Racism And Discrimination Are Good Things.

[TheFightingPikachu]

Condemning Religious Injustice

Racism and discrimination are not good.

I agree with your main sentiment, Vermehlo, however you are being very misleading in your title here. It is in no way racism to condemn those who treat women in such a barbaric fashion, because we would have the exact same reaction if those acts were carried out by whites/blacks/asians etc. etc.

However yes, we do indeed have the right, nay, the duty to try and change the way such people and nations treat women, so long as we do so through moral and legal means. There is no greater hypocrisy than abandoning ones morals in order to force morality on another.

Tim the turtle, I'd say you nailed it! Your statements are correct. While I don't care for the wording of "discriminating against those who discriminate," we can rightly condemn some actions as truly wrong. While we shouldn't force another country to change, countries can justly take legal action against offenders even if they claim a religious reason for violating the rights of others.

Rape has NO excuse whatsoever, I don't care who you are.

This is absolutely correct. This ought to be enough to convince anyone that morality is not truly subjective. When anyone says, "all morality is subjective," they are actually being thoughtless, even cruel.

its funny how westerners speak badly about eastern religeons when they follw one.

Though I think I have an idea what western religion you are talking about, that doesn't matter. Westerners do not all follow one religion. I know I'm gonna sound like a broken record, but your quote is made of two entirely unjust stereotypes.

Wow. I thought this thread would be full of "Muslims never mistreat women," or other such politically correct falsehood.

 

[CSolarstorm]

Like I said on the very second post on this thread...if it's against the law, you step in, and that covers rape, murder, even just plain abuse. No matter what religion you follow you're subject to that right now, and that's the status quo currently. Steele is trying to make this about racism, when it's already agreed to be a matter that goes beyond race or religion.

 

[Zaralt]

There's being racist and then there are human rights. Human rights should be held above everything else and it's not being racist if you say such things as 'having sex with a woman who doesn't want you to is wrong'. Anything that brings unwanted harm upon another human being should be automatically considered wrong, no matter what religion or ethnicity. I don't think it's racist to make such a statement. What would be racist is assuming that all men who exist in the Muslim religion are terrible people and do such a thing. Making a wrongful stereotype is what truly makes something racist.

 

[ZarraWolf]

This is absolutely correct. This ought to be enough to convince anyone that morality is not truly subjective. When anyone says, "all morality is subjective," they are actually being thoughtless, even cruel.

I still believe that morality is completely subjective.

There are plenty of people who don't see rape as immoral. If everyone would agree that murder, rape, torture and abuse are unacceptable, then those things wouldn't exist.

And Zaralt... Muslim isn't a race. You would not be a racist if you discriminate against Muslims. You would be a racist if you discriminate against Semites.

 

[Tim the turtle]

I still believe that morality is completely subjective.

And what moral theory do you use to support that claim?

There are plenty of people who don't see rape as immoral. If everyone would agree that murder, rape, torture and abuse are unacceptable, then those things wouldn't exist.

Just because there are people who do not consider such things to be immoral does not in any way justify them. There is absolutely no reason to suppose that those people are correct in their views.

 

[ZarraWolf]

What reason is there to suppose your moral viewpoint are correct? And what could you possibly base universal morals on?

I'm not basing my opinion on any moral rules. I dislike certain things, I like other things. But that doesn't mean that what I like is morally right, and that what I dislike is morally wrong.

 

[Tim the turtle]

What reason is there to suppose your moral viewpoint are correct? And what could you possibly base universal morals on?

Moral theories and rational argument...

... that doesn't mean that what I like is morally right, and that what I dislike is morally wrong.

No, but it should be, and without justifcation then you have no right to defend your beliefs when someone who does have moral justification demands you change them.

 

[Tim the turtle]

What reason is there to suppose your moral viewpoint are correct? And what could you possibly base universal morals on?

Moral theories and rational argument...

... that doesn't mean that what I like is morally right, and that what I dislike is morally wrong.

No, but it should be, and without justifcation then you have no right to defend your beliefs when someone who does have moral justification demands you change them.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

OK, there is a misconception happening here. The TITLE has NO bearing on this, it was and still is a eye-grabber that works. I'm not saying that racism is good etc as I have been victim of it before.

What I'm trying to say is that is it justifiable to accept other cultures/religions when they have unsavoury practises/beliefs that hurt the rights/freedoms of others?

