Locking posts because someone disagrees.

This is for discussions about news, politics, sports, other games, culture, philosophy etc.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

umeu wrote:displacement is indeed higher, the number i mentioned was people who left syria. the 11 million you cite also includes people displaced inside syria. 5 million fled to outside syria is a number that doesnt seem that strange to me, and isnt so far from what i said. perhaps they are more up to date numbers. i havent really spent much effort in looking them up. 5m is still around 20% most of them however are in neighbouring countries.
the numbers about ww2 are from wikipedia.

Well you could post the source of your numbers, I'm not gonna search the whole wiki to find where you found those numbers. I find it hard to believe 60 million Europeans left the continent during WW2 and relocated to Syria and Iran. When those countries had even less population back then.

But I think now you're going to backpedal and say you were talking about people who left homes, not people who took refuge in Syria during WW2. When the original argument was about refugees and how many relocated in the Middle east.

i havent really spent much effort in looking them up

But you make definitive and dramatic moral judgements based on numbers you "haven't really spent much time looking up". :hehe:
User avatar
Netherland Antilles Laurence Drake
Jaeger
Posts: 2687
Joined: Dec 25, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Laurence Drake »

Dolan wrote:
umeu wrote:displacement is indeed higher, the number i mentioned was people who left syria. the 11 million you cite also includes people displaced inside syria. 5 million fled to outside syria is a number that doesnt seem that strange to me, and isnt so far from what i said. perhaps they are more up to date numbers. i havent really spent much effort in looking them up. 5m is still around 20% most of them however are in neighbouring countries.
the numbers about ww2 are from wikipedia.

Well you could post the source of your numbers, I'm not gonna search the whole wiki to find where you found those numbers. I find it hard to believe 60 million Europeans left the continent during WW2 and relocated to Syria and Iran. When those countries had even less population back then.

But I think now you're going to backpedal and say you were talking about people who left homes, not people who took refuge in Syria during WW2. When the original argument was about refugees and how many relocated in the Middle east.

i havent really spent much effort in looking them up

But you make definitive and dramatic moral judgements based on numbers you "haven't really spent much time looking up". :hehe:

Image
Top quality poster.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by lejend »

gibson wrote:
lejend wrote:
Show hidden quotes


In Christianity and modern mainstream Judaism, the Bible's "horrible" passages are more often considered descriptions of historical events, figures of speech, etc., not commandments.


If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, ā€œThis son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.ā€ Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear.
Deuteronomy 21:18ā€“21

Yea that was a nice historical event, when parents started stoning their children for being rebellious.


Well, this is the danger of people looking up verses on the Internet, while completely ignoring the mainstream interpretations of them in the religion.

Mainstream Judaism largely makes the death penalty impractical. Along with the Written Torah, which you quoted from, Jews have an Oral Tradition that discourages and effectively prohibits execution, by making it impossible to convict people.

For Christians and Jews, these are not commandments, but perhaps to someone from outside the religion, who reads the Bible from the perspective of an outsider, and has no regard for proper context and interpretation as provided by the mainstream religious authorities, I guess it can seem that all these verses apply tiday and should be read literally. But again, this is your perspective and opinion, and Christians and Jews disagree with it.

It is of extreme difficulty to determine whether the modes of capital punishment given above, and based on the detailed discussion, mainly in the tractate Sanhedrin, reflect actual practice, or whether they were academic discussions, as, for instance, are the detailed discussions on the sacrifices. Thus the law of the "stubborn and rebellious son" covers five mishnayot (Sanh. 8:1ā€“5) and four folios of the Babylonian Talmud (68bā€“72a), and it is laid down that he is put to death by stoning and then hanged (ibid., 46a). Yet it is stated that "It never happened and it never will happen" and that the law was given merely "that you may study it and receive reward" (for the pure study; Tosef., Sanh. 11:6; Sanh. 71a), though on the other hand in the talmudic passage R. Jonathan protests "I saw him and sat on his grave." The same statement is made in the case of the death penalty for communal apostasy (Tosef., Sanh. 14:1) and the same reason given for its study.

