Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - On the burning of books ...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedOn the burning of books ...
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 16>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
JLocke View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 15:27
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Orthodox Jews burn New Testament

Taken from that article:

''Orthodox Jews set fire to hundreds of copies of the New Testament in the latest act of violence against Christian missionaries in the Holy Land.''

*facepalm*


Edited by JLocke - September 14 2010 at 15:36
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 15:55
Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Do you think before/as/after you type?
Speaking personally, all of the above.

I acn't eevn taape!
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 16:05
I say we burn the amazing god damn atheist. That would solve one problem
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 16:10
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

I say we burn the amazing god damn atheist. That would solve one problem

What's the amazing god damn atheist?
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 16:11
Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

I say we burn the amazing god damn atheist. That would solve one problem

What's the amazing god damn atheist?


You really don't know? Your are lucky indeed.
And its nothing to do with his beliefs, he's just a supreme asshat.

It's the guy who Mike posted in the OP. Also youtube "The Amazing Atheist" for rage filled lulz
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 16:12
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

I say we burn the amazing god damn atheist. That would solve one problem

What's the amazing god damn atheist?


You really don't know? Your are lucky indeed.
And its nothing to do with his beliefs, he's just a supreme asshat.

It's the guy who Mike posted in the OP. Also youtube "The Amazing Atheist" for rage filled lulz

Oh him.
Back to Top
Paravion View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 16:28
Originally posted by JLocke JLocke wrote:

Originally posted by Paravion Paravion wrote:

No, I don't think it should be forbidden. It is this whole line of discourse where it comes down to this question I oppose to. I don't oppose to freedom of expression.  

Then I don't think you and I have any real disagreement. Although I do think you're being much too generous to the opposing side, but as long as you don't want something forbidden, you can discourage it all you want. Hell, I discourage behavior I don't like, too. But again, I was speaking about things on a different level, I suppose. 

Glad we could reach some sort of agreement. But the thing is that the level where it comes down to an issue of freedom of expression is unfortunately far too widespread. Bear in mind that I'm from the land of the Mohammed Cartoons, and this is still extensively debated in the media. I find myself in fundamental disagreement with those who constantly tries to make this an issue of Jyllands Postens (the name of the newspaper that printed the cartoons) right to do so. Of course they had the right. No one in their right mind would question that. But when the discourse goes down this line, we digress from the central issue and it inevitably results in a nonconstructive and some times quite disrespectful "us and them, either/or rhetoric", where little (if any) importance is given to pragmatic, humanist, social and cultural aspects. I don't perceive that as remotely constructive in the forming of a new multi-cultural -ethnic & -religious society - a real challenge we are facing in many European countries, and - to some extend - also in the States, I believe.


Edited by Paravion - September 14 2010 at 16:30
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 17:20
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

I say we burn the amazing god damn atheist. That would solve one problem

He's so full of sh*t, he'll probably not burn... 
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 20:43
Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:

Yeah, and most of the world is wrong. Most of the world has lower literacy rates too, but that is not an argument for illiteracy.
 
FALSE

13% of USA white and 40% of minority 17 years students are functionally illiterates.

14% of USA adults are  ILLITERATE (Lack the BPLS)

60% of prison inmates are illiterate.

In Europe the percentage is inferior to the one in USA (In most countries is close to 0%), even in Latin America the average is around 7.5 % of illiteracy (In Perú for example is 7.1%, Argentina is 2.5% to 3%, Brazil 9.7% and Guatemala reaches the peak with  20% in 2005)

No country in South America has an illiteracy average as high as USA, and  with countries as Ecuador, Perú or Colombia (Theo won't let me lie), with a high percentage of population living in cities or towns with no communication with the rest of the country, because in the high mountains or the deep jungles with no roads.

So don't shout with that arrogance that the rest of the world is wrong and that we are illiterates, because you don't live in fantasy island.

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

^^ You're building up straw men arguments, Iván. Of course freedom of speech/expression doesn't mean that people have the right to say anything under any circumstances, that goes without saying. The actual legislation varies from country to country, but if you for example look at one of the most liberal countries in that respect (USA), then you'll see that there are many meaningful limitations (e.g. slander). The point is that you should be free to voice your opinion.

Mike you are making exactly my point. LOLLOLLOL

Some people here has said that freedom of speech has to be almost absolute, and that's not truth, that's all what I was saying and you have supported my claim.

Iván



Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 14 2010 at 21:53
            
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 21:01
The USA has an illiteracy rate of 1%. Where are you pulling your stats from? 

