• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

China arrests Singapore journalist

ludahai said:
Of course, you have repeatedly voiced contempt for freedom and free nations, so I wouldn't expect you to understand that..

We obviously disagree on what we believe constitiutes freedom, but there was really no need to resort to slander and re-adopt your aggressive tone.





ludahai said:
THe U.S. can't topple every dictator in the world. It is better to have a constitution that allegedly disadvantages 50% of the population rather than 99% of the population...

No, it can't topple those dictatorships it sucks up to as it wouldn't want to lose the benefits, often oil related (Saudi Ararbia, Uzbekistan etc.)

It would have been better to have a plan in place for the day after. The war's "won" hence so is Bush's election, but what then for Iraq? Nobody is defending Saddam, but your claim that 99% of the population were disadvantaged is an overstatement. Replacing one tyranny with another is no progress. Or are you OK with tyranny if it's religious tyranny? Or if it's only women who suffer?
ludahai said:
As for Chile, that is often alleged, but with little proof to back it up. It is actually amusing that anti-U.S. people out there take as an article of faith that the U.S. CIA arranged the toppling of Allende, but there is little evidence to back that up, and plenty of evidence to point toward the fact that there was considerable domestic opposition within Chile to Allende at the time....

Erm, Allende was elected democratically. As in all healthy democracies, there was opposition, but much of it was from the wealthy classes who didn't like the fact that cleaning up the poblacions and tackling poverty actually meant afew less diamond necklaces. Are you referring to the saucepan protests? Yes, the bored, bridge playing housewives of Santiago's chicer suburbs suddenly found something to do when the champagne was threatened with rationing. You're obviously fine with the fact that any "opposition" to Allende could result in widespread torture and murder - with the support of the US. I would point you towards two very good texts: Joan Jara's "Victor - An Unfinished Song" (written from a communist perspective - you won't like it) and Dr. Sheila Cassidy's "Audacity To Believe" (written from a christian perspective - you might just approach that with a more open mind).
ludahai said:
Comparing the U.S. to China is laughable. Are you claiming that China is a freer country with a more reponsible government than the United States? Be VERY careful how you respond to that question, should you dare tackle it in the first place.

They each have a very different approach to things. The Chinese government's made its mistakes, and no, I wouldn't defend an atrocity such as Tiannanmen. But I also wouldn't defend US inspired atrocities like for example Chile, Iraq or the bombing of Belgrade's radio station in the knowledge you would only have civillian casualties (the hairdressers and make-up artists who perished were hardly Milosovic's right hand men). As Fried Rice points out, China, for all its faults doesn't horse it's way around the world launching phoney wars based on lies in which innocents perish. What is unrivalled in the world, is the arrongance in US foreign policy for decades, and the untold harm that has done.

ludahai, this is not an attack on you, simply an observation. While I fully understand what it is to fall in love with a foreign country and make it your home, I think we should avoid the foreigner knows more about this place than the natives syndrome. I defend France, I criticize France, but I would never dare to speak FOR the French. I may have an opinion on how the French handle the Corsican separatists for example, but I don't make banging on about it my raison d'être. I think you need to stand back a little to have a more objective view on the whole Taiwan question. Look at your responses to frankguy and Fried Rice. Whilst you have every right to disagree with them, your responses simply dismiss them out of hand without demonstrating that you've actually considered what they have to say.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
We obviously disagree on what we believe constitiutes freedom, but there was really no need to resort to slander and re-adopt your aggressive tone.

Once I hear you state support for free nations in the world and not support totalitarian dictatorships, than I will stop saying that you are against freedom.


No, it can't topple those dictatorships it sucks up to as it wouldn't want to lose the benefits, often oil related (Saudi Ararbia, Uzbekistan etc.)

Many nations that have been close to the United States through the Cold War have opened up considerably from their days of totalitarianism. South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines and Indonesia are but a few examples of nations with close U.S. ties that were authoritarian, but later democratized. Even Saudi Arabia has recently taken its first steps toward democratization due to behind the scenes U.S. pressure. Just because the U.S. has friendly relations with some totalitarian governments and doesn't browbeat them, it doesn't mean that they don't exert other forms of pressure.

It would have been better to have a plan in place for the day after. The war's "won" hence so is Bush's election, but what then for Iraq? Nobody is defending Saddam, but your claim that 99% of the population were disadvantaged is an overstatement. Replacing one tyranny with another is no progress. Or are you OK with tyranny if it's religious tyranny? Or if it's only women who suffer?

OK, 80% of the population was disadvantaged, basically anyone who was not a Sunni Arab. Does that make you any happier? And there is no guarantee that a new constitution under a democratically elected Iraqi government is going to oppress women. WHat we DO know is that if the insurgents get their way, they will bring in a government that will not only oppress women, but will likely oppress Kurds and whatever ethnic or religious subgroup they don't happen to like.


Erm, Allende was elected democratically. As in all healthy democracies, there was opposition, but much of it was from the wealthy classes who didn't like the fact that cleaning up the poblacions and tackling poverty actually meant afew less diamond necklaces. Are you referring to the saucepan protests? Yes, the bored, bridge playing housewives of Santiago's chicer suburbs suddenly found something to do when the champagne was threatened with rationing. You're obviously fine with the fact that any "opposition" to Allende could result in widespread torture and murder - with the support of the US. I would point you towards two very good texts: Joan Jara's "Victor - An Unfinished Song" (written from a communist perspective - you won't like it) and Dr. Sheila Cassidy's "Audacity To Believe" (written from a christian perspective - you might just approach that with a more open mind).

As for Allende, I never said that he wasn't a democratically elected leader of Chile. What I pointed out is that while CIA involvement in his ouster is taken as an article of faith among U.S. haters, the fact is that there is little evidence for direct CIA involvement. You say nothing that negates the fact that there was significant domestic opposition to him and they were as likely as anyone to be involved in his ouster.

They each have a very different approach to things. The Chinese government's made its mistakes, and no, I wouldn't defend an atrocity such as Tiannanmen.

That is good to know. Is that the only atrocity of theirs you wouldn't defend? How about the oppression of the Tibetan people as well as people in Occupied-East Turkestan? How about their buildup of missiles against peaceful and democratic Taiwan? How about their claim to the Senkaku Islands and an EEZ that comes right up to the Japanese islands of the Ryukyu Chain? What about China's claim to the entire South China Sea? Don't forget, China's best friends are the likes of North Korea, Burma, Cuba, Pakistan, Iran, and Sudan!

But I also wouldn't defend US inspired atrocities like for example Chile, Iraq or the bombing of Belgrade's radio station in the knowledge you would only have civillian casualties (the hairdressers and make-up artists who perished were hardly Milosovic's right hand men).

Again, the Chile example is not proven. What is the atrocity in regards to Iraq, the efforts to free its people from a horrible dictator, or the insurgents who deliberatly target civilians while the U.S. did all it could during the invasion to limit civilian casualties. Do you think the bombing of the radio station was deliberate and without purpose? Remember, that Yugoslavia operation had the full blessings of NATOs military council. The U.S. got involved in that conflict reluctantly.

As Fried Rice points out, China, for all its faults doesn't horse it's way around the world launching phoney wars based on lies in which innocents perish. What is unrivalled in the world, is the arrongance in US foreign policy for decades, and the untold harm that has done.

The Chinese haven't yet because they can't, it't that simple. The Chinese have a phoney claim on Taiwan. If they launch their missiles and invade this country, it will result in countless casualties. China's claims to the South China Sea are similiarly based on lies. The occupation of Tibet, which has been ongoing for more than five decades, is based on the lie that TIbet is historically part of China and that the Tibetan people welcome the presence of the People's LIberation (sic) Army. There is a difference between the U.S. and China in this regard. When Iraq is ready to stand on its own two feet, the United States WILL leave. Tibetans only dream that the ChiCom army will ever leave their country.

ludahai, this is not an attack on you, simply an observation. While I fully understand what it is to fall in love with a foreign country and make it your home, I think we should avoid the foreigner knows more about this place than the natives syndrome.

