Subject:
|
Re: Description vs. argument
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:34:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3969 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > As does most of the world, up until a few years ago many still viewed this
> > homosexuality as a medical condition. Thankfully, those days have mostly
> > passed - so much so that homosexuality is not an issue. Indeed, there are a
> > few at the highest level of UK politics.
>
> Oh...well if that's all it takes, then I can dispel your assertions by
> mentioning that there are a few blacks at the highest levels of US government
> too. Great.
>
> > > > Or did you not have rather unsavoury "witch hunts"?
> > >
> > > We did.
> >
> > Why were they not free to be communists? Whay did there right not protect
> them?
>
> Their rights did protect them. But bad men in the government -- the kind that
> I wish to be armed in order to defend against -- usurpped their rights
> unjustly.
Indeed. So what is the point of your system, if your "god given" rights can
be removed the government? Are they only fair weather rights?
>
> > > > While we are talking about education, when did
> > > > the US get rid of segregation in the education system?
> > >
> > > Segregation based on what? Skin tone? Um...at least by 1600 in some • schools.
> > > Why do you ask?
> >
> > "some schools" is not all schools. Where segregation did exist, was the
> > level of education given equal to all?
>
> I see. So is it your position that a rigorous investigation of the UK could
> not find schools which are fairly strictly segregated by ethnicity? I don't
> _know_ that you're wrong. But I think so.
I know of no UK school which has a "whites only" policy in the last century.
I know of no UK organisation, with the consent of the law, which had a
"whites only" policy. In the eyes of the law we are all equal - at least
since emacipation.
>
> > > Parents should be able to decide to which school they will send their • children.
> > > That decision could be based on the curricula, social and affective • handling,
> > > rights issues, location, etc. Parents should not dictate what schools teach
> > > because schools should be private.
> >
> > But you think it is OK for a school to have a "whites only" outlook?
>
> OK? that depends on what you mean. I think it should be legal. I wouldn't
> send my kids there.
OK, we differ their.
>
> > Not quite. I have shown that your system has allowed persecution of
> > communists and school children based on the colour of their skin.
>
> Right. Everybody's system has persecuted people. And this isn't my darned
> system anyway. Remember? I'm the disenfranchised nut with the guns!
>
> > I have shown you that I have/had freedoms that you do not - but you
> > still claim to be freer than me?
>
> Oh...I get it...sort of. At least I understand where our communication is
> missing. You think that you've pointed to freedoms that you have and I don't.
> What were they again? I'm not sure how that ties into communist or negro
> persecution
Come now chris. Freedom of expression is a fundamental freedom. It is the
key to democracy. Further to that, we all should have equal rights – the
right to an education should included in that?
ScottA
>
> Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Description vs. argument
|
| (...) Oh...well if that's all it takes, then I can dispel your assertions by mentioning that there are a few blacks at the highest levels of US government too. Great. (...) them? Their rights did protect them. But bad men in the government -- the (...) (26 years ago, 15-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
188 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
