Marianne has a naked breast because it’s an allegory, you cretin

[Ben Kenobi]

Point out where I am supporting the burkha. Specific quotes or gtfo. Also point out where I am supporting the killing of girls... Or gtfo.

This is over the ban of the Burkha here. Do you support the Burkha ban?

As for killing girls, you support abortion.

Neonazis in Germany burn **** and they are considered christian.

LOL, except for the fact that they are pagan and they hate Christians...

I just think additional IDs bear additional costs on the poor who can barely afford living costs. You essentially are arguing for a poll tax.

I've helped folks get their ID so that they could vote. This is a lie. At most you're out half a day to get it if you've lost it.

Edit: By saying abortion is killing girls you are lying. A fetus isn't a girl.

Yes, a fetus is a girl.

[Ben Kenobi]

So again BK, just because some Muslims are terrorists doesn't mean all Muslims are terrorists.

If Muslims are committing terrorist attacks in France, then the French are well within their rights to impose restrictions on Islam.

[Ben Kenobi]

For someone so pro-women, why are you such a staunch Catholic? Catholicism is anti women. More and more people are disavowing Catholicism.

Given that protestants accuse Catholicism of elevating women too much, I can't see the argument that Catholicism is anti-women. Not when we have devotionals for the Blessed Virgin.

[Giancarlo]

This is over the ban of the Burkha here. Do you support the Burkha ban?

As for killing girls, you support abortion.



LOL, except for the fact that they are pagan and they hate Christians...



I've helped folks get their ID so that they could vote. This is a lie. At most you're out half a day to get it if you've lost it.



Yes, a fetus is a girl.

He is back at it... Lying Ben!

We aren't discussing a burkha ban. I was discussing the ban of any Muslim headgear in France. Learn how to read illiterate.

The Neo Nazis proclaim themselves as perfect Christians. Don't like it? Take it up with them.

A fetus isn't a person. Stop acting as if it is.

What IDs? Specialized voter ids? Out half of the day? Poll tax! And out half of the day? You realize people can't even afford to take half of day off work! You are just totally wrong as usual!

Specialized voter IDs are usually even more than state IDs and are simply a poll tax. You hate the working class and you don't want them voting.

[Giancarlo]

Given that protestants accuse Catholicism of elevating women too much, I can't see the argument that Catholicism is anti-women. Not when we have devotionals for the Blessed Virgin.

I see all religions as anti women. Including Catholicism. Grow up!

[Ming]

If Muslims are committing terrorist attacks in France, then the French are well within their rights to impose restrictions on Islam.

Catholic priests were raping children, I didn't hear you wanting to impose restrictions on all Catholics.

[Elok]

We interrupt this showing of "Geez BK is a ****ty person, part XLVIII" for an actually novel discussion.

For a more serious answer - to me it sounds like BE is referring to prominent intellectual approaches post-WW2 arguing indeed that with NS the "project of enlightenment" has failed, namely that it set free developments leading to all kinds of nifty scientific/tech stuff, but failed to deliver on the ethic side, esp. since reason and rationale were (ab)used to develop mechanisms for opressing ppl more and more.

But while this approach my have merit in a certain way, it is not a universal explaination for everything, and since totalitarian regimes have not taken over the world post WW2 declaring a "failure" of enlightenment globally seems kind of a stretch....

I would say that the Twentieth in general did severe damage to a previously rosy view of human nature and the future. The medieval view of humanity was, as a general rule, rather grim, and in some cases the early modern one (Calvin, Hobbes--and I don't mean comics) could be even worse. The Enlightenment, and its successors, were rooted in the idea that, far from total and unfixable depravity, we were really pretty okay, and if things weren't great now we could keep incrementally making them better. But then we had WWI, with lots of fantastically horrible new ways to kill people in larger numbers than ever before--tens of thousands dead in single inconclusive battles. Then the WWII era, which added to the general slaughter a whole new kind of brutal and barbaric government, worse than anything the premodern world had to offer. Then we spent fifty years in a delicate diplomatic tapdance trying to keep from destroying civilization. Along the way we grew environmentally conscious. Etc. It's been very disillusioning, in spite of all the very real benefits bestowed by technology.

Now, with the end of the Cold War and the Pax Americana since, it has become somewhat easier to be optimistic again, and you see this in the Stephen Pinker types. But it's also been the era of terrorism, resurgent despotism, and climate change. In the long term, I think we're going to have to face up to the shortcomings of the Enlightenment: the modern world is one in which large-scale power (governments, and to some extent large corporations) has eclipsed small-scale bonds of family and community. And individual freedom cannot grow indefinitely without offloading the costs of bad choices onto others.

[Aeson]

Humanity has come a long way and in general has improved each decade even. Science and reason are the way to improve the human existence, though they could be better applied and accepted of course.

[Giancarlo]

Humanity has come a long way and in general has improved each decade even. Science and reason are the way to improve the human existence, though they could be better applied and accepted of course.

Mr. Orange hair begs to differ.

[Elok]

"Science and reason" are ancillary to the social issues imposed by modernity. I'm very glad that our ancestors succeeded in overthrowing the nonsensical academic orthodoxy imposed by a Jesuit monopoly on education, but that has little to do with the other problems they created at roughly the same time.

[Dinner]

The problem with things like burkas is many women really are forced to wear them upon pain of death. If you don't outlaw them then you allow the coercion to continue. Ataturk got that part right when he outlawed them in modern Turkey.

Sadly, the current muslim fundamentalist dictator has removed these protective laws.

[Uncle Sparky]

Win - Win.

[Giancarlo]

Lots of posturing on here about what is going on. First off, the hijab is what was being targeted. And second there is no proof women are going to be put to death in a WESTERN COUNTRY for not wearing it. Those countries are governed by the judicial systems of that country.

It's almost as shambolic as that speech Donald Trump gave on immigration that makes him look more like a white supremacist.

[Berzerker]

If Muslims are committing terrorist attacks in France, then the French are well within their rights to impose restrictions on Islam.

banning burkas will restrict attacks?

seems it would just piss of Muslims

[Aeson]

I just spent a nice week with my parents who came over to visit. They met Net's family, we had a great time together.

100 years ago this would have been all but impossible. I wouldn't ever have met Net in the first place, such a relationship would have been frowned on at best by both societies, I wouldn't be able to make a living here, my parents realistically couldn't have travelled here in the off chance they were even alive at their age. We definitely couldn't have called each other to make sure we were meeting in the right place, Skyped with family back in the US, and posted pictures to Facebook/Instagram about the occasion.

Modernity doesn't "impose" a breakdown of the family. People have left or lost touch with their families throughout history. There have been horribly broken families throughout history. At least in modern times a woman and the children have a chance to escape an abusive relationship. That may lead to more divorces, but a divorce is a far less insidious wrong than an abusive relationship.