As for defending Taiwan and saying I know more about Taiwan than Taiwanese do, that is NOT the case. For one, Fried Rice and frankguy are NOT natives of Taiwan, they are natives of China. In China, it isn't as if there is a free media from which people can consult different points of view. In fact, websites around the world that present a different view from the one held by the Chinese government are routinely blocked. THis is especially true if the website is in Chinese. Taiwanese newswebsites are blocked in China. The reverse is NOT true in Taiwan.

I defend France, I criticize France, but I would never dare to speak FOR the French. I may have an opinion on how the French handle the Corsican separatists for example, but I don't make banging on about it my raison d'être.

I am only speaking for the right of the Taiwanese people to make their own decisions in peace. That is all I have ever argued for Taiwan. Taiwan is historically not a part of China, nor is it legally a part of China. That isn't a matter of interpretation, that is fact. It is up for the Taiwanese people to decide what kind of relationship they want with China (or not to have one at all.) I have never argued any differently. However, it is also clear that the majority of Taiwanese people have no desire at all to be a part of the PRC. Nearly all Taiwanese people I know refer to them as "Taiwanren" (Taiwanese nationality) and "Huaren" (Chinese ethnicity), but NOT "Jhongguoren" (Chinese nationality.) Many of those who do say the later out of habit (due to decades of indoctrination by the KMT occupation government) quickly correct themselves when it is brought to their attention. Generally, the only ones in Taiwan who consider themselves to be citizens of China are the Chinese who came to Taiwan in 1949 and illegally occupied and took control of the island.

I think you need to stand back a little to have a more objective view on the whole Taiwan question. Look at your responses to frankguy and Fried Rice. Whilst you have every right to disagree with them, your responses simply dismiss them out of hand without demonstrating that you've actually considered what they have to say.

All they know is what they have been brainwashed to say by their government. They have never made a case for Taiwan being legally a part of China in accordance with international law. It is that simple. Territory can only be transferred from one state to another by means of a treaty. There is no legally binding treaty between the PRC and Japan that transfers sovereignty of Taiwan to the PRC.
 
ludahai said:
All they know is what they have been brainwashed to say by their government. .

The sheer arrogance of that statement destroys any fragile credibility you may have had.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
The sheer arrogance of that statement destroys any fragile credibility you may have had.

If you had lived in China for even a short period of time and actually followed their newsmedia, and knew how they kept differing opinions from their own people, you would know what I am talking about. However, since you don't speak Mandarin and you have never lived in China, you would have no idea of which I speak.
 
ludahai said:
If you had lived in China for even a short period of time and actually followed their newsmedia, and knew how they kept differing opinions from their own people, you would know what I am talking about. However, since you don't speak Mandarin and you have never lived in China, you would have no idea of which I speak.


You claim to love the Chinese people yet the last thing you want to do is actually listen to them. You live in a fantasy world of mythical, dragon-chasing people philosophising over Confucious (forgive possible mis-spelling?) but the reality is that the Chinese nation has taken many different turns of history and moved on (and whether you like it or not, Taiwan has been a part of that). It would be like me coming to France and dreamily imagining I could be Amélie Poulin, sitting in brasseries smoking my Gitanes discussing what Sartre actually meant by existentialism. Contemporary France is a different ball game, and I accept that. I rather feel that frankguy and Fried Rice have a better feel for contemporary China (Taiwan included) than some foreigner who's spent a bit of time there. Your marriage to a local gives you insight but hardly makes you the expert you imagine. Honey, I've been with a Senegalese guy for years - hardly makes me an oracle on African affairs.

Many nations of the world have controlled media, including many of your precious capitalist ones, and most people know how to read between the lines. You dismiss our Chinese friends here out of hand as brainwashed because you don't want to have to consider their point of view. They have the audacity to disagree with you, hence they're brainwashed - rather an arrogant stance if you think about it. Far from being brainwashed, they both seem like intelligent guys with valid points of view to discuss. They've obviously got access to the internet and international news; nothing stops them coming on a site like this to be exposed to capitalist, christian and even nazi views. And Fried Rice is hardly towing the party line as an out gay man is he?
 