I believe, like others do, that there are certain rights that extend to all people no matter what gender, race, religion, sexuality etc. If some believe that it is OK wear some garment or not to eat a certain food or believe that it is bad luck to do a certain action, fine, thats cool and noone should really have to change any cultural inclination unless it infringes on the human rights and freedoms of others.

Anyway, since when was this about race?
Oh, that's right, everybody assumes that because I'm Western that I'm therefore White and therefore racist. Just to clarify, SunnyC and those who are quick to judge and are poor of reading skills, I'm not.

 

[Tim the turtle]

We know, no one's saying you're a racist, but when the title is so hilariously misleading then you've done something wrong.

 

[The_Panda]

I'd say that almost universally (well universal enough for this to be adopted in practice), racism and discrimination are absolutely horrible things. It's simply one of the most awful ways you can be insulted by another person, and mark my words it can leave a serious impact (especially when you're a child). I came here when I was very young, and most children just don't understand the idea of racial differences: I knew I couldn't speak English very well but that was really it. And then when someone a bit older than you who is slightly more aware of race or has been 'indoctrinated' by their parents makes fun of you for something that is both entirely part of your identity, but also something there is no way you can change, something you really don't understand, it is horrible, disgusting and troubling. Racism is something we should never condone, and it's as simple as that.

To be honest I don't see how questions of race, religion and culture are really relevant to the criminal justice system. A man who has killed his daughter in an 'honour killing' needs to go straight to gaol for murder. I'm not being discriminatory, or 'unaccepting' of that man's culture. It's just that the law and my person view of morality dictates that if you murder somebody, you go to gaol unless there are mitigating circumstances (of which mental illness is the only one I can actually think of). The fact that this man in question is following Sharia law just doesn't come into the equation.

I'd also suggest that we make the problem worse by saying "OH MY GOODNESS ALL THEM IMMIGRANTS ARE NOT ONLY TAKING OUR JOBS, BUT THEY ARE ALSO RAPING OUR WOMEN IN THE NAME OF ISLAM!" What the media does is not only being racist at least in implication (whereas ideally such accusations would be race neutral), but you also alienate the Muslim community. I suggest that at least half the reason some immigrants in Australia have problems integrating (not just Muslims) is that programmes such as Today Tonight spend an inordinate amount of time creating an image that immigrants have problems integrating into society. It's the preconception that does the most damage, as it alienates people who are already the most marginalised, creating an extreme degree of frustration and indeed fostering extremism. Do you get what I mean? Attitudes like those that Vermehlo Steele is advocating aren't just unnecessarily racist, they actually cause a large degree of harm. Arguably more harm for the health of Australian society in general than the actions of the supposed 'immigrant thugs' themselves.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

Please comrade, don't get me started on our sensationalist media (save for SBS, ABC and The Australian)

Attitudes like those that Vermehlo Steele is advocating aren't just unnecessarily racist, they actually cause a large degree of harm. Arguably more harm for the health of Australian society in general than the actions of the supposed 'immigrant thugs' themselves.

So, I'm racist for saying we shouldn't accept those (immigrant or not) who don't follow our core beliefs of equality and freedom because they are of a different culture? I don't like that I'm [insert negative adjective here] just beacuse I don't like the fact that people hide behind religion/culture to do evil and get away with it. If one more person assumes the title of this thread is my belief, then you an idiot and you are arrogant for assuming I'm KKK member or a Nazi purely because of a title and where I live.

 

[CSolarstorm]

Oh, that's right, everybody assumes that because I'm Western that I'm therefore White and therefore racist. Just to clarify, SunnyC and those who are quick to judge and are poor of reading skills, I'm not.

Hey, leave me out of your neon blue rant. I'm sorry if you assume that I believed you're a white racist, but honestly I never thought or said such a thing.

"...but you said -!"

Steele is trying to make this about racism, when it's already agreed to be a matter that goes beyond race or religion.

I'm sorry. I meant "Steele is trying to make this a question about tolerance, but this has more to do with the law, which is a matter that goes beyond race or religion." Basically I agree with what Tim the Turtle said.

(And who are you calling quick to judge...you're the one who judged me for three solid pages as a paranoid insomniac. 0_o)

I am mostly "white" myself, and I think people cry racist way too much.

I'm just pointing out, those who don't agree with freedom and human rights are still bound to the law which advocates freedom and human rights. And how far do human rights go? Isn't it a facet of human rights that you don't have to believe in human rights? Or is the one restriction, the one right you don't have, to believe that people shouldn't have human rights?