Much more pertinent, however, is a passage of the Talmud which explicitly compares the study of, and the discussion on the various death penalties with that on the sacrifices. The halakhah was established in the case of the death penalty for an adulterous woman. R. Joseph asked, "Is there need to establish a halakhah for the messianic age (the Sanhedrin no longer having jurisdiction in capital offenses)?" Abaye answered, "If so, we should not study the laws of sacrifices, as they also apply to the messianic age. But we say 'Study and receive reward'" (Sanh. 51b). Similarly, the passage in Mishnah Makkot 1:10: "A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called a murderous one. R. Eleazar ben Azariah says 'Or even once in 70 years.' R. Tarfon and R. Akiva said, 'If we had been in the Sanhedrin no death sentence would ever have been passed'; Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel said: 'If so, they would have multiplied murderers in Israel.'" Instructive though this is, it is merely an academic discussion, the right of imposing capital punishment having been taken from the Sanhedrin by the Romans a century before, "40 years before the Destruction of the Temple" (Sanh. 41a; TJ, Sanh. 1:18a). The rabbis agreed that with the destruction of the Temple the Sanhedrin was precluded from inflicting capital punishment (see above).

The Talmud actually asks whether the statement of Eleazar b. Azariah was one of censure or reflected the fact of the rarity of death sentences, and leaves the question undecided, as it does for the question as to how R. Tarfon and R. Akiva would have prevented the death verdict being passed (but see Makk. 7a).

That the discussions are largely academic is reflected in the language of the Mishnah. Of capital punishment by the sword it is stated that "they used to decapitate him, as the [Roman] government does [at the present time]" (cf. Tosef., Sanh. 9:10) and R. Judah proposes another method. It goes on to state how "they used to" fulfill the method of death by strangulation (ibid., 7:3). No less significant is the fact that R. Akiva himself, who would have abolished capital punishment, enters into the halakhic discussion on it as fully as his colleagues (cf. ibid., 11:7, 12:2).

...

What is perhaps the most cogent evidence that the talmudic discussions on the death sentence did not reflect the actual practice is provided by a third instance. In Sanhedrin 7:2 R. Eleazar b. Zadok gave evidence of an actual case of death by burning which differed diametrically from that given by the Mishnah. The answer was given that "the Sanhedrin at that time was not competent." In the Tosefta (9:11) and the Jerusalem Talmud (7:2, 24b) Eleazar b. Zadok vividly describes the circumstances under which he witnessed it. "I was a child and was being carried on my father's shoulders and I saw it," to which his colleagues replied "You were then a child, and the evidence of a child is inadmissible." That the incident happened is therefore definite; the rabbis in the two replies were concerned with establishing their theoretical view of the law even when it conflicted with the actual practice of the past. There are no recorded cases of execution by strangulation or the sword. It would seem therefore that discussions on the various modes of execution and the details of their implementation were made to "study and receive the reward therefore," i.e., academic. As is evident from the above quoted mishnah in Makkot, the whole tendency of the rabbis was toward the complete abolition of the death penalty.


Orthodox Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan wrote:

"In practice, ... these punishments were almost never invoked, and existed mainly as a deterrent and to indicate the seriousness of the sins for which they were prescribed. The rules of evidence and other safeguards that the Torah provides to protect the accused made it all but impossible to actually invoke these penalties ... the system of judicial punishments could become brutal and barbaric unless administered in an atmosphere of the highest morality and piety. When these standards declined among the Jewish people, the Sanhedrin ... voluntarily abolished this system of penalties.[18]


The Talmud ruled out the admissibility of circumstantial evidence in cases which involved a capital crime. Two witnesses were required to testify that they saw the action with their own eyes. A man could not be found guilty of a capital crime through his own confession or through the testimony of immediate members of his family. The rabbis demanded a condition of cool premeditation in the act of crime before they would sanction the death penalty; the specific test on which they insisted was that the criminal be warned prior to the crime, and that the criminal indicate by responding to the warning, that he is fully aware of his deed, but that he is determined to go through with it. In effect this did away with the application of the death penalty. The rabbis were aware of this, and they declared openly that they found capital punishment repugnant to them.


