quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Irish-Princess:
See to me that is total disrespect to burn a flag, it happens here every summer on the 12th the Unionist have bonfires and put a lovely crisp tri-colour on top.

Blimey, I didn't know that.

Have they got a bulk buy agreement with anyone who makes flags? I'm beginning to see an export opportunity here.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:
Awww. How fluffeh.

But hold on. Should I respect and tolerate Iran's culture and governance for hanging gay people for being gay?

Nothing *fluffeh* about it.... it's the hardest principle to follow... that's why we all fail so miserably! But i'll make a start, and respect your right to think it is fluffeh

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:
Awww. How fluffeh.

But hold on. Should I respect and tolerate Iran's culture and governance for hanging gay people for being gay?

Nothing *fluffeh* about it.... it's the hardest principle to follow... that's why we all fail so miserably! But i'll make a start, and respect your right to think it is fluffeh

Did you miss the bit about the gay people?

I suggest the principle seems very hard because it's not a principle. It's a position or stance and it is inherently flawed as my example illustrates.

It's also based on unstated assumptions: our liberal democratic ones that everybody is nominally equal before our principles and people have rights. Some people don't agree with the principles of equality and liberty. You make that assumption unconsciously because you're a product of the West or have a Western outlook.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Firstly, I make the assumption not because I am a Westerner but because I am a human being. Secondly, I do not think the principle is flawed, and I think you also miss the point. If the principle of respect and tolerance was applied worldwide, then the your example of the Iranians would not exist, as they would also be respectful and tolerant of others rights! If you want to criticize my post then perhaps you should argue that it is a pipedream, which it most certainly is... but we are all allowed to dream, aren't we?

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Firstly, I make the assumption not because I am a Westerner but because I am a human being. Secondly, I do not think the principle is flawed, and I think you also miss the point. If the principle of respect and tolerance was applied worldwide, then the your example of the Iranians would not exist, as they would also be respectful and tolerant of others rights! If you want to criticize my post then perhaps you should argue that it is a pipedream, which it most certainly is... but we are all allowed to dream, aren't we?

You're making that assumption because you're the product of a particular set of cultures. People in this country used to think feudalism was natural. Divinely ordained, actually. Where people had their place in a hierarchy and ought to stick to it. Were they not human?

Essentially, you're saying that we should all be of one culture. Actually, you're probably saying we should all be under one government. Otherwise there will inevitably be clashes over scarce resources or differences in culture leading to lack of respect and

tolerance.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Firstly, I make the assumption not because I am a Westerner but because I am a human being. Secondly, I do not think the principle is flawed, and I think you also miss the point. If the principle of respect and tolerance was applied worldwide, then the your example of the Iranians would not exist, as they would also be respectful and tolerant of others rights! If you want to criticize my post then perhaps you should argue that it is a pipedream, which it most certainly is... but we are all allowed to dream, aren't we?

You're making that assumption because you're the product of a particular set of cultures. People in this country used to think feudalism was natural. Divinely ordained, actually. Where people had their place in a hierarchy and ought to stick to it. Were they not human?

Essentially, you're saying that we should all be of one culture. Actually, you're probably saying we should all be under one government. Otherwise there will inevitably be clashes over scarce resources or differences in culture leading to lack of respect and

tolerance.

Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Firstly, I make the assumption not because I am a Westerner but because I am a human being. Secondly, I do not think the principle is flawed, and I think you also miss the point. If the principle of respect and tolerance was applied worldwide, then the your example of the Iranians would not exist, as they would also be respectful and tolerant of others rights! If you want to criticize my post then perhaps you should argue that it is a pipedream, which it most certainly is... but we are all allowed to dream, aren't we?

You're making that assumption because you're the product of a particular set of cultures. People in this country used to think feudalism was natural. Divinely ordained, actually. Where people had their place in a hierarchy and ought to stick to it. Were they not human?

Essentially, you're saying that we should all be of one culture. Actually, you're probably saying we should all be under one government. Otherwise there will inevitably be clashes over scarce resources or differences in culture leading to lack of respect and

tolerance.

Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

Alas! Rather like DanielJ, I am unable to find it in my heart to have tolerance for several regimes, and people who "do things" in the name of their religion.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Firstly, I make the assumption not because I am a Westerner but because I am a human being. Secondly, I do not think the principle is flawed, and I think you also miss the point. If the principle of respect and tolerance was applied worldwide, then the your example of the Iranians would not exist, as they would also be respectful and tolerant of others rights! If you want to criticize my post then perhaps you should argue that it is a pipedream, which it most certainly is... but we are all allowed to dream, aren't we?

You're making that assumption because you're the product of a particular set of cultures. People in this country used to think feudalism was natural. Divinely ordained, actually. Where people had their place in a hierarchy and ought to stick to it. Were they not human?

Essentially, you're saying that we should all be of one culture. Actually, you're probably saying we should all be under one government. Otherwise there will inevitably be clashes over scarce resources or differences in culture leading to lack of respect and

tolerance.

Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

Alas! Rather like DanielJ, I am unable to find it in my heart to have tolerance for several regimes, and people who "do things" in the name of their religion.

Me too Garage Joe, but my point was not about just us tolerating and respecting.... it's about everyone doing it.

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Garage Joe:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Firstly, I make the assumption not because I am a Westerner but because I am a human being. Secondly, I do not think the principle is flawed, and I think you also miss the point. If the principle of respect and tolerance was applied worldwide, then the your example of the Iranians would not exist, as they would also be respectful and tolerant of others rights! If you want to criticize my post then perhaps you should argue that it is a pipedream, which it most certainly is... but we are all allowed to dream, aren't we?

You're making that assumption because you're the product of a particular set of cultures. People in this country used to think feudalism was natural. Divinely ordained, actually. Where people had their place in a hierarchy and ought to stick to it. Were they not human?

Essentially, you're saying that we should all be of one culture. Actually, you're probably saying we should all be under one government. Otherwise there will inevitably be clashes over scarce resources or differences in culture leading to lack of respect and

tolerance.

Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

Alas! Rather like DanielJ, I am unable to find it in my heart to have tolerance for several regimes, and people who "do things" in the name of their religion.

Me too Garage Joe, but my point was not about just us tolerating and respecting.... it's about everyone doing it.

I shall write Mugabe a letter.. immediately.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

It's the differences that cause the trouble. We have differences because we have different cultures as groups and different aspirations as individuals. They're inevitable. What else is culture other than shared views on the world and how we react to it and each other?

Here's another example: some cultures think it is okay to eat dogs. They'll even kill and cut the heads off them at the market stall in front of the customer. Other cultures consider dogs as culturally unclean. In the UK, we consider dogs in general as pets and members of families. We all get by because these practices are usually local to their host country. But what happens when one culture ends up co-existing with the other. Who tolerates whom?

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

Feudalism, divinely ordained, one culture???? No, sorry, totally the opposite! I am saying that if we, as a human race, showed a little more respect and tolerance for the differences among us, the world would be a better place. Like I also said, it is not a very likely scenario, but without aspirations there would be no achievements, would there??

Also without dreams of how the human race can better itself and strive towards peace and harmony between different sections what is the alternative? Get the other guy before he gets you? And that is no future.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:
They tolerate each other. Seriously, the principle is nigh on impossible to achieve, but I believe that if we can pratice it an individual level then it's a start. Personally I try very hard to adhere to the notion that I may not agree with another persons belief, but I still acknowledge their right to hold them. I will say though, that the operative word there is I *try*

quote:

Originally posted by Irish-Princess:
Alot of people in the world won't be able to tolerate certain things and cultures until alot of wrongs have been put right.

quote:

it's completely impossible to achieve. Hence, a flawed position or stance

quote:

Originally posted by Irish-Princess:
Alot of people in the world won't be able to tolerate certain things and cultures until alot of wrongs have been put right.

quote:

Originally posted by Baz:

quote:

it's completely impossible to achieve. Hence, a flawed position or stance

Oh Ok... you win....I will bow to using the wrong terminology.... it is not 'nigh on impossible'... it probably IS impossible. But it was never a position or a stance... it was simply an ideal And while I disagree with you, I will respect your point of view, how's that for a start

quote:

Originally posted by Moonbeams:

quote:

Originally posted by Irish-Princess:
Alot of people in the world won't be able to tolerate certain things and cultures until alot of wrongs have been put right.

