Egyptian general admits 'virginity checks' conducted on protesters

#26
#26
rjd970 said:
Do you think some administrations have been worse about this than others?
Click to expand...

I think the point was what happened in Egypt doesn't happen in democratic societies. There would have been outrage and anyone involved would have been arrested and charged with rape with a blunt object. The Egyptian govt may very well be moving toward a democracy, but they have a long way to go if they are treating protestors like this.
 
#27
#27
droski said:
polls would certainly suggest that. muslim brotherhood gets a favorable rating by 70% of the population.
Click to expand...

So? What does that have to do with the question? They also do a lot of charity work, just like hamas, hezbollah.

You have a talent for deflecting the question. Please link a poll where the majority of the Egyptian population want to be ruled by religious leaders running a theocracy.
 
#28
#28
oklavol said:
I think the point was what happened in Egypt doesn't happen in democratic societies. There would have been outrage and anyone involved would have been arrested and charged with rape with a blunt object. The Egyptian govt may very well be moving toward a democracy, but they have a long way to go if they are treating protestors like this.
Click to expand...

Not arguing that.

But droski's insinuation that they aren't because the majority don't want it and would rather be ruled by religious nutjobs is beyond absurd.
 
#29
#29
rjd970 said:
So? What does that have to do with the question? They also do a lot of charity work, just like hamas, hezbollah.

You have a talent for deflecting the question. Please link a poll where the majority of the Egyptian population want to be ruled by religious leaders running a theocracy.
Click to expand...

so you think people like them because of the charity work? really?

that's what's going to happen as long as they keep these people in power. they may "want" democracy, but no one is doing anything to encourage it.
 
#30
#30
rjd970 said:
Not arguing that.

But droski's insinuation that they aren't because the majority don't want it and would rather be ruled by religious nutjobs is beyond absurd.
Click to expand...

they unquestionably want the status quo when it comes to "family values." that is why there is support of the muslim brotherhood.
 
#33
#33
Dated one month ago:

But that put the group roughly at a par with the April 6 Movement, a new and relatively secular and progressive youth group that played a leading role in organizing the revolution. Seven in 10 viewed that group favorably, with 38 percent viewing it very favorably and 32 percent viewing it somewhat favorably. The poll’s margin of samplinfg error is plus or minus four percentage points.

Only 17 percent of respondents said they would like to see the Muslim Brotherhood lead the next government. Al Ghad, a liberal party led by Ayman Nour, a formerly jailed presidential candidate, was favored to lead the new government by roughly the same number. And one in five supported the New Wafd Party, a secular liberal party that was recognized under Mr. Mubarak.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/26/world/middleeast/26poll.html

At worst, support for the Muslim Brotherhood is even with those wanting a more moderate government.
 
#34
#34
looks similar to GOP polls for the new president. they are in the lead and that speaks VOLUMES.
 
#39
#39
therealUT said:
The response was toward the assertion that women cannot/are not treated as cattle under democracies. I used the history of our own nation to rebut the statement.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It didn't. Using the standards of 100 years ago wasn't talking to his point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#40
#40
BigPapaVol said:
It didn't. Using the standards of 100 years ago wasn't talking to his point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

He brought up democracies, thus he introduced the entire history of them. The U.S. political standards of a hundred years ago were not radically Christian; yet, the U.S. was still a democracy that treated women (African-Americans, Asians, etc.) as chattel. It is certainly pertinent and a few generations when referring to the vast magnitude of human history is merely a flicker.
 
#42
#42
therealUT said:
He brought up democracies, thus he introduced the entire history of them. The U.S. political standards of a hundred years ago were not radically Christian; yet, the U.S. was still a democracy that treated women (African-Americans, Asians, etc.) as chattel. It is certainly pertinent and a few generations when referring to the vast magnitude of human history is merely a flicker.
Click to expand...

So you genuinely believe he remotely gave a crap about centuries ago in his question?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#43
#43
BigPapaVol said:
So you genuinely believe he remotely gave a crap about centuries ago in his question?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I could care less about what he believed or gave a crap about. His assertion is patently false.

Not all democracies are inherently good and/or enlightened.

Not all theocracies are inherently evil and/or living in the dark ages.
 
#45
#45
therealUT said:
I could care less about what he believed or gave a crap about. His assertion is patently false.

Not all democracies are inherently good and/or enlightened.

Not all theocracies are inherently evil and/or living in the dark ages.
Click to expand...

Your indignation is awesome, but he used the verb "are." His "assertion" was essentially a question about current democracies. We can use history and six degrees of separation to make everyone appear to suck.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#47
#47
RealUT's point is completely valid. Not all democracies are all perfect, all the time. So the ME has work to do. This is the first time they have had a chance at a legitimate democracy. There was some stuff in the constitution that were completely stupid (slavery, etc). Assuming they are going to be perfect from the get go in no way applies it isn't possible, or that there won't be stumbles along the way, or that they "don't want it".

Again, if you want to ridicule the "time gap" then less than a generation ago not every US citizen had full civil rights.
 
#48
#48
rjd970 said:
RealUT's point is completely valid. Not all democracies are all perfect, all the time. So the ME has work to do. This is the first time they have had a chance at a legitimate democracy. There was some stuff in the constitution that were completely stupid (slavery, etc). Assuming they are going to be perfect from the get go in no way applies it isn't possible, or that there won't be stumbles along the way, or that they "don't want it".

Again, if you want to ridicule the "time gap" then less than a generation ago not every US citizen had full civil rights.
Click to expand...

It's 2011 in America - many developing countries are still in the 'dark ages'. The simplicity of saying it's 2011 in this argument doesn't work. It took the modern western world centuries of enlightenment to get to this point - yet it's easy for us to expect developing countries to progress in a much shorter time frame.
 
#49
#49
KiffinKiller said:
It's 2011 in America - many developing countries are still in the 'dark ages'. The simplicity of saying it's 2011 in this argument doesn't work. It took the modern western world centuries of enlightenment to get to this point - yet it's easy for us to expect developing countries to progress in a much shorter time frame.
Click to expand...

much shorter time frame? I was under the impression the US was a relatively new country and that these "developing countries" have also been around for centuries. What kind of timeline are we working with here?
 
#50
#50
utvolpj said:
much shorter time frame? I was under the impression the US was a relatively new country and that these "developing countries" have also been around for centuries. What kind of timeline are we working with here?
Click to expand...

At its founding, the US was an extension of Old World Europe. The founders brought livestock, pack animals, and cultivation methods that were completely foreign to the Native Americans. These methods were also not available to persons in sub-Saharan Africa, as per Jared Diamond, and Indian development was stunted under British Colonial Rule.

Depending on innovations in both production and thinking, civilizations will experience boom and bust periods. While Western Europe was experiencing a cultural and intellectual lapse from about 600 A.D. through 1200-1300 A.D., culture and thought in the Middle East became highly developed. Internal and religious conflicts stunted that growth, and Western Europe picked it up with the Renaissance and the Enlightenment from 1400-Present.

Currently, IMO, the West is experiencing a cultural decline in the form of producing works of literary and artistic merit. India seems to be picking up the slack in those areas, though; and, where literature and art thrive, philosophy and political innovation soon follow.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top