SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (247675)11/8/2007 12:42:02 AM
From: c.hinton  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
BUT Nadine you are yourself very multi cultural.......American and Jewish and Zionist.

You try to influence american politics in favor of your own cultures interests.

America started down the road of multiculturalism when we let in all those jewish and catholic italian russian chinese .....ect .

Now on this thread we have people complaining about disunity who at the same time say that all those of opposing political thought are un american.

You want a KultureKampf!



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (247675)11/8/2007 8:17:33 AM
From: Noel de Leon  Respond to of 281500
 
You answer the question of how multiculturism is defined by producing arguments that criticize it while pointing out the consequences of such a policy.

"The second(Multiculturalism) is about people acting as members of cultures, striving for things that are good only relative to their own culture, because there is no absolute merit across cultures and all good and evil is relative."

But that doesn't define multiculturism as opposed to monoculturism.

Because one is for multiculturism doesn't imply that one is for a suppression of women's rights and nor should it. Like all problems in society those that are a part of the society by their mere presence are subject to the laws of that society. So women's rights come under the category of societal laws and not under the concept of multiculturalism.
To put it another way, the law of the land overrides conflicting cultural mores. Changing those laws requires a majority of law makers or a Supreme Court decision not a cultural dogma.