The grooms mother may sniff the brides genitals? Seriously? I’d smack her in the nose first.
Prof. Sabri Abd Al-Rauf: The mother [of the bridegroom] and other female relatives may look at the bride’s hair and neck, and may smell her private parts. Interviewer: Smell what?! Prof. Sabri Abd Al-Rauf: Her armpits, for example. Some women and girls sweat, and there are men who are nauseated by this. Interviewer: So the mother may check to make sure… Prof. Sabri Abd Al-Rauf: The mother may go near the bride, in order to check whether she smells good or bad. There is nothing to prevent this. But the groom is forbidden to look at any part of her except her face and hands. Admittedly, if I were the groom I’d be a little disappointed if my bride didn’t clean herself up first, but still.
H/T Weasel Zippers
But then again….
we`d also have to accept those countries in which some of the people had no freedom too…
If I came and punched you in the face and stole a fiver off you, I`m sure you wouldn`t be to receptive if I suddenly proclaimed that we should all accept the current distribution of resources “starting from now”.
Of course I wouldn’t be. You would have committed assault occasioning grievous bodily harm and theft. That you could find a moral equivalence between this and my labouring to create and using the fruits of that labour to freely exchange for other property is to me incomprehensible.
You are stating that my working to build a table using timber I have purchased with money I have earned by cleaning the floor down the pub is morally on a par with assaulting someone and stealing their table.
Is it really your position that in that case someone else has rights to that table I have built? On what basis? On what possible morality could anyone else have rights to the fruits of my labour? In what way is my ownership and exclusive use of that table unfair?
You are making these claims, justify them.
but that we can`t in all honesty claim that our ideas are inherently superior to any other means of organising society.
I certainly can make such claims, and I do. This just gets back to being yet another demonstration of your amoral stance. Are you really going to argue that a mass murdering redistributionist Stalinist thugocracy is materially and morally the equivalent of a free liberal democracy? On what possible basis could such a claim be made? As I said, that position is at best amoral, if not completely immoral.
I wrote a long rejoinder to you Locke.
I shall shorten it…
Fuck off.
…a form of discrimination which isn`t actually any different from racism — we can work with people who have a different culture, it`s just that we don`t like it) to live near us then I really can`t see how we can claim that we could ever have “freedom”, in any significant sense.>/em>
Which “we” is that Locke? The royal one? I have worked with people from every continent apart from Antarctica (I have never been a penguin keeper, alas) so you can really piss off. What you said sounds like it came from Nick Griffin’s “Big Book of ‘Facts”".
If a “right-winger” had said that you’d be climbing the walls.
The simple fact is you can’t cope with the fact that people who don’t share your grievance politics do not always live up to your prejudices.
You say you are well-off. Well I am not especially so but bully for you if you are minted. Try giving some of those quids away then rather than bitching at “the system” or getting self-righteous on my account. You see poverty and you wanna do something about it then fucking well do it. Do not carp at us lot.
We vary in wealth but we don’t do envy and the last thing any of us would do is wave our wads in the face of the poor. We might bung a few pennies to the Sally Army. What part of the fact we are not gits do you not get?
Sheesh!