Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Human rights

Human rights
December 24, 2011, 06:07:50 PM
What are they? Are they real? Farce? How do I take on a human right activist?

Re: Human rights
December 24, 2011, 10:48:16 PM
Well, it's an invented notion. Basically says that there are things which every single person should have, or things you should never do to anyone - a minimum wage for how you should treat people. Might be valid if looked at right the right way, but most people don't look at things the right way. If the human rights activist is reasonable, reason with them, if not either ignore or troll.

Re: Human rights
December 25, 2011, 08:59:01 PM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won already)

Then point out that even though he might have the best interests for the pedophile he's still admitting that the pedophile is sick and needs treatment until he can be considered equal again. Then point out the differences between cultures, what is considered a pedophile in some cultures is considered normal in others (point out the differences in ages of consent between countries and states, you don't even need to mention third world countries where child rape is common, point out that even in the west in the past was normal for children to marry at a young age)

Now go in for the kill: tell him that the universal declaration of human rights is a western invention. It does not take in account the differences between cultures. The universal declaration of human rights is in fact a form of post-colonial christian racism. It does not insist equality but it insists sameness and there's a big difference between those two. The declaration of human rights is the democratic west's way of saying "we're right, we're superior, and everybody should live according to our standards" Compare it to the way the west has tried to spread democracy to countries that weren't ready for it (Iraq) or had no desire for it (North Vietnam) Compare it to the different interpretations of honor in different cultures (Japan). By now he will probably have no sound arguments anymore to use against you, the declaration of human rights is a nothing more than a declaration of moral superiority. It is impossible to define what human rights should be on a worldly scale, it should be up to each society on it's own to define them. The fact that it's called a "universal" declaration shows just how arrogant and stupid it is.

In my experience people will either admit that you have a point or they will come up with completely stupid counter-arguments, so stupid that it will probably be safe to just laugh in their face and call them ignorant and full of themselves.

If you want you can skip the part about pedophiles and go straight for the kill. Or replace pedophile with a different example. Read the declaration and you'll find plenty of articles that are either grossly violated even in the free west or articles that are so vague that there can be many different interpretations of them.

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 12:58:15 AM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won alread


The idea of equal rights doesn't entail that people can't forfeit certain rights by violating the rights of others, so I don't really see your point here.

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 09:53:22 AM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won alread


The idea of equal rights doesn't entail that people can't forfeit certain rights by violating the rights of others, so I don't really see your point here.

This was my contention as well. Umbrage, what say you? I like your argument, but I am not sure I can think of a counter for what would be considered forfeit as pointed out above, especially if the same violation is not culturally justified?

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 09:54:06 AM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won alread


The idea of equal rights doesn't entail that people can't forfeit certain rights by violating the rights of others, so I don't really see your point here.


If you want you can skip the part about pedophiles and go straight for the kill. Or replace pedophile with a different example. Read the declaration and you'll find plenty of articles that are either grossly violated even in the free west or articles that are so vague that there can be many different interpretations of them.


But what the hell, here's something for you to consider:

Quote from: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

    (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
    (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

    (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/


Quote from: Big Black Cock News
Dutch alarmed by paedophile group

A political party with a paedophile agenda has been registered in The Netherlands, prompting outrage among many parts of society.

The party plans to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and for legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5038682.stm


I mentioned the pedophile as a simple example, most people understand it. But if you want we can go deeper into this. So what's your opinion on this? Should this political pedo movement be allowed to exist or should they be banned?

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 10:01:40 AM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won alread


The idea of equal rights doesn't entail that people can't forfeit certain rights by violating the rights of others, so I don't really see your point here.


If you want you can skip the part about pedophiles and go straight for the kill. Or replace pedophile with a different example. Read the declaration and you'll find plenty of articles that are either grossly violated even in the free west or articles that are so vague that there can be many different interpretations of them.


But what the hell, here's something for you to consider:

Quote from: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

    (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
    (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

    (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/


Quote from: Big Black Cock News
Dutch alarmed by paedophile group

A political party with a paedophile agenda has been registered in The Netherlands, prompting outrage among many parts of society.

The party plans to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and for legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5038682.stm


I mentioned the pedophile as a simple example, most people understand it. But if you want we can go deeper into this. So what's your opinion on this? Should this political pedo movement be allowed to exist or should they be banned?

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 10:04:13 AM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won alread


The idea of equal rights doesn't entail that people can't forfeit certain rights by violating the rights of others, so I don't really see your point here.


If you want you can skip the part about pedophiles and go straight for the kill. Or replace pedophile with a different example. Read the declaration and you'll find plenty of articles that are either grossly violated even in the free west or articles that are so vague that there can be many different interpretations of them.