It's an interesting question. Personally I believe people have the right to believe that other people shouldn't have rights, as long as they don't pursue that goal within our land where we say everyone should have human rights. I don't think we should export people based on their beliefs, even if they are abherrant beliefs, because that would be violating the very human rights that we are expecting of them, and that gives a contradictory message.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

Some African dic-tators believe that human rights is a concept of those silly Imperialists of Whiteland. Funny, but that is the mindest. Some Asian and Ukrainian and Russian people consider democracy to be a waste of time and a inneficient process (Can't say I blame them)

I was a very hypocritical I suppose SunnyC, it's just that It feels like everyone was attacking me for the wrong reason. That all were saying "OMFG!!1! STWEELE IS A RSCIST FUUL CASE HE SIAS RACCSIT!!1!"

On one of your lines, the human rights being a choice. It's interesting, but the fact is that people of China or [insert African/Middle-Eastern country here] don't have a choice. Their terms are dictated by a bunch of old, senile men in a luxury government building the size of a stadium. Women in Sharia Law don't choose wether or not they can lose their independence to man who probably has other wives. If the people of Afghanistan, Turkey, Indonesia and Iraq (the only Islamic democracies) choose Sharia Law, that is their choice. But alot of people such as a muslim woman who is in a very strict muslim family or people under a dictatorship simply cannot choose their fate.

 

[Antiyonder]

To be more precise, should we Westerners tolerate other cultures/religions/ideologies if they uphold beliefs that are aginst ours? For example, should we welcome and tolerate muslims who believe that men are allowed to have sex with women whenever they want, even if the woman dosn't want to?

I believe a person should be free to do anything as long as they don't deprive others of their freedom (murder, rape and assault).

If a person wants to drink themself to death (not literal death mind you) fine. If a drunk person wants to drive a public vehicle like a bus with passengers or engaging in drunk driving, not fine as it deprives other drivers of their freedom to be safe.

To apply this to racism. We can't really force people to dismiss their racial attitude, but if they show negative behavior due to racism (denying payment to someone based on skin color), they should be punished.

 

[Nidogod]

What I'm trying to say is that is it justifiable to accept other cultures/religions when they have unsavoury practises/beliefs that hurt the rights/freedoms of others?

Yes, if it falls within the boundaries of the law. Otherwise, no. People put too much emphasis on religion and morality, which when discussing what someone can and cannot do, are both no better than plugging your ears and yelling SLIPPERY SLOPE.

When someone's native culture/religion interferes with the laws of the area they are residing in, I could care less how sacred it is, illegal means illegal. As a human race, we need to think long and hard about traditions and decide if they are truly worth sticking with, simply because one's ancestors did it.

 

[BynineB]

I support following your religion and the law.

The law comes first.

 

[Vermehlo_Steele]

You guys are aware that Western Law came from Christianity, right?

So, by your logic Sharia Law is acceptable because it is a legal system?
(Not that I support SL, but that's your logic)

If laws were introduced forcing people who were of different ethinicty to be killed or enslaved, then I suppose you two would obey it?

 

[CSolarstorm]

You guys are aware that Western Law came from Christianity, right?

So, by your logic Sharia Law is acceptable because it is a legal system?
(Not that I support SL, but that's your logic)

If laws were introduced forcing people who were of different ethinicty to be killed or enslaved, then I suppose you two would obey it?

We don't really need to answer that, it's rather obvious that nobody here would follow a law based on ethnic cleansing. We're not depending on the law, per se, we are saying that the law is perfect as is. That's what I see most of us posting, at least. I don't see anyone talking about whether Sharia Law is acceptable or not, just that people need to obey Western laws that say you can't murder, rape, etc.

 

[CSolarstorm]

You guys are aware that Western Law came from Christianity, right?

So, by your logic Sharia Law is acceptable because it is a legal system?
(Not that I support SL, but that's your logic)

If laws were introduced forcing people who were of different ethinicty to be killed or enslaved, then I suppose you two would obey it?

We don't really need to answer that, it's rather obvious that nobody here would follow a law based on ethnic cleansing. We're not depending on the law, per se, we are saying that the law is perfect as is. That's what I see most of us posting, at least. I don't see anyone talking about whether Sharia Law is acceptable or not, just that people need to obey Western laws that say you can't murder, rape, etc. In other words, when Sharia oversteps Western law, that's when things become a problem.