Urethra Franklin said:
You claim to love the Chinese people yet the last thing you want to do is actually listen to them.

I hear the same thing over and over again from them, their government and their newspapers. It isn't like either of them have an original thought. All of what they say comes straight from the pages of the People's Daily or CCTV.

You live in a fantasy world of mythical, dragon-chasing people philosophising over Confucious (forgive possible mis-spelling?) but the reality is that the Chinese nation has taken many different turns of history and moved on

True, China has taken many turns through history. Some good, some bad. The turn they have taken over the last half of the 20th century has been mostly bad.

(and whether you like it or not, Taiwan has been a part of that).

Like it or not, Taiwan has never been controlled by a Han Chinese Dynasty. The only time Taiwan was ever part of the same political unit as China was when both were conquered by the Manchus. China was conquered by them in 1644 while Taiwan was conquered in 1683. Prior to the Manchu conquest, Taiwan was not part of China. Following the fall of the Manchu empire, Taiwan was not a part of China.

It would be like me coming to France and dreamily imagining I could be Amélie Poulin, sitting in brasseries smoking my Gitanes discussing what Sartre actually meant by existentialism. Contemporary France is a different ball game, and I accept that. I rather feel that frankguy and Fried Rice have a better feel for contemporary China

They are Chinese and of course have a better feel for contermporary China, even if it is clouded by an oppresive media atmosphere.

(Taiwan included) than some foreigner who's spent a bit of time there. Your marriage to a local gives you insight but hardly makes you the expert you imagine. Honey, I've been with a Senegalese guy for years - hardly makes me an oracle on African affairs.

To say that they have any insight on contemporary Taiwan is simply laughable. Taiwanese culture and society not to mention its values are vastly different from that of China today. As far as I know, neither one has ever been to Taiwan. I actually live in Taiwan. Comparing my knowledge of Taiwan to yours of Senegal is not the same. You don't live in Senegal, you live in France. I live in Taiwan. Big difference.

Many nations of the world have controlled media, including many of your precious capitalist ones, and most people know how to read between the lines.

I don't know which capitalist countries you are referring to, but neither Taiwan nor the United States have their media completely owned and controlled by the government and the party, though much of Taiwan's media IS owned by the KMT. However, Taiwanese and Americans also have various outlets, including foreign sources. Try accessing a Chinese language Taiwanese news website in China. Very unlikely you will be able to do it. However, I can easily access any newswebsite from China that I want to. Goes to show which side of the strait has a more open media.

You dismiss our Chinese friends here out of hand as brainwashed because you don't want to have to consider their point of view.

You forget. I have lived there. I have heard the line from their government and their media. Their position doesn't differ one iota from that of their government or the media. This is true of most Chinese you encounter unless they have no intention of actually returning to the Middle Kingdom.

They have the audacity to disagree with you, hence they're brainwashed - rather an arrogant stance if you think about it.

No, comes from knowing the methods that the government in China uses to control what their people think. They use the newspapers, television, even classes in university and thought police (they really exist in China) to keep the masses in line.

Far from being brainwashed, they both seem like intelligent guys with valid points of view to discuss. They've obviously got access to the internet and international news; nothing stops them coming on a site like this to be exposed to capitalist, christian and even nazi views. And Fried Rice is hardly towing the party line as an out gay man is he?

Both tow the party line on political issues. The ChiComs have become somewhat tolerant of homosexuality in recent years. Not a gay paradise to be sure, but far different than even when I was there in the late 90s.
 
ludahai said:
I don't know which capitalist countries you are referring to, but neither Taiwan nor the United States have their media completely owned and controlled by the government and the party,.

Many of the dictatorships the world over which have been propped up by capitalism, notably in South and Central America, for starters.

Italy is a fine example. Berlusconi now owns virtually all the media via which he can peddle his filth, but that's OK since he's a friend of Bush.

Singapore (from whence your famous journalist came!!!) Have you ever read The Straits Times??