Interesting story. A Jewish couple were being judged for illegal adultery in Arabia. Mohammad asked the Jews about what should be done about them according to Jewish law. A rbabi opened up the Torah and covered with his hand the verses about stoning, because Judaism was against the death penalty. Mohammad however saw this, he had them reveal the violent verses, and then he killed the couple. It's funny how he agreed with your interpretation and disagreed with that oc the Jews', of what the Bible says. I mean what do they know about their own religion...

The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and told him that a man and a woman from amongst them had committed illegal sexual intercourse. Allah's Apostle said to them, "What do you find in the Torah (old Testament) about the legal punishment of Ar-Rajm (stoning)?" They replied, (But) we announce their crime and lash them." Abdullah bin Salam said, "You are telling a lie; Torah contains the order of Rajm." They brought and opened the Torah and one of them solaced his hand on the Verse of Rajm and read the verses preceding and following it. Abdullah bin Salam said to him, "Lift your hand." When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Rajm was written there. They said, "Muhammad has told the truth; the Torah has the Verse of Rajm. The Prophet then gave the order that both of them should be stoned to death. ('Abdullah bin 'Umar said, "I saw the man leaning over the woman to shelter her from the stones.
-Bukhari
User avatar
Great Britain oats13
Lancer
Posts: 618
Joined: Aug 13, 2015
Location: Dorsetshire

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by oats13 »

gibson wrote:
lejend wrote:
Show hidden quotes


In Christianity and modern mainstream Judaism, the Bible's "horrible" passages are more often considered descriptions of historical events, figures of speech, etc., not commandments.


If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, ā€œThis son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.ā€ Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear.
Deuteronomy 21:18ā€“21

Yea that was a nice historical event, when parents started stoning their children for being rebellious.


This is textbook example of quoting out of context- Deuteronomy is OT and therefore not valid as criticism of Christianity, I can't speak for 'modern judaism' personally.

The correct context is that Deuteronomy is a book dealing with the implementation of law in the community and is delivered largely as a 'pep talk' of sorts by Moses prior to the conquest of Canaan and entry to the 'promised land' as such it is clearing ground rules prior to the setting up of the coming community, it is also understood that the community was expecting to be under attack.

The passage above is about not being divided as a community, as such it's meaning is thus- The first few chapters are about israels previous stubbornness which sets the context for the stubbornness of the 'drunkard'- the children are the new inhabitants of the promised land- if they should rebel and stubbornly divide the community to the extent that it would become too weak to protect itself it would be better to kill the rebel and stay united- it is nothing to do with parenting-it is to do with governing a semitic tribe under attack in a semi-subsistence world, the Jewish people survived so it must of worked :smile:

Also the quote of me at the middle of this is firstly a joke and quite obviously not a precursor to what is now being discussed- I would appreciate it not being used.
We hold these truths to be self-evident. All men and women created by the you know, you know the thing.
Great Britain InsectPoison
Lancer
Posts: 970
Joined: Mar 6, 2016

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by InsectPoison »

lejend wrote:
Well, this is the danger of people looking up verses on the Internet, while completely ignoring the mainstream interpretations of them in the religion.

Mainstream Judaism largely makes the death penalty impractical. Along with the Written Torah, which you quoted from, Jews have an Oral Tradition that discourages and effectively prohibits execution, by making it impossible to convict people.

For Christians and Jews, these are not commandments, but perhaps to someone from outside the religion, who reads the Bible from the perspective of an outsider, and has no regard for proper context and interpretation as provided by the mainstream religious authorities, I guess it can seem that all these verses apply tiday and should be read literally. But again, this is your perspective and opinion, and Christians and Jews disagree with it.