The other great flaw in your post, besides entirely missing llama's point, is that you can't compare rates together. You need to compare actual raw numbers. Simpson's paradox, look it up. 
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 21:25
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

The USA has an illiteracy rate of 1%. Where are you pulling your stats from? 

The other great flaw in your post, besides entirely missing llama's point, is that you can't compare rates together. You need to compare actual raw numbers. Simpson's paradox, look it up. 
 
Here
 
Quote

About 14 percent of U.S. adults won't be reading this article. Well, okay, most people won't read it, given all the words that are published these days to help us understand and navigate the increasingly complex world.

But about 1 in 7 can't read it. They're illiterate.

Statistics released by the U.S. Education Department this week show that some 32 million U.S. adults lack basic prose literacy skill. That means they can't read a newspaper or the instruction on a bottle of pills.

The figures are for 2003, the latest year available. State and county results are available here.

 
 
And if you add that 21% to 23% of USA 16 or older have achieved only level 1 of literacy (The lowest literacy level), the situation is frightening.
 
This numbers are repeated in all the net including the modest Wikipedia
 
Quote National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL)

The US Dept. of Education, Institute of Education Sciences has conducted large scale assessment of adult proficiency in 1992 and 2003 using a common methodology from which trends could be measured. The study measures Prose, Document, and Quantitative skills and 19,000 subjects participated in the 2003 survey. There was no significant change in Prose or Document skills and a slight increase in Quantitative skills. As in 1992, roughly 15% of the sample could function at the highest levels in all three categories. Roughly 40% were at either basic or below basic levels of proficiency in all three categories.

Thus, if this bottom quantile of the study is equated with the functionally illiterate, and these are then removed from those classified as literate, then the resultant literacy rate for the United States would be at most 65-85% depending on where in the basic, minimal competence quantile one sets the cutoff.

 
TheLlama's post is clear
 
Quote Yeah, and most of the world is wrong. Most of the world has lower literacy rates too, but that is not an argument for illiteracy.
 
 
We are lore literate than you, so we are right......I can't have missed the point.
 
And here
 
 


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 14 2010 at 21:28
            
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 21:33
The CIA factbook and Wiki disagree with you and agree with me for the US's illiteracy rate.

Llama's point was not the rest of the world is wrong because its illiterate compared to the US. He was making an analogy. He's saying that just because a majority of the world has a certain property, it does not mean that property is desirable. For Example: Most of the universe has a lower density of oxygen than the US. This does not mean that a lack of oxygen density is a desirable thing. 

Yet again I'll make you aware that you can't compare rates; you must compare absolute numbers. 
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 21:49
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

The CIA factbook and Wiki disagree with you and agree with me for the US's illiteracy rate.

Llama's point was not the rest of the world is wrong because its illiterate compared to the US. He was making an analogy. He's saying that just because a majority of the world has a certain property, it does not mean that property is desirable. For Example: Most of the universe has a lower density of oxygen than the US. This does not mean that a lack of oxygen density is a desirable thing. 

Yet again I'll make you aware that you can't compare rates; you must compare absolute numbers. 
 
The National Center for Education Statistics with the seal of the USA Department of Education clearly states
 
Quote For the 2003 NAAL, the national direct estimate of the percentage of adults lacking BPLS is 14.5 percent. For the 1992 NALS, the national direct estimate is 14.7 percent.
 
 
 
Pëople who lack the BPLS are functionally illiterate, there's no question about it.
 
Now, again read thellams's post please, his first phrase is a statement: Yeah, and most of the world is wrong.
 
And even if both statements are "disconnected" his original point that most of the world has more illiterates doesn't seeem correct either, at least in Latin America and Europe.
 
Iván


Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 14 2010 at 21:51
            
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 21:53
Seriously Ivan, I know you're a lawyer, but you can stop equivocating to try to make your point. 

The data supports my statement, no doubt about it.

You can't compare rates, no doubt about it.

Llama meant what I just told you he meant, no doubt about it. He'll verify it himself when he's online.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 14 2010 at 23:02

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:


Seriously Ivan, I know you're a lawyer, but you can stop equivocating to try to make your point. The data supports my statement, no doubt about it.

Seriously Equality, you reply is hallucinating, I have supported all my claims with data from the National Assessment of Adult Literacy and The National Center for Education Statistics, which tell you that at least 14.5% or 30'000,000 adults (If you want numbers and not percentages, are functionally illiterate,) you give none and still say the data supports your claim.

How?

Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

You can't compare rates, no doubt about it

.