Your media may not be so heavily controlled in the US, but it functions in a way which supresses true analysis. having created an atmosphere in which any socialist ideas are viewed as cranky, and communism totally unacceptable, indeed "unAmarican" No true debate can take place, since the left is undfer-represented, or not represented at all. Wishy washy liberals are seen as left wing socialists, when they are nothing like, since they would still prop up capitalism, and the US media falsely presents this as an across the board representation. You only have to look at Fox News to see news presented in a totally biassed fashion, and CNN lies, like so many local US news broadcasts, is so dumbed down it can hardly provoke debate - it's spoonfeeding the masses: exactly what you accuse the Chinese of.

ludahai said:
though much of Taiwan's media IS owned by the KMT. .

:mrgreen: :rofl

ludahai said:
Try accessing a Chinese language Taiwanese news website in China. Very unlikely you will be able to do it. However, I can easily access any newswebsite from China that I want to. Goes to show which side of the strait has a more open media. .

But they can get on here.
I come accross them on other sites, where they display evidence of having accessed international news sites.


ludahai said:
You forget. I have lived there. I have heard the line from their government and their media. Their position doesn't differ one iota from that of their government or the media..

So anybody who agrees with the government of the day is brainwashed?




ludahai said:
Both tow the party line on political issues. .

Has it ever occured to you that they may actually agree having thought it through with a free mind? It's too easy to dismiss them as brainwashed - it saves you having to debate the issues they raise and that's not intellectually credible. I don't know about frankguy's position, but I've chatted alot with Fried Rice: he's educated, he's well read and he's TRAVELLED. He's in the US now, or on his way there soon. He's been exposed to the "other"

ludahai said:
The ChiComs have become somewhat tolerant of homosexuality in recent years. Not a gay paradise to be sure, but far different than even when I was there in the late 90s.

ludahai admits to social progress in China?
And the bells rang and the champagne corks popped!

Out of interest, how does Taiwan do on gay rights?
And the position of women?
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Many of the dictatorships the world over which have been propped up by capitalism, notably in South and Central America, for starters.

Italy is a fine example. Berlusconi now owns virtually all the media via which he can peddle his filth, but that's OK since he's a friend of Bush.

Do you have any substantive evidence that the Italian P.M. owns virtually all of the Italian media? To be honest, I am not all that familiar with media ownership in most European countries.

Singapore (from whence your famous journalist came!!!) Have you ever read The Straits Times??

I never argued that Singapore is a democracy with press freedoms.

Your media may not be so heavily controlled in the US, but it functions in a way which supresses true analysis. having created an atmosphere in which any socialist ideas are viewed as cranky, and communism totally unacceptable, indeed "unAmarican"

Perhaps because that is the view of most Americans?!? Imagine that!

No true debate can take place, since the left is undfer-represented, or not represented at all. Wishy washy liberals are seen as left wing socialists, when they are nothing like, since they would still prop up capitalism, and the US media falsely presents this as an across the board representation.

Actually, most American mainstream media in the United States is left of center on the American political spectrum. So, Americans are generally more conservative than Europeans. So what!

You only have to look at Fox News to see news presented in a totally biassed fashion, and CNN lies, like so many local US news broadcasts, is so dumbed down it can hardly provoke debate - it's spoonfeeding the masses: exactly what you accuse the Chinese of.

Fox News is the one voice of fresh air among mainstream U.S. media. CNN is certainly left of center. However, unlike in China, these are privately run organizations. If you disagree with them, you can start your own newspaper, or blog. Try and do that in China, and you end up in jail.

But they can get on here.
I come accross them on other sites, where they display evidence of having accessed international news sites.

But they still parrot the spoon fed drivel of the Party and Government. They do that or risk reprisals when they return home.

So anybody who agrees with the government of the day is brainwashed?