Mate you can't just say that and pick and choose which religious texts to apply it to. The Quran was written 1400 years ago in ancient arabic, we can also argue that it has been interpreted incorrectly can't we by your logic?
Image
Image
Image
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by deleted_user0 »

Dolan wrote:
umeu wrote:displacement is indeed higher, the number i mentioned was people who left syria. the 11 million you cite also includes people displaced inside syria. 5 million fled to outside syria is a number that doesnt seem that strange to me, and isnt so far from what i said. perhaps they are more up to date numbers. i havent really spent much effort in looking them up. 5m is still around 20% most of them however are in neighbouring countries.
the numbers about ww2 are from wikipedia.

Well you could post the source of your numbers, I'm not gonna search the whole wiki to find where you found those numbers. I find it hard to believe 60 million Europeans left the continent during WW2 and relocated to Syria and Iran. When those countries had even less population back then.

But I think now you're going to backpedal and say you were talking about people who left homes, not people who took refuge in Syria during WW2. When the original argument was about refugees and how many relocated in the Middle east.

i havent really spent much effort in looking them up

But you make definitive and dramatic moral judgements based on numbers you "haven't really spent much time looking up". :hehe:


i didnt say 60 million left to syria and iran. ofcourse not. neither did 5 million syrians leave to europe. I was talking about total number of refugees. I dont know if there are numbers of how many went where exactly. There is probably no conclusive record. But a couple of millions went to that region. Others went to countries in africa, to india, south america and many of course to UK and USA. You can call it backpedaling if you like, i just call it poor reading on your part. Also I brought up those numbers not in response to ppl relocating to the middle east, but to you suggesting that more people left syria and decided to abandon home than europeans did during ww2 because they so heroically defended their home

I dont make any dramatic judgment based on the numbers. Wether its 4 million, like i said, or 5 million, as you claimed, is irrelevant. The fucking disgusting part is where you are trying to make it seem as if the majority of syrian refugees are only out to rob your fridge and sleep in your bed for free. Even though most havent even left the levant. There's also a difference between not having the exact number, and just spreading blatant misinformation, as you were doing.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

Laurence Drake wrote:Image

Image
User avatar
Tuvalu gibson
Ninja
ECL Reigning Champs
Posts: 13597
Joined: May 4, 2015
Location: USA

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by gibson »

InsectPoison wrote:
lejend wrote:
Well, this is the danger of people looking up verses on the Internet, while completely ignoring the mainstream interpretations of them in the religion.

Mainstream Judaism largely makes the death penalty impractical. Along with the Written Torah, which you quoted from, Jews have an Oral Tradition that discourages and effectively prohibits execution, by making it impossible to convict people.

For Christians and Jews, these are not commandments, but perhaps to someone from outside the religion, who reads the Bible from the perspective of an outsider, and has no regard for proper context and interpretation as provided by the mainstream religious authorities, I guess it can seem that all these verses apply tiday and should be read literally. But again, this is your perspective and opinion, and Christians and Jews disagree with it.


Mate you can't just say that and pick and choose which religious texts to apply it to. The Quran was written 1400 years ago in ancient arabic, we can also argue that it has been interpreted incorrectly can't we by your logic?
you're right but that's exactly what they do, pick and choose what they like and exclude anything that don't like. "Our religion isn't horrible because we ignore all the horrible parts".
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

@deleted_user

That's not what the original argument was about. If you go to the other page, it started from me saying that Europeans didn't go to Arabia during WW2 to live there on their welfare. I wasn't implying what you're mistakenly interpreting. Maybe you just don't have any counter-argument and you're using this strawman. *shrugs*
User avatar
United States of America n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 7068
Joined: Jul 24, 2015
ESO: jezabob
Clan: ķŒ€ ķ•˜ģš°ģŠ¤

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by n0el »

Wait so because Europeans went to America to avoid their death and conflict and not the Middle East, Syrians shouldnā€™t be able to come to Europe. Makes sense.
mad cuz bad
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

Let me put it another way. Saudi Arabia refused to take in any refugee from Syria at all. And they share the same religion. They're brothers in Allah. But they gave money to Jordan to organise camps for them.