But what the hell, here's something for you to consider:

Quote from: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

    (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
    (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

    (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

www.un(dot)org/en/documents/udhr/


Quote from: Big Black Cock News
Dutch alarmed by paedophile group

A political party with a paedophile agenda has been registered in The Netherlands, prompting outrage among many parts of society.

The party plans to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and for legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals.

news.bbc(dot)co(dot)uk/2/hi/5038682.stm


I mentioned the pedophile as a simple example, most people understand it. But if you want we can go deeper into this. So what's your opinion on this? Should this political pedo movement be allowed to exist or should they be banned?

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 10:04:45 AM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won alread


The idea of equal rights doesn't entail that people can't forfeit certain rights by violating the rights of others, so I don't really see your point here.


If you want you can skip the part about pedophiles and go straight for the kill. Or replace pedophile with a different example. Read the declaration and you'll find plenty of articles that are either grossly violated even in the free west or articles that are so vague that there can be many different interpretations of them.


But what the hell, here's something for you to consider:

Quote from: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

    (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
    (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

    (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/


Quote from: Big Black Cock News
Dutch alarmed by paedophile group

A political party with a paedophile agenda has been registered in The Netherlands, prompting outrage among many parts of society.

The party plans to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and for legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5038682.stm


I mentioned the pedophile as a simple example, most people understand it. But if you want we can go deeper into this. So what's your opinion on this? Should this political pedo movement be allowed to exist or should they be banned?


Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 10:05:56 AM
Quote from: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Article 18.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19.

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20.

    (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
    (2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21.

    (1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

www.un(dot)org/en/documents/udhr/


Quote from: Big Black Cock News
Dutch alarmed by paedophile group

A political party with a paedophile agenda has been registered in The Netherlands, prompting outrage among many parts of society.

The party plans to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and for legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals.

news.bbc(dot)co(dot)uk/2/hi/5038682.stm


I mentioned the pedophile as a simple example, most people understand it. But if you want we can go deeper into this. So what's your opinion on this? Should this political pedo movement be allowed to exist or should they be banned?

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 02:44:03 PM
I mentioned the pedophile as a simple example, most people understand it. But if you want we can go deeper into this. So what's your opinion on this? Should this political pedo movement be allowed to exist or should they be banned?
Not only should it be banned, everyone in it should be killed, have all their immediate male family members killed, and have all their valuables and money taken by The Cool Crew.

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 02:56:27 PM
One way to take on a human rights activist is by asking him the definition of human behavior. Any society will have some consensus of how to treat each other, most commonly a human rights activist will insist on equality. Then point out the inequality between people. If you have the nerves then you could ask him if he considers the rights of his children as important as the rights of the pedophile who would molest them. If he thinks the pedophile has equal rights then ask him why the pedophile should be locked up then. If he's hardcore humanist he will say the pedophile needs to be cured so he can return to society (in other cases he will say the pedophile needs punishment, if he says that then you've basically won alread


The idea of equal rights doesn't entail that people can't forfeit certain rights by violating the rights of others, so I don't really see your point here.

I think he's stating in shorthand that there's a long way around this argument. If everyone is equal, the pedophile's choice to be a pedophile is not a violation but a choice, and as such the pedophile should not be locked up or executed, but "rehabilitated." If everyone is not equal, the pedophile is simply broken and should be excluded from society. This split in argumentation focuses on a lot more than equal rights but it's intimately connected to it. Over the past 40 years, American justice has gone from the second view to the first, with disastrous consequences.

Re: Human rights
December 26, 2011, 05:52:04 PM
A reasonable conclusion might be; everyone is not equal, but we share a lot and it is mostly our deeds that separate us. A pedophile who acts is punished accordingly, one whose nature succumbs to his will is no threat. I imagine a world where people with these tendencies could receive assistance and support (without threat of punishment) before they act on their urges to be a far better place. Help the ones that seek help, strike the ones that transgress. "Rehabilitation" of offenders is so nature-denying; public punishment and subsequent rehabilitation makes so much more sense to me.

An (open) organization of pedophiles intrudes on the social sphere and would be destroyed without mercy.

Re: Human rights
December 27, 2011, 12:39:31 AM
What are they? Are they real? Farce?

Applied rights are no more farcical or unreal than the act of going inside one's home before an approaching rainstorm.

Quote
Alain de Benoist traces the history of the concept of human rights from Antiquity to the present day, showing how the relationship between rights and belonging to a community has gradually been replaced by the idea of a sovereign individual who exists independently of any communal identity or responsibility.

http://www.arktos.com/alain-de-benoist-beyond-human-rights.html

Having everyone run for shelter at random times everywhere for no apparent reason is the modern version of human rights. It's also disruptive and needless, but makes for great politics and news headlines.


Re: Human rights
December 28, 2011, 12:06:34 AM
I'd like a singular human right, which is to live in a sane society where things are not always failing on an architectural level.

Where do I vote for that?