First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Human Equality
564 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
All of time / God
Offline
Posted 6/5/17 , edited 6/5/17

karatecowboy wrote:

2000 people executed in 300 years. That's like a busy morning in the Third Reich's camps.



why do we just throw out random numbers on this site? especially easily googlable ones like this?

burning at the stake ALONE killed 32,000 people. also 300k. died in prison. both of these are the lowest numbers. some have it as high as millions

truth is we don't know exactly how many died but 2k aint it. and fun fact you bring up the holocaust . which lets remember the people were killed due to their religion.
10742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 6/5/17 , edited 6/5/17

b17bomber wrote:


karatecowboy wrote:

2000 people executed in 300 years. That's like a busy morning in the Third Reich's camps.



why do we just throw out random numbers on this site? especially easily googlable ones like this?

burning at the stake ALONE killed 32,000 people. also 300k. died in prison. both of these are the lowest numbers. some have it as high as millions

truth is we don't know exactly how many died but 2k aint it. and fun fact you bring up the holocaust . which lets remember the people were killed due to their religion.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jun/16/artsandhumanities.internationaleducationnews

But according to Professor Agostino Borromeo, a historian of Catholicism at the Sapienza University in Rome and curator of the 783-page volume released yesterday, only 1% of the 125,000 people tried by church tribunals as suspected heretics in Spain were executed.

So, that's about 1,250 people. The numbers you are citing are largely from anti-Roman protestant fanatics. How they killed millions when there were fewer than 200,000 tried by tribunals ... I'll leave the explanation up to you. Europe would have been wiped out if the higher estimates were true.

NEVERTHELESS! Let's say it was 125,000 over 300 years. That's 416 per year. That still dims in comparison to the violence and bloodshed of militantly atheistic and socialist states over the last century(including the Third Reich). Actually, here in the USA, ten times that amount are murdered by their own mothers every day. The point still stands: Historians call our last century the Bloodiest Century because it was.

564 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
All of time / God
Offline
Posted 6/5/17

karatecowboy wrote:


NEVERTHELESS! Let's say it was 125,000 over 300 years. That's 416 per year. That still dims in comparison to the violence and bloodshed of militantly atheistic and socialist states over the last century(including the Third Reich). Actually, here in the USA, ten times that amount are murdered by their own mothers every day. The point still stands: Historians call our last century the Bloodiest Century because it was.


i agree with the very last sentence. but without religion at all, hitler never kills jews because they arent one. actually people think they're superior because of some divine power from Kami. that literally is what the hebrew are believed to be: "chosen people of God"

that tells me that they believe they are better than me. and that also goes with race and other ethnicity's. it didnt just start as "im better than you cause of our skin color" it started as "im better than you because god made me better than you and its proven in our skin color"
48 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 6/6/17
The problem with forced equality is, it too often means dragging the best and brightest down, rather than raising the worst and dimmest up.
114 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/6/17

Shuai-Fi wrote:


Are you saying you don't think the existence of "wage gaps, glass ceilings and what not" is undesirable in a society with an "ideal state" of equality?

In which way is the lack of any of the aforementioned concepts contradictory to your own description of "It's ideal state"?


The meaning is that the "Wage Gap" and such are fallacies, they are fictional. There is no wage gap, women are not paid less because they are women. On the contrary. Otherwise what incentive is there for a business that runs off profits to hire men at all? The differences in pay come from other factors. Women tend to desire a more flexible schedule then men, which tend to them undershooting careers. Men tend to focus more on career and so overwork in their field. And many other factors. What sexual organ is on you has nothing to do with your pay. But it does on the incentives you get. I.E. Maternity leave (Paid) when men rarely even get unpaid paternity leave.


So take your Neo-Feminazi crap elsewhere.
83700 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / M
Offline
Posted 6/6/17 , edited 6/6/17
It's "ideal state" is a state where there is no equality. When someone refers to the "ideal state" of equality they are typically thinking "equality of result" or "equality of opportunity". Equality of result is not only impossible, it is highly undesirable. People don't have the same motivations, desires, thought processes, perspectives, or advantages/disadvantages (both physical and mental). Remove all those things that inevitably cause inequalities, and you are left with mindless automatons that are all the same size, shape, and color. Even then you don't have equality of result, because the universe itself is unequal. You would have local environmental differences that would cause inequality even with the mindless automatons. Equality of opportunity may sound great, but is also undesirable. For somewhat the reason in the OP post, but not really due to talents, which can be made up for desire and effort and even the talented have to put far more effort into things that people realize. The bigger issue is the disadvantaged, such as the disabled. There has to be some means of support for at least those severely disadvantaged, which would inherently be unequal.
19379 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 6/6/17

ishe5555 wrote:

