Kasz216 said:
dib8rman said:
A. As long as we are talking about Ethic's I've indicated experts in the field, you seem to be bringing up male female relations, I argue fair enough but your arguing ethics so long as you keep the charge that myself and another poster are treating those two women like shit.
B. Oh that's right by now China had the impression it was a square and Columbus did a pre-voyage around the world in 1399 just to set everything up for the church to explain later. Again your being suspicious and for the innocent reader Columbus had set sail in 1492 and not a single claimant of authority would with safety asured agree that the Earth could be spherical much less round until Magellan's voyage. Also note I was very specific on which part of the world I was referring because I know just about every civilization had a different idea of what shape the world was.
C. Again it's your everyone thing, the problem with dishonesty is it's always found in the convenient not usually intentionally but certainly from confidence in everyone else’s ignorance. - I'm happy you seemed to omit both my cases of feminism’s pragmatic application with the legal system. I'm going to have to assume then that your find with a 12 year old boy being raped by his teacher and told through injunction to pay child support for her child.
D. We are in accord on D though, I think it should be pointed out here that I would always be forced to argue against women's rights as it is applied by feminists but I am for equal rights as it is implied by rational society. An example maybe?
I will always be against a woman being tied to a man through fillial contract and I believe that contract should be an independent body where both parties are obligated.
I will always be for women not being treated like animals and having the right to say yes or no to bearing a child or intercourse.
I will not stand for separate financial aid services for specifically men or women.
These things do not omit though that women are the fairer sex and that they should not be under any obligation to take on the tasks men must bare. Such as heavy lifting, armed services and stand up comedy. ^_^ If they want to then so be it but none of the tasks that a man can do because his body can handle it should have their prerequisites bent or weakened so a woman could fill the role and likewise for female activities.
|
A) We really aren't talking about ethics. At least, not the kind of ethics and ethics proffessor can answer. Afterall we're talking about applied ethics. "Is it wrong to steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving famiy."
Except, instead of a loaf of bread, it's various laws trying to counteract a sexist culture that works in fairly complicated ways to the point of where you have to spend a decent amount of time studing it to understand how it works. (rather then think it's some global conspiracy to keep women down via some dudes.)
So yeah, Ethics proffessors, aren't really going to know enough on the subject compaired to people whose entire jobs it is to study this and come up with ways to fix it.
It's like asking who's an expert at solving a quantum physics question. Someone with a degree in Quantum Physics, or someone with a degree in Mathematics.
Or, who is more likely to know the ethical implications of stem cells, someone with an ethics degree... or someone who knows what a stem cell is?
You are trying to apply a very strict moral absolutism along the lines of "It's wrong to steal to feed your starving family because it's stealing." Though aren't even using the constructs of the law and are instead using constructs based on...
I'm not sure.
B) This is just wrong.... in so many ways. This again is a case of the "Every expert disagress with you." This time, it's the experts of the 1400's.
http://www.bede.org.uk/flatearth.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth
C) I'm.... not being dishonest though. Like literally everyone disagress with you. Aside from which, point to a law that directly says "People who are statutory raped must pay child support."
Outside of that just being some judges opinion on the matter.
D) Your examples are stupid. Afterall, there are plenty of women more suited to things like heavy lifting and the armed forces then me.
Even the differences between men and women that are physical are mostly social. There were various tribes where the best fighters were actually female. People who came across these tribes later suggeted genetic differences, before people discovered... that's just not how shit works.
Treat women and men the same, and even things like physical world records are going to shrink. David Stern thinks that before he's done being commisoner a woman will play in the NBA. I disagree, but only because unlike a guy, a really good woman isn't going to get a personal trainer at 14 and everyone isn't going to focus and support her like other players.
Though, if David Stern is right, and he knows more about basketball then you or I... if it's possible for that to happen in the .0000001% of one of the most physical sports in the leauge...
the real physical differences certaintly are a lot less different then we'd like to think for the 99.99999% of us.
In a world where guys aren't given Gi-Joes and women aren't given dolls... I think you'd be surprised how similiar most things would turn out physically. Sure there aren't going to be many 6-10 women, but there aren't many 6 10 people in general... and being 6 10 actually hurts more then it helps even in most physical endevors.
|
