's not really my call to make unless it seriously affects my nation (which it doesn't in this case).

Take that down to the level of your next door neighbour. Say he beats his wife and kids but does in on his privatly owned land inside his own home, does that make it right because its his way of doing things? more so is it ok because is does not impact on you?

No, it doesn't, but that doesn't mean I need to break down the door, claim his house under my domain and correct the situation. Additionally, the if the wife doesn't leave I certainly have less pity for her.

This, however, is not a congruent argument since we have police and laws that apply to that level. This is untrue of nations.

I like your idea of education and help for goverments that want to improve but what do you do when the goverment does not want to change the status quo but the population does and they have no means of taking on there goverment.

They always have means. Guns do not always equal success, and very often overwhelming public opinion being ignored isn't something governments can stand against for long.

Suffering is tolerated as long as suffering it tolerable. Obviously it is tolerable.

Welcome to the REAL enforcers of the NWO...It isn't who you thought it would be is it?