It's "ideal state" is a state where there is no equality. When someone refers to the "ideal state" of equality they are typically thinking "equality of result" or "equality of opportunity". Equality of result is not only impossible, it is highly undesirable. People don't have the same motivations, desires, thought processes, perspectives, or advantages/disadvantages (both physical and mental). Remove all those things that inevitably cause inequalities, and you are left with mindless automatons that are all the same size, shape, and color. Even then you don't have equality of result, because the universe itself is unequal. You would have local environmental differences that would cause inequality even with the mindless automatons. Equality of opportunity may sound great, but is also undesirable. For somewhat the reason in the OP post, but not really due to talents, which can be made up for desire and effort and even the talented have to put far more effort into things that people realize. The bigger issue is the disadvantaged, such as the disabled. There has to be some means of support for at least those severely disadvantaged, which would inherently be unequal.


Your on the right track, but the definition of "Equality of Opportunity" is off a bit. It has more to do with in cases of equal treatment of an individual, where a given effort and talent are not penalized due to other factors, such as skin-color and ethnic neutrality. As you said we should be fair and not mindlessly serve an unrealistic ideal, but we should aspire to treat everyone with respect and kindness.
1025 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/6/17

Floki_the_god wrote:


Shuai-Fi wrote:


Are you saying you don't think the existence of "wage gaps, glass ceilings and what not" is undesirable in a society with an "ideal state" of equality?

In which way is the lack of any of the aforementioned concepts contradictory to your own description of "It's ideal state"?


The meaning is that the "Wage Gap" and such are fallacies, they are fictional. There is no wage gap, women are not paid less because they are women. On the contrary. Otherwise what incentive is there for a business that runs off profits to hire men at all? The differences in pay come from other factors. Women tend to desire a more flexible schedule then men, which tend to them undershooting careers. Men tend to focus more on career and so overwork in their field. And many other factors. What sexual organ is on you has nothing to do with your pay. But it does on the incentives you get. I.E. Maternity leave (Paid) when men rarely even get unpaid paternity leave.


So take your Neo-Feminazi crap elsewhere.


When did I ever state my opinion or argue for whether any of the aforementioned concepts exists in reality or not?
I don't know jack shit about the statistics which is why I never claimed to know anything about the de facto state of society.

Please stop pulling insults out of your triggered ass and take it elsewhere.
Posted 6/6/17
Everyone is born with the same potential.
171 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / M
Offline
Posted 6/6/17
God made everyone, Sam Colt made them equal. Humans are by nature variable. No 2 are the same, even identical twins have their unique quirks. Having the same stuff or making the same amount of money or even the same education doesnt make you equal to any one else. They can only be treated equally.
35659 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/7/17 , edited 6/7/17

karatecowboy wrote:
That's like a busy morning in the Third Reich's camps.


You really need to go back to your history books if you think the Third Reich were "militant atheists". Hell, if you were an atheist you weren't even allowed to join the SS to begin with.

10849 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Australia
Offline
Posted 6/7/17

runec wrote:


karatecowboy wrote:
That's like a busy morning in the Third Reich's camps.


You really need to go back to your history books if you think the Third Reich were "militant atheists". Hell, if you were an atheist you weren't even allowed to join the SS to begin with.



I heard that you could only join if you drank alcohol, smoked and ate meat!
10742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 6/7/17

runec wrote:


karatecowboy wrote:
That's like a busy morning in the Third Reich's camps.


You really need to go back to your history books if you think the Third Reich were "militant atheists". Hell, if you were an atheist you weren't even allowed to join the SS to begin with.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

What history books are you reading? Common knowledge that their end game was abolishing religion and loyalty to God.

35659 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/7/17

karatecowboy wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

What history books are you reading? Common knowledge that their end game was abolishing religion and loyalty to God.


Might want to read your own link.
10742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / M / People's Republic...
Offline
Posted 6/7/17

runec wrote:


karatecowboy wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

What history books are you reading? Common knowledge that their end game was abolishing religion and loyalty to God.


Might want to read your own link.


Don't be a smart aleck. I did:

"Many historians believed that Hitler and the Nazis intended to eradicate Christianity in Germany after winning victory in the war"

The end goal was atheism, with supreme allegiance to the state.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.