Quote:

---

Sativus said:
Unless they're voluntarily entering into our global community, then I don't see what right we have to put an end to their culture (or at least the aspects which we disapprove of).

The idea of basic human rights arose in Enlightenment-era Europe.  It forms the basis for evaluating what is and isn't acceptable in the global community, and appears to be your basis for judging as well.  The UN and Amnesty International both operate under the presumption of basic human rights.

But a culture which is not voluntarily engaged in our experiment in global community shouldn't be bound by our mutual agreements of what is/isn't acceptable.  That's called totalitarianism.

If we have the right to do that, why don't they have the right to attack us to put an end to our cult over overpopulation?

"Universal morality" is an oxymoron.  We can have a universally accepted morality within our community.  But to say that our agreement upon a standard of ethics gives us the right to attack an independent civilization that has a different set of morality, that just doesn't work for me.  The issue is more complicated than that.

---

Quote:

---

Sativus said:

Quote:

---

Doitagain said:
alright well basically a coerced procedure that takes away the pleasure of sex for a woman is committing a transgression against another human being.

---

And transgressions against other human beings are inherently wrong? 

I'd like to point again to our culturally-sanctioned raping and pillaging of the third world.  That's a serious transgression against millions of other human beings.  Looks pretty fucking fucked up to me.  But our cultural consensus encourages this activity as not only necessary, but as serving the ultimate force of good (the economy).

Think about killing, for another good example.  We generally consider the taking of other human life to be wrong (unless they happen to be brown and in an oil-rich country, but that's another issue; I'm talking about killing someone from your own civilization).  But then, on the other hand, you have traditions of ritual human sacrifice stretching far back in time.  If the killing of another member of your civilization is inherently wrong (as a transgression against another human being), how come so many cultures worked it into their religious practices?

I think I've expressed myself well enough to leave the topic alone now.  I'm just trying to point out that what's right and wrong, even on issues we see as fundamental human rights, is totally culturally subjective.  Within a community, we can make sure these things are clearly delineated; the Growery by consensus sees child porn as reprehensible, and flaming as a good amusing pasttime.  We're all on essentially the same page; that doesn't mean that any independently developing community needs to agree with us.

---

Quote:

---

kidaihuan said:
I'm going to go right out there and say this.

Although I am for freedoms, I am not a pedophile.

I don't have time to go in depth right now and reply to the whole thread, but I'm just going to say thanks to those who sided with me - both those thinking that I was a pedo and those who knew otherwise.

---