No, only when that government uses obvious brainwashing methods as the ChiCom government does. Have you ever seen a Chinese news broadcast? Have you ever seen Chinese television? And if you had, could you understand it? I can't forget the hack job they did on Falungong. I don't suppose you support religious freedom, do you? I remember the hack job they did on the U.S. after the accidential bombing of the embassy in Belgrade, but since it was anti-U.S., I am sure you approve. No alternate views are permitted. No one was permitted to get on CCTV and actually SAY that the U.S. claimed that it was an accident, much less have the ability to say that they agreed with that assessment. No one from Falungong would be allowed to get on SBC or LBC or CCTV to refute the allegations made by the government against it. If you can't see the moral difference between China's media and that of Western democratic countries, you have a bigger problem than I initially thought.

Has it ever occured to you that they may actually agree having thought it through with a free mind? It's too easy to dismiss them as brainwashed - it saves you having to debate the issues they raise and that's not intellectually credible. I don't know about frankguy's position, but I've chatted alot with Fried Rice: he's educated, he's well read and he's TRAVELLED. He's in the US now, or on his way there soon. He's been exposed to the "other"

Considering that all they do is parrot the Party line? I am still waiting for their legal argument that Taiwan is a part of China. But they can't give one because they simply state it is a part of China. Once again, the Party line at work again. I challenge them on it, and they disappear for a few days or weeks and reappear as if the point had never been made.

ludahai admits to social progress in China?
And the bells rang and the champagne corks popped!

Of course there has been some progress in China over the past 27 years. However, the past five years have seen a definate downgrade in human rights and there have been no substantive gains in political rights.

Out of interest, how does Taiwan do on gay rights?
And the position of women?

Taiwan's legislature has been considering legalizing gay marriage. If it happens, it would be the first country in Asia to do so. I don't approve of it, however.

As for women, the vice president of Taiwan is a woman, there are seats allocated in the Legislative Yuan for women. Several county magistrates are women, as are two members of Taichung's city council. Women have longer paid maternal leave than in most non-Nordic countries. Women do better in the business world than just about anywhere else in Asia. The Taiwanese economic miracle was based largely on the development of small business (the complete antithesis to that in Japan and Korea) and women made huge gains in Taiwan very rapidly through their own opening and managing of their own small businesses. Taiwanese women have the ability to control their own economic lives that women in most of the world can only envy. This, I completely support and agree with!
 
ludahai said:
Do you have any substantive evidence that the Italian P.M. owns virtually all of the Italian media? To be honest, I am not all that familiar with media ownership in most European countries.



It's widely known, and Berlusconi himself positively brags about it.



ludahai said:
I never argued that Singapore is a democracy with press freedoms..

No, but you said you didn't know which examples in the capitalist world I was alluding to, and now you've been enlightened.






ludahai said:
Actually, most American mainstream media in the United States is left of center on the American political spectrum. ..

Your definition of left is rather skewed, probably because you grew up with a United Statesian perspective.
ludahai said:
Fox News is the one voice of fresh air among mainstream U.S. media...

If you're to the right of Bush, yes.

ludahai said:
CNN is certainly left of center....

Oh that one's funny ludahai:rofl :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


ludahai said:
But they still parrot the spoon fed drivel of the Party and Government. They do that or risk reprisals when they return home.....

And when United Statesians regurgitate drivel like "the war on terror is justified" should I apply your logic and accuse them of being simply brainwashed, because they're following the government line, as spewed out to them by Faux News?








ludahai said:
Of course there has been some progress in China over the past 27 years.

There, that didn't kill you did it?







ludahai said:
Taiwan's legislature has been considering legalizing gay marriage. If it happens, it would be the first country in Asia to do so. I don't approve of it, however.


Quelle surprise! ludahai doesn't believe in equality. He would deny his gay co-citizens the same rights and dignity under the law as he enjoys. Are you one of those christians who preaches love but practises hate?
 
Urethra Franklin said:
It's widely known, and Berlusconi himself positively brags about it.[/quote[

I don't follow EUropean media news very closely.

No, but you said you didn't know which examples in the capitalist world I was alluding to, and now you've been enlightened.[/quote[

I should have specified capitalist and DEMOCRATIC countries. Singapore most certainly is NOT democratic.