You can't change the past but you can cahnge the future.

quote:

Originally posted by Irish-Princess:

I know that, but oppression is still rife and will be until the status quo is retained. Ireland aren't the only country to experiance this type of treatment, look at Palestine as well.

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:
At least Baz with our way of thinking there is hope, with Daniel J's way of thinking the future seems very bleak.

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:
At least Baz with our way of thinking there is hope, with Daniel J's way of thinking the future seems very bleak.

Some things are worthy of respect and tolerance in my eyes and some aren't. There's nothing inherently bleak about that and I reject your false dichotomy. I prefer realism to idealism. World peace would be lovely but I'll be happy with less war in the world.

quote:

Originally posted by Blizzie:
I think Daniel's point is that by respecting others' cultures and beliefs, we can actually do more harm than good, in some cases.

We need to remember that others in such cultures would prefer us to stand up to such beliefs and practices and aim for universal human rights.

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:
I must admit that I struggle to find where respecting others' cultures and beliefs clashes with an aim for universal human rights?

quote:

Originally posted by Blizzie:

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:
I must admit that I struggle to find where respecting others' cultures and beliefs clashes with an aim for universal human rights?

For example, female circumcision, gay rights, women's rights, universal suffrage?

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:
Your view is that mutual respect and understanding is an impossible ideal. There is no dichotomy there and you have yet to say how your world progresses if there is no hope of mutual respect and understanding leading to progress. What then is the answer, one power conquering another?

quote:

Originally posted by Daniel J*:

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:
Your view is that mutual respect and understanding is an impossible ideal. There is no dichotomy there and you have yet to say how your world progresses if there is no hope of mutual respect and understanding leading to progress. What then is the answer, one power conquering another?

You've substituted understanding for tolerance there. Mutual respect and tolerance is an impossible ideal. That's a fact. I'm a John Stuart Mill type liberal. I respect that right of people to have differing opinions even if I don't respect the opinions themselves. Some of those opinions are garbage and ought to be argued against. I tolerate where I can because my opinions might be wrong. However, I simply can't tolerate some actions.

Here's yet another example. It wasn't that long ago in the UK when the ruling class was comprised of men. Women were denied a vote because it was thought that women were too emotional. It was thought that men were more suitable by nature for some things and women for others such as bringing up children and running the home. In other words, there was a gender division of labour. Most women thought this was true too.

Some people didn't have respect (and understanding) and tolerance for this. They went against the status quo; the status quo being that most men and women accepted their current culture. In other words, these people were radicals. We now have a different culture and I think it has progressed from that time in this area. Hence, a lack of respect and tolerance for a culture has resulted in significant progress. What do you think?

quote:

Originally posted by paace:
I tnink its very rude of the Queen to always wear gloves when shaking someones hand. How dare she infer that we are all filthy grubby creatures. The Battenburgs.

quote:

Originally posted by Blizzie:
Free and fair elections and an independent justice system, would help Zimbabwe.

Change can only come with an educated populace and the ability to change their government, every few years.

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:

quote:

Originally posted by Blizzie:
Free and fair elections and an independent justice system, would help Zimbabwe.

Change can only come with an educated populace and the ability to change their government, every few years.

Hear hear AND a black leader who will not succumb to corruption and greed or misuse of power. I wonder whether this is too much to hope for.

quote:

Originally posted by squiggle:

quote:

Originally posted by Blizzie:
Free and fair elections and an independent justice system, would help Zimbabwe.

Change can only come with an educated populace and the ability to change their government, every few years.

Hear hear AND a black leader who will not succumb to corruption and greed or misuse of power. I wonder whether this is too much to hope for.

quote:

Originally posted by paace:
Judging by the greed of the MP's here I'm afraid its most unlikely.

quote:

Originally posted by Blizzie:

quote:

Originally posted by paace:
Judging by the greed of the MP's here I'm afraid its most unlikely.

True, but there's nothing like transparency for curbing such greed.

I think most politicians do start off with good intentions, and they will be less inclined to feather their own nests in future - now that the voting public can see what is happening!