Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You needed be so jumpy. It is one example of a bad thing. I don't claim it to be normative of India.Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:Can you please get off the India thing!
My humble request.
I agreeBorn_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:People, can anyone tolerate the extermination of the aboriginies of Australia?
Can anyone tolerate the burning of witches at the stakes in the middle ages?
Can anyone tolerate the wiping-off of native Americans in America?
If some one cannot tolerate the above three, he will also not tolerate Suttee.
Montalban said:You needed be so jumpy. It is one example of a bad thing. I don't claim it to be normative of India.
I agree
Why is that a bad thing?Lokisdottir said:I believe I've already said that we shouldn't tolerate any practice by which people get hurt or killed. And no, being non-Christian does NOT count as such a practice.
So how do you decide, considering you don't believe anyone can tell you what is right or wrong? What basis do you have for determining what's right or wrong?Lokisdottir said:Also, being a tolerant person does NOT mean tolerating everything.
Do you want me to put a disclaimer any time I mention it?Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:I know you are not generalizing Suttee to be nominative of India.
I know you are just giving an example.
But people here should know that India is a progressive forward-looking nation which ditches obsolete practices and moves forward in time.
Most people don't even know that it's particular to India. Most times I mention it I simply state that it's a practice of throwing a widow on a funeral pyre. The fact that we both know it was practiced there is different from me advertising "Guess what used to happen in India..."Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:Your repeated insistence on giving Suttee as an example paints a barbaric picture to India for those who don't know anything about India.
It's not a stereotype, we both know it wasn't normative. I never claimed it was, you accept that.Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:Your intentions are right but to me it looks like:
- The use of negative stereotypes and disseminating false information.
The context is to do with toleration of horrid practices. That is a horrid practice, we both agree. And we both agree it should have ended.Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:
- Providing factually correct information in inappropriate contexts or out of context.
I simply mention it.Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:
- Over-emphasizing rare or minor aspects that are negative or sensational.
Note I don't tie it into India. Most people wouldn't know it has anything to do with a particular place. You are emphasising it's "Indian-ness".Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:It is my right to clear people's misconceptions that are caused due to your well-intentioned examples.
Self-harm is bad. Suttee was wrong. I don't need a Christian to tell me Suttee is wrong after consulting his Holy Book.Montalban said:Why is that a bad thing?
What if she wants to be thrown on the pyre? Is self-harm good?
So how do you decide, considering you don't believe anyone can tell you what is right or wrong? What basis do you have for determining what's right or wrong?
Montalban said:Why is that a bad thing?
What if she wants to be thrown on the pyre? Is self-harm good?
So how do you decide, considering you don't believe anyone can tell you what is right or wrong? What basis do you have for determining what's right or wrong?
All you've done is stated that it is bad. I ask 'why?'Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:Self-harm is bad. Suttee was wrong. I don't need a Christian to tell me Suttee is wrong after consulting his Holy Book.
That means prior to the 1860s slavery was 'good', but after that, it was 'bad'. And those people who tried to change from one system to the other... conversely they were 'trying to impose their beliefs on the majority' prior to the change, but were hereos of social justice, afterwards.Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:The basis for determining what is right or wrong does not exist in a religious book. Right or wrong is for the society to decide according to the times.
That raise the next question, instead of knowing wether something is 'right' or 'wrong', how do you know when not to make a stand?Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:For me, I don't have a stand on whether today's pornography in America is right or wrong.
Good for you. (I think - 'good' being such a relative word)Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:But I simply cannot say that I can't tolerate such practices and burn them on stakes.
You've done the same as the previous poster, just affirming a belief that it is bad. Why is it bad?Lokisdottir said:No; it is not right to knowingly harm oneself.
Why is your common sense a good determiner of what is right or wrong?Lokisdottir said:As for how I decide right and wrong, I use common sense. If it harms anybody (including yourself) or deprives them of what's rightfully theirs, it is wrong. It's not quite as simple as that, but that's what it basically boils down to.
In this case, yes, I would both accept and tolerate. Who am I to interfere with someone's religious beliefs, if she makes the choice to harm herself?It was the religious practice by some where a widow was thrown on the funeral pyre of her late husband; so she could join her in the next life.
You want to make a difference between 'acceptance' and 'toleration'. Would you 'accept' it? Would you 'tolerate' it?
Ignoratio elenchi, package deal, & false dilemma.Obviously you don't vote, or petition for changes.
And if you see something going wrong, you turn the other way.
As a Christian I must warn that if you are truly watching pornagraphy you are in grave danger. It is unclean ( pornia - greek for unclean). God can not be with sin. This is not religion but truth.Born_to_Lose_Live_to_Win said:If I want to watch pornography I watch it.
If I want to act as a porn-star I act.
What right has someone got to stop me from doing that?
No one should act as the "moral police" of the world.
What she said. I know my Gods. I'll trust them over human beings any day.I've met my Gods and spoken with them. Tell me why I should trust some anonymous guy on an Internet forum instead of my own real-life experiences.
thirsty said:As a Christian I must warn that if you are truly watching pornagraphy you are in grave danger. It is unclean ( pornia - greek for unclean). God can not be with sin. This is not religion but truth.
Bevlina said:I think we are talking about Religious Tolerance here. Nothing more, nothing less.
And, my belief is that we should be able to be gracious enough to accept the fact that the other person has a belief, and leave it at that. We are never going to change the world. But, we can always try to understand those in the world and live side by side with people in peace without trying to be controlling, or nasty in any way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?