• Rozaŭtuno
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -11 year ago

    How do you get by without the ability to read?

    That should be my line. I’ve already said twice that I’m arguing this under the lens of feminism and twice already you’ve conveniently ignored it to hide behind the excuse of laicism. And if that wasn’t enough now you’ve resorted to infantilizing who disagrees with you.

    Forcing someone to do something because of religion is wrong and oppressive, but that doesn’t mean that forcing someone NOT to do something in the name of laicism isn’t any less oppressive.

    I’m questioning whether the law is just and is applied justly, you are running on the assumption that the law must be just because it oppresses everyone equally. That’s an example of negative peace.

    Anyway, I hate internet screaming contests, so I’m done. Enjoy your neoliberal state slipping into authoritarianism. Peace ✌

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      under the lens of feminism

      And again, just for my amusement since - you can’t read, same rules apply to men, women and different religion.

      to infantilizing who disagrees with you.

      Nah, mate - you have done it to yourself, but just not engaging with what I write and making weird absolutist statement. Obviously I don’t know if you are a teen, but I sure hope so.

      but that doesn’t mean that forcing someone NOT to do something in the name of laicism isn’t any less oppressive.

      So how do you make sure that girls that don’t want to wear religious closing are not forced to to so? Sometimes you have to chose, whose rights to oppress - and sorry I will be always on the side of moderates and not fundamentalist. Since as mentioned before - there is no point in appeasement of fundamentalist.

      you are running on the assumption that the law must be just because it oppresses everyone equally.

      No, I was more like: you don’t like secular countries - move to a religious one. Because we have a lot of the second and only a few of the first. But again - you can’t read so you will never know.

      Anyway, I hate internet screaming contests,

      Sure buddy.

      Enjoy your neoliberal state slipping into authoritarianism.

      Sure, gay Europe is in it’s downfall and will end surly soon, just after capitalism collapses. I know that argument from somewhere - and not from feminists.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -11 year ago

        The fact that it also applies to men is not an argument in your discussion.

        It’s sad that freedom has to be given up for those few who are oppressed.

        All these laws do is divide people. They’re racist laws wrapped in a thin layer of good intentions and nationalism.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          Nah, mate - religious rules that only apply to one sex don’t belong in the modern world. You can try to spin it all you want - but it’s conservative Islam that tells women what to wear.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 year ago

            And now it’s the government telling women what to wear, which is even worse as it takes everyone’s freedom, not only those who are oppressed.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Wait till you hear about school-uniforms, basically gulag.

              By the way you can still wear what ever you want - just not in school, which is like it has always been. And if your religion tells you to wear modest cloths, you are still free to do so. It only targets fundamentalist who have to wear a specific outfit. Which by the way is not specified in Quran - there is a lot of room for interpretations.