Your definition of left is rather skewed, probably because you grew up with a United Statesian perspective.

I am an American, sure. However, as a European, your view of the right can be seen as equally skewed!

If you're to the right of Bush, yes.

I am not really to the right of Bush. On a couple of issues I am, but in general, I am a little more moderate than he is.

And when United Statesians regurgitate drivel like "the war on terror is justified" should I apply your logic and accuse them of being simply brainwashed, because they're following the government line, as spewed out to them by Faux News?

Well, the war on terror IS justified. After all, the United States was attacked by terrorists not only on September 11th, 2001, but in a number of occasions prior to that. The terrorists began this war. The United States is justified in taking the fight to the enemy.

As for your "Fox News" comment. I live in Taiwan. For those without satellite dishes (like myself), Fox News is not available. The only foreign TV news sources available to people here are CNN, BBC and NHK (and my Japanese, while good enough to get me in trouble in Tokyo, is not good enough to really follow the later.)


Quelle surprise! ludahai doesn't believe in equality. He would deny his gay co-citizens the same rights and dignity under the law as he enjoys. Are you one of those christians who preaches love but practises hate?

Marriage is between a man and a woman, period! Civil unions, which give the same legal rights to gay couples is an acceptable compromise as far as I am concerned, but to call a coupling between two men or two women is not marriage and is not acceptable in the eyes of God as is told to us in the Holy Scriptures and is taught to us by the Holy Spirit through the Church.
 
ludahai said:
Marriage is between a man and a woman, period! Civil unions, which give the same legal rights to gay couples is an acceptable compromise as far as I am concerned, but to call a coupling between two men or two women is not marriage and is not acceptable in the eyes of God as is told to us in the Holy Scriptures and is taught to us by the Holy Spirit through the Church.


Oh, I hadn't realized that Taiwan was a christian state that should have civil laws according to the scriptures. No wonder the Chinese want you back to save yet more innocent children from religious brainwashing.

There was once a time when people argued it was against the will of god for people of different races to marry, or he'd have made us all the same colour (funny, they don't apply this logic to hair colour, eye colour, shoe size etc.) Indeed, you only have to peruse this forum to see that in mediaeval places like Texas, some people still think that way. Now ludahai, you and I are both living proof that cross racial relationships work, that love conquers all and that if you love somebody, you should have the right to express that love. All adult consensual reltationships should have equality before the law. The word marriage was originally about property and inheritance: religion didn't invent it, it simply highjacked it.

ludahai, I sincerely hope you and your wife are never at the receiving end of whackos who think you've offended god marrying outside your race. I've had this crap (in the US - land of the free? My arse) for being on the arm of a black man, and believe me it's not pleasant. This is exactly the same kind of hatred and ignorance you dish out to gay people. Doubtless you'll scream it's different, buit it's only different because it doesn't affect you. As I said originally, like many christians, you preach love, but when you're put to the test, you don't really mean it.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
Oh, I hadn't realized that Taiwan was a christian state that should have civil laws according to the scriptures. No wonder the Chinese want you back to save yet more innocent children from religious brainwashing.

I didn't say that was the opinion of Taiwan, I stated that as my personal opinion. Though, to be honest, homosexuality is not exactly accepted by mainstream Taiwanese society, and Christianity has nothing to do with it, despite the fact that Taiwan's first elected president (Lee TungHui) is a Christian.


Now ludahai, you and I are both living proof that cross racial relationships work, that love conquers all and that if you love somebody, you should have the right to express that love. All adult consensual reltationships should have equality before the law. The word marriage was originally about property and inheritance: religion didn't invent it, it simply highjacked it.

But regardless of religion, marriage was always between a man and a woman. It doesn't matter if you use a religious definition for it, or a secular one. This is true in most cultures. Vermont gives homosexuals the option of civil unions. That SHOULD be regarded as an acceptible compromise, especially in a country like the U.S. where most people do in fact regard marriage as being between a man and a woman.

ludahai, I sincerely hope you and your wife are never at the receiving end of whackos who think you've offended god marrying outside your race.

I have, but not with my wife. I dated a Taiwanese girl while I was a graduate student at Georgia in the mid 90s. We went to South Carolina to visit some friends. We saw some Protestant Fundie wackos and when they saw us holding hands, they went nutzoid on us.

I've had this crap (in the US - land of the free? My arse) for being on the arm of a black man, and believe me it's not pleasant.

That has nothing to do with the U.S. being free or not. People have the freedom to voice their point of view, you have the freedom to ignore them or tell them how cruddy their notions are. Isn't freedom great? Of course, you don't support people's freedom to disagree with you, do you?

This is exactly the same kind of hatred and ignorance you dish out to gay people. Doubtless you'll scream it's different, buit it's only different because it doesn't affect you. As I said originally, like many christians, you preach love, but when you're put to the test, you don't really mean it.

It is called love the sinner, not the sin. The Bible specifically identifies homosexuality as an abomination in the eyes of God. I know you are not a Christian, but I am as are most Americans. I have had friends who were gay. They understood my position on homosexuality, and while they didn't agree with it, they accepted it and it didn't get in the way of our being friends because in day to day life, I didn't treat him any differently than I did any of my other friends. I think you need to try to understand people better before painting such broad brushes over them. You, on the other hand, are so overt in your contempt for the United States and for freedom in general, it is fairly easy to pin you down.
 
ludahai said:
it is fairly easy to pin you down.


As it is you.
Christian = full of contradictions and happy to dish out hate.

There are many other threads on gay marriage so would should probably leave it there. If Taiwan passes this legislation I will applaud it for it's respect of human rights and equality.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
There are many other threads on gay marriage so would should probably leave it there. If Taiwan passes this legislation I will applaud it for it's respect of human rights and equality.

That would be a first. You don't seem to want to applaud Taiwan for anything else though it is rated as one of the most free countries in Asia!
 
ludahai said:
That would be a first. You don't seem to want to applaud Taiwan for anything else though it is rated as one of the most free countries in Asia!


The definition "country" is open to debate, as we have seen.
 
Actually, most American mainstream media in the United States is left of center on the American political spectrum. ..

Just an example of how media construed russia and communism. One of my family friends told me this story:

he had received six moscovites who had recently arrived from Moscow. I believe this was around the time of the collapse of the USSR. They turn on the news, and see Dan Rather reporting that there is no food in Moscow. He shows a store where all the food is completely gone.. and from the look of it, he certainly makes the situation seem very bad. The moscovites of course were like wtf...they're like this guy doesn't know what he's talkin about. They said that most of the government owned stores were now sold out, thats why they are empty. However there were already private shops established by this time, so there was no "food crisis" as Dan Rather (one of the top news anchormen) was suggesting.

As to the US establishing dictatorships, its not really contested that they would prop-up US supportive dictators to back against the communist threat. Cases where communism or socialism would be democratically elected would be seen as athreat, and dictatorship woudl be a viable alternative. Hell, we trained the muhajideen against the Soviets, and look what that lead to... We chose Pakistan over Democratic India. People say that is because India sided with the Soviets, but if you look at the history, Indira Ghandi actually went to the US for support prior to this alignment. US disregarded India. We also supported Sadaam during the Iraq/Iran war, for personal gain.

Freedom is something cherished by the American public, but seriously, our government could care less who they support or give power to, as long as it serves their own interests. This applies to any country.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
The definition "country" is open to debate, as we have seen.

OK, let's clarify it and say that Taiwan is one of the most free nation-states in Asia. You may think Taiwan's status is up for debate, but in accordance with international law, it is up for the Taiwanese people to make that decision, and no one else. Do you hate freedom so much that you would deny the Taiwanese people the right to chart their own future as international law says that they have the right to?
 
Keep China out of Taiwan, that is the best thing that can happen in Asia. A free Democratic state, probably one of the most free and democratic in all of Asia, and the world should let a Dictatorship like China claim Taiwan? I think not, Taiwan for Taiwan. Let them chart their own course which is so denied to the people of China.
 
Back
Top Bottom