Conrod Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I think the disagreement is all about where we draw the line - the point at which human rights, even life itself, are denied. Some people believe the scope for denying human rights is too narrow and as a result the rights of the decent majority are risked in order to protect the rights of the bad minority. I think it is fair to say that you (Halibut) do not share this opinion and think the balance is about right? Unfortunately, this is not a popular position! On one side of the debate we have the 'give them a hug' extreme and at the other end the 'string them up' extreme. I personally think that HR Act is currently too close to the first extreme and needs realigning. However, without people like Halibut acting as a check to our instinct for rough justice, I think there is a risk of a knee-jerk leap too far the other way... which is potential far more dangerous. I think you neatly sum it up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 That is the nature of human rights. It's literally all or nothing. Either all humans have certain rights or no humans have certain rights. I'd defend the rights of sub-human scum. I don't think sub-human scum should be hurt or harmed in the name of punishment or justice. Well, we differ. Rights should be earned on the basis of people's behaviour and contribution to society. Bad behaviour/negative contribution? No rights. Including to oxygen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 [WW2] ... that situation no longer exists therefore the quote must now be construed as an attack on any far right organisation or people the poster believes subscribes to the fascist regime As it should. Far-right organisations and fascists should have their ideas attacked. Are you arguing that Halibut has a machine that does kill fascists? Well, we differ. Rights should be earned on the basis of people's behaviour and contribution to society. Then they aren't rights; they are rewards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamo Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 What a load of TOSH ! He is a forum accepted troll as anyone with an ounce of sense will testify. He wouldnt be posting such 'Tripe' if Mr Hamza's friend's had taken one of his loved ones out in the name of Islam.... Entrusting the State with the power to execute, lock up indefinitely, deport etc without having to jump through sufficient hoops and checks is far more dangerous than the risk posed by people like Hamza. The balance may not be right but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 As it should. Far-right organisations and fascists should have their ideas attacked. Are you arguing that Halibut has a machine that does kill fascists? Then they aren't rights; they are rewards. You are being silly and naive ,the original sticker had nothing to do with ideas it accepted the killing of Germans by American troops,Halibut knows what he's doing with his signature,tell me how long do you think my account would last on here if I used the same signature but replaced the word fascist with muslim...same idea different target ,I would also care to take a stab on the idea that I would might actually be breaking the law using that version.Inciting hatred ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 You are being silly and naive ,the original sticker had nothing to do with ideas it accepted the killing of Germans by American troops,Halibut knows what he's doing with his signature,tell me how long do you think my account would last on here if I used the same signature but replaced the word fascist with muslim...same idea different target ,I would also care to take a stab on the idea that I would might actually be breaking the law using that version.Inciting hatred ? Silly thing is virtually every aspect of all religions is fascist! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism Don't all countries have national religions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 . .. Then they aren't rights; they are rewards. Mmm, good point. Put like that, I guess I don't believe in rights. But I believe people 'earn rights' in many respects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I think the disagreement is all about where we draw the line - the point at which human rights, even life itself, are denied. Some people believe the scope for denying human rights is too narrow and as a result the rights of the decent majority are risked in order to protect the rights of the bad minority. I think it is fair to say that you (Halibut) do not share this opinion and think the balance is about right? Unfortunately, this is not a popular position! On one side of the debate we have the 'give them a hug' extreme and at the other end the 'string them up' extreme. I personally think that HR Act is currently too close to the first extreme and needs realigning. However, without people like Halibut acting as a check to our instinct for rough justice, I think there is a risk of a knee-jerk leap too far the other way... which is potential far more dangerous. You've summed up my position fairly and accurately, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 I know where the quote comes from, it is a quote supporting the USA involvement in wwii i.e condoning the killing of fascists,now in that context I suppose it was accepted considering the damage that fascist Germany was inflicting on the world ,that situation no longer exists therefore the quote must now be construed as an attack on any far right organisation or people the poster believes subscribes to the fascist regime,now as far as I am aware we are not in any wars with said fascists therefore it is an attack on ordinary non combatant people and surely that is not the done thing these days. You clearly don't know where the quote comes from. It arose from the Spanish Civil War. It isn't an attack on anybody and your continued attempts to portray it as such are frankly puerile and pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 You clearly don't know where the quote comes from. It arose from the Spanish Civil War. It isn't an attack on anybody and your continued attempts to portray it as such are frankly puerile and pathetic. Can we just clarify then.. So you respect the human rights of the EDL and think they should be treated the same as anyone else? In relation to your signature. You will gladly state then that you are totally opposed to the killing or ill treatment of any fascist...They are entitled to the same rights as anyone else? Just trying to help.....I'm not sure what you mean... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.