Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,594
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 623:
Line 623: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
stuff moved from user Talk
:::We discussed this all above. "''favors personal freedom in all its forms''" is a definition of licentiousness, because obviously a civil regime cannot enforce all prohibitions against human conduct, anal sex for example. While someone many consider this "personal freedom in all its forms", it really is quite the opposite of the root word of "liberty". [[User:RobS|RobS]] 21:17, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
:::We discussed this all above. "''favors personal freedom in all its forms''" is a definition of licentiousness, because obviously a civil regime cannot enforce all prohibitions against human conduct, anal sex for example. While someone many consider this "personal freedom in all its forms", it really is quite the opposite of the root word of "liberty". [[User:RobS|RobS]] 21:17, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
==Rights of women==
''Stuff moved from talk pages''
uhhhh, 'scuse me Rob, but where exactly have I done anything like that? Please point out the specific exchange between us. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 17:39, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
:PF, actually I wasn't specifically refering to you here. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 19:59, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
::I see nobody else arguing with you in the section you cited as an example: [[Talk:National_Socialist_German_Workers_Party#Right_Wing]]. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 11:08, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::That section specifically discusses left v right; further you brought in a dictionary definition that reads, "advocating the greater well-being of the common man"; this is particularly comical, for example, where do opponents of "advocating the greater well-being of man" go to apply for membership? or perhaps you'd like to play some craps with loaded dice. I mean, come on now, let's get real. Here's other discussion of esentially the same nature [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Liberal#Foreign_Policy][http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Abuse&diff=88362&oldid=88296][http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Abuse&diff=85295&oldid=85280]
:::::And nowhere in that section have I reponded to your request for a definition of a leftist by "explain(ing) a leftist is a liberal or that "a liberal is a leftist."--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:14, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::''P.S. And I am absolutely serious as a heart attack; I will press the issue how so-called advocates of human rights, the "betterment of humanity", and womens sufferage are working overtime to insure Iraqi women loose what few gains have been made since 2003. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 11:58, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
::::What gains are those, Rob? The fact is, Iraqi women have LOST a great deal of ground since 2003. Before the invasion, they were able to walk about in public unveiled, look forward to a higher education, and practice professions like medicine unmolested. Now women are afraid to leave their homes without their faces covered, the rise of the shia majority has made the prospect of their daughters attending college highly doubtful, and professional women who insist on continuing to work are being murdered. How do these qualify as "gains?" --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:14, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::You have well stated the so-called "leftist" viewpoint, my friend; Iraqi women were much better off under the fascists Ba'athists than a liberal Constitutional democracy. Thank you. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 12:29, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::: That doesn't answer my question. You claimed Iraqi women had made "gains." Specifically what "gains" have Iraqi women made? Do you consider the imposition of Shia restrictions on women a "gain?" --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:32, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::::The "gains" are identitical to the gains you cited in Wiemar Germany. Exercising the basic human right of voting. So Iraqi women have freely chosen to live under a liberal Consitutional democracy; they are met with opposition to holding these basic human rights by thier alleged "liberal" fellow thinkers in the West who argue they were better off barefoot, pregnant, in the kitchen, down on the farm, and subject to rape at the whim of Uday, Qusay & Saddam. Yes indeed, modern "leftists" and "liberals" are shining advocates of democracy and human rights. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 12:38, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
Weimar Republic women were not driven back into their homes out of a fear of going outside with their faces uncovered, nor were they shot dead in the streets for the "crime" of practicing medicine as doctors. Or maybe you're going to claim they were, along with your bizarre contention that the Weimar Republic didn't end until 1939? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:41, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:PF, please clarify for me once more; I get the impression you are pointedly argueing Iraqi women were better off under fascism than living under a Constitutional liberal democracy. Please set the record straight once and for all--no qualifiers added or anything. Then we can leave this discussion were it concludes and move on to other things. Thank you. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 12:51, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
::There's no question that Iraqi women as a group were better off under Saddam. They were not veiled. They could practice professions.They could look forward to a higher education. With the rise of the Shia majority, (which does not qualify as a "Constitutional liberal democracy") all of those advantages are evaporating. Are you claiming otherwise? --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 12:59, 7 April 2007 (EDT)