Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pezz who wrote (58834)	8/19/1999 8:37:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

ME: >Sure pezz. You assaulted brees' religion and Islamic cultures because of a perception that those cultures and the religion present something you find repugnant.< YOU: >Well I agree with this statement.I think that this is a valid reason to assault a religion, don't you?< Indeed I do, but you also in the course of the thing used religion and culture to assault brees the man. I honestly am not concerned with brees himself. I simply want him to keep his dang hands off "the truth," for whoever controls the truth, wins. If anyone has to control it, it dang sho is gonna be me (and those like me), or I am gonna die trying to control it. Better we all just let it lay for as long as it takes for it to show up by itself. >If my perception was faulty it was up to Brees to demonstrate that to me.< Well pezz, to tell you the truth I like you, have always liked you, even when you went after brees and even when you insulted a Christian awhile back. Heck, you and I have insulted one another like it was penny-a-glass lemonade and I still like you, have not a dang thing against you. But I do believe brees was at a distinct disadvantage in trying to demonstrate anything to you about Islam and Islamic cultures. There was not a thing he could do in this department, and it ain't just Islam's fault either. >I, like you, must be true to my perceptions....Surely you must know that I am not alone in the perception that Islam mistreats women.BTW what do you think?< I think that Islam came of a culture that generally thought women less than men, and I think as a result Islam indeed reflects this thought, despite brees' nonsense about it having given women "equal rights" some 1400 years ago. This is not to say Islam had no respect for women, however. I think respect for women is reflected in the Quran. But the notion of women and men being viewed as equal in the same way we think of the term today is pure nonsense. Middle Eastern religion (even Judaism and Christianity, though I think by far distinguishable from Islam) simply has not that perspective. Whether Islam "mistreats" women is hard to determine, as mistreatment references perceptions. Some women who you think are mistreated are perhaps in full agreement with their lot and with Islam. Moreover we should make some sort of a distinction between Islamic philosophy itself and how Islam is manifested in certain Islamic cultures. I do flatly agree with you that many Islamic cultures are truly barbaric toward women, moreso than many or perhaps even most other cultures. >You know that I was actually accused of "thinking" of calling him a "towel head"? This is how low they think of this term. Yet you actually say it and they are silent. My point is what phonies they are.< Well I did not call him a towelhead. I called his religion that to clearly make the point of what I thought of it when he tried to analogise it to self-evident truth. >Ahhh.... you underestimate your self.< Perhaps. Though folk here have made it plain enough that they disagree with me. They likely nailed you harder because not only do they disagree with your literal assault, but also they disagree with its philosophical basis. They likely agree with me that brees perhaps should cool the Quran=Truth junk, but think I was too harsh in rejecting it. This agreement, however small, is enough to ameliorate some of their ire at my harshness. Also its the dang summer, folk are busy playing and doing stuff. Lastly, even amidst my harranging I at least made some dang sense. You ain't made a dang bit of sense since the day you showed up heah! (grin). So in your case, folk simply disagreed with you period, both for your behaviour and for the philosophy (or lack thereof) behind it. I do not think them hypocritical in the least, and had I seen hypocrisy in them I would honestly have told you right here that I see it. I do not. >Oh come on. I no more do this than you do.... Needling is what this thread is all about and all of those that I needle do their share of needling so no need to feel sorry for them.< Well, pezz. I think you have a dang good point here. (grin) Although I feel sorry for no one. I do not think the fellas here philosophically in error for not hammering me as hard as they hammered you. And so I think you have no philosophical basis to needle them. ME: >The implications of brees' argument I found repugnant, and I told him so. Simple as that.< YOU:>Not quite so simple.....< Perhaps I am missing something. From my vantagepoint, the thing is dang simple. I literally have no axe to grind against Islam in the broad imprecise sense. I have no axe to grind against brees himself, though it may seem to you that I do. If brees were willing, I would be perfectly at ease in enjoying his company-- so long as he keeps his dang hands off the Truth. >Well although I don't usually agree with your opinions...< Well see you lost me right there... (grin) >I will say that the above is true. But of course it's true for most of us. As it happens it was not you or your argument that I was addressing. Nor was I concerned by your lack of political correctness. Just the curious lack of condemnation by your comrades.< Well I think I have explained this, and hopefully you agree with it. (Really late. Gotta run. I now leave you the dang forum.)