The original statement which I'm rejecting says:

Originally posted by Thellama73 Thellama73 wrote:

Most of the world has lower literacy rates too,

.

And you insist without any argument that I can't answer a statement about rates with rates? How can I talk about the truth of a statement made in rates without using rates?

The worst...You don't say why...Maybe we can only use rates if you agree with our opinion?

How in hell can you compare two countries with different population if you don't use rates?
 
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

Llama meant what I just told you he meant, no doubt about it. He'll verify it himself when he's online.

Please, read Thellama's post.

  1. Yeah, and most of the world is wrong
  2. Most of the world has lower literacy rates too, .

When he uses the word too (In this case means also) he's clearly saying Most of the world is wrong, also most of the world has lower.....

It's clear as water, I don't know what he means, but I know what he wrote.
 
Please, justify what you say.

Iván



Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - September 14 2010 at 23:17
            
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 15 2010 at 01:43
Originally posted by Paravion Paravion wrote:

Originally posted by JLocke JLocke wrote:

Originally posted by Paravion Paravion wrote:

No, I don't think it should be forbidden. It is this whole line of discourse where it comes down to this question I oppose to. I don't oppose to freedom of expression.  

Then I don't think you and I have any real disagreement. Although I do think you're being much too generous to the opposing side, but as long as you don't want something forbidden, you can discourage it all you want. Hell, I discourage behavior I don't like, too. But again, I was speaking about things on a different level, I suppose. 

Glad we could reach some sort of agreement. But the thing is that the level where it comes down to an issue of freedom of expression is unfortunately far too widespread. Bear in mind that I'm from the land of the Mohammed Cartoons, and this is still extensively debated in the media. I find myself in fundamental disagreement with those who constantly tries to make this an issue of Jyllands Postens (the name of the newspaper that printed the cartoons) right to do so. Of course they had the right. No one in their right mind would question that. But when the discourse goes down this line, we digress from the central issue and it inevitably results in a nonconstructive and some times quite disrespectful "us and them, either/or rhetoric", where little (if any) importance is given to pragmatic, humanist, social and cultural aspects. I don't perceive that as remotely constructive in the forming of a new multi-cultural -ethnic & -religious society - a real challenge we are facing in many European countries, and - to some extend - also in the States, I believe.


This is going down the road of "let's be nice to the extremists, and they'll be nice to us". I don't agree ... appeasement is usually a bad idea when dealing with bullies.
Back to Top
Mr ProgFreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 15 2010 at 01:46
Originally posted by Ivan_Melgar_M Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Originally posted by Mr ProgFreak Mr ProgFreak wrote:

^^ You're building up straw men arguments, Iván. Of course freedom of speech/expression doesn't mean that people have the right to say anything under any circumstances, that goes without saying. The actual legislation varies from country to country, but if you for example look at one of the most liberal countries in that respect (USA), then you'll see that there are many meaningful limitations (e.g. slander). The point is that you should be free to voice your opinion.

Mike you are making exactly my point. LOLLOLLOL

Some people here has said that freedom of speech has to be almost absolute, and that's not truth, that's all what I was saying and you have supported my claim.

Iván



Either that, or you misunderstood them (us) entirely. Whatever suits your ego.LOL
Back to Top
Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 15 2010 at 02:09

I believe I understood it well:

Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:

Originally posted by Rabid Rabid wrote:

So you're prepared to defend the right to free speech, even if it costs innocent peoples lives?



Of course. You have to, or else anyone can threaten violence over any speech they don't like and soon all meaningful speech becomes impossible.

Human life is the essential value, if you place the freedom of speech over life, well, what more absolute you can get?

This also sounds pretty absolute to me:

Originally posted by JLocke JLocke wrote:

The moment you start putting limits on freedom of speech, you've opened the door for everyone to jump in and stifle it further and further. .

As a fact there are and always been limits to freedom of expression.

I don't imply this members know that there are laws that can limit freedom of expression, but them and more seem to believe that it's a super right above everything else, and that's not the case.

Not even in USA, where you can open a page and give the names of undercover officers of the law and informants..

Iván
            
Back to Top
JLocke View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 15 2010 at 02:20

Quote

As a fact there are and always been limits to freedom of expression.


Yes, and I disagree with most of them. 
Back to Top
Textbook View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 15 2010 at 06:26
I just can't believe the stupidity of this pastor. "Islam is hateful and destructive! Let us demonstrate how different Christianity is by burning their holiest book en masse!"
 
Idiots, plain and simple.


Edited by Textbook - September 15 2010 at 06:26
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 16>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.