On the other hand, Germany received them with open arms. How do you interpret that?

@n0el
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/08/world ... index.html
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by deleted_user0 »

Dolan wrote:@deleted_user

That's not what the original argument was about. If you go to the other page, it started from me saying that Europeans didn't go to Arabia during WW2 to live there on their welfare. I wasn't implying what you're mistakenly interpreting. Maybe you just don't have any counter-argument and you're using this strawman. *shrugs*


look. You said that europeans didnt leave their homes to go to the middle east. I told you they actually did. Then you said thought that more syrians left their country than europeans left their country. which i gave you the numbers, which indicate the percentages are quite similar, and thats not taking into account the fact that most europeans were not able to flee because of the germans closing the border. and i have no clue what you are trying to do now. you were wrong. i pointed that out. no idea what else there is to it. its funny that you say multiple times that syrians deserve refuge, while at the same time trying to paint them as opportunist robbers who only come her to live out of your pocket. its fucking pathetic, and the funny thing is you have no data to back it up and everything else youve said on the topic is pretty much wrong.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by deleted_user0 »

n0el wrote:Wait so because Europeans went to America to avoid their death and conflict and not the Middle East, Syrians shouldnā€™t be able to come to Europe. Makes sense.


they actually did go there. millions went to morocco, the levant and iran.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

umeu wrote:and everything else youve said on the topic is pretty much wrong.

no u.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by lejend »

@Snuden

Yes.

InsectPoison wrote:Mate you can't just say that and pick and choose which religious texts to apply it to. The Quran was written 1400 years ago in ancient arabic, we can also argue that it has been interpreted incorrectly can't we by your logic?


We could, but we'd be disagreeing with all the major religious authorities.

I mean that the mainstream interpretation of the Christian and Jewish religions is generally peaceful; the more "horrible" passages of the Bible are considered poetic or historical, not commandments for today. Whether this is the "correct" interpretation or not, is really irrelevant.

But in the case of Islam, the more violent parts are considered to be literal and applicable for all time, by all teh major Islamic authorities. So we got an actual problem there.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by deleted_user0 »

great debating skills. show me where what i said was wrong.

it seems its very hard for you to admit you are wrong about something. even though you have repeatedly proven that you lack knowledge about historical subjects. which is odd, as you like to use them frequently to bolster your xenophobic statements.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

http://daily-sun.com/post/279734/Japane ... arks-anger

Are the Japanese xenophobes, racists or is this just a reflection of their culture rejecting cultural assimilation?

How do you interpret this:

phpBB [video]
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by fightinfrenchman »

I can't interpret it, I don't speak Japanese
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

Neither me, but this apparently caused disturbance among black people who live in Japan. So I'm curious to understand what does this say about Japanese culture?

How would Western (Enlightenment-based) culture perceive this?
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by fightinfrenchman »

I do not know what they are saying so I don't know how I might perceive it
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

Well, it's comedy, so it speaks the universal language of laffin.

I suppose they're trying to impersonate American cops, playing up the memes.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by fightinfrenchman »

Well just based on the fact that they have a very different culture I would not say that their use of blackface is necessarily racist. However there is also a lot of text and talking and I have no idea what they're saying so it could go in many different directions.
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Dolan »

Welp, take a look at the article I posted, if you got time.

Or maybe there's someone who knows Japanese and can translate what they're saying.
User avatar
No Flag fightinfrenchman
Ninja
Donator 04
Posts: 23505
Joined: Oct 17, 2015
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by fightinfrenchman »

Tbh I was hoping they were going to make a joke about how American cops are racist and they were all gonna shoot the black guy
Dromedary Scone Mix is not Alone Mix
Image
User avatar
Netherland Antilles Laurence Drake
Jaeger
Posts: 2687
Joined: Dec 25, 2015

Re: Locking posts because someone disagrees.

Post by Laurence Drake »

Dolan wrote:
Laurence Drake wrote:Image

Image

No one wants to see your selfies.
Top quality poster.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV