5 ms·

"Afghan soldiers told to ignore American Allies' eating pork" Well, reading this you might think "how can that compare to raping boys? Boys are human beings an

• adrianN 11y ago
  So were does cultural acceptance stop? If it were common not to rape boys but to eat babies after torturing them to tenderize the meat, should we also be accepting of that? There has to be a point where we draw the line. Most people here I think would agree that rape is on the other side of that line.
  • rgbrenner 11y ago
    Just to be completely impartial, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was agreed to by Afghanistan and the US in 1948. http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ Rape violates several of those rights.. while eating pork violates none of those rights. So there is a line that was already drawn years ago.. and rape is clearly on the other side of it.
  • erikb 11y ago
    I love your first question. How many lives can be saved right now and in the next X years just because you achieve this cooperation? How many things the other side has to accept from you that they consider really bad? Do you help the boys by not agreeing to cooperate and going home or do you help them more by accepting what happens and providing medical/psychological help afterwards? How many of them are even like that? Maybe most of them also disagree with raping boys but somehow can't enforce it? Can you even choose to not cooperate or will the people above you not allow it? It is very complex and should not be answered in general. Sometimes even every decision is bad. How many of them are even like that? Maybe most of them also disagree with raping boys but somehow can't enforce it? I'm happy that you open up for that question, because that's really the point. When should we stop? Thanks!
  • JupiterMoon 11y ago
    I start with the principle, "your freedom ends where my face begins" following this acts that involve harming another human are unacceptable. I.e. rape, genital mutilation, forced marriage etc can never be cultural issues to me. In my opinion they are always wrong no exceptions. I consider myself lucky to live in a country where the laws (mainly) reflect my own stance on many of these issues.
• deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
• flarg 11y ago
  This is quite an astounding comment!
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
• Qantourisc 11y ago
  If you don't care about humanity, and are going to ignore abuse. Why send soldiers there in the first place? Culture is NOT an excuse! Locally normal and immoral don't exclude each other. In my opinion immoral doesn't differ all that much depending on culture. The biggest factor in defining what things are immoral would depend on some believes: do animals have right, are you an extremist in your believe, are there any animals holy, ... Personally I think any sane person would decide what is moral purely by considering suffering
  • coldtea 11y ago
    >If you don't care about humanity, and are going to ignore abuse. Why send soldiers there in the first place? To secure control of the area, friendly allied governments and cheap oil. Why they'd sent soldiers there, for "humanity"? They could send them to Emirates or Palestine if that was the issue (if we ignore the whole "not their business in the first place" thing).
• sahreeg 11y ago
  Correct me if I am wrong, but while your argument might have some legitimacy, in this particular case it sounds as if you believe that rape is actually something culturally acceptable in these parts of the world. It is not, and FYI, Islam forbids 1- homosexuality, 2- rape. This phenomena SHOULD be fought against -because it is wrong, and the child is being abused here- especially by the people who are there to spread 'democracy and progressiveness' in the first place ;)
  • crpatino 11y ago
    Not that I disagree with you on the morals of this comment, but a lot of confusion would be avoided if everybody just accepted that the US is a normal empire; an empire with geopolitical interest in the region and every reason to keep happy the cadre of monsters they got themselves as alleys. It is not that they hate the local population, but they don't gain anything by defending them and may loose a lot by playing the role of Knight in the Shinning Armour.
    • erikb 11y ago
      That's also a good point. Gaining access to trade routes and natural ressources might be more important than protecting innocents to the agenda givers.
      • crpatino 11y ago
        Or preventing unfriendly third parties from gaining access to such resources. Both China and Russia are better positioned geographically to take advantage of those territories.
  • aikah 11y ago
    > Islam forbids 1- homosexuality, 2- rape. Like all religions Islam says one thing and its contrary. consistency has never been a strength of religions. Some muslims say that only homosexual acts are forbidden , as for rape , I'll let you read the quran and the hadiths again.
  • rimantas 11y ago
• MichaelApproved 11y ago
  I downvoted because that's a bad analogy. Here's why: Animal rights aside (because that has nothing to do with the restriction of pork), only the person eating pork is harmed. When Americans consume pork, it doesn't harm the Afghans who don't consume pork. Meaning, everyone eating pork is freely volunteering to do so. No one involved in eating of pork is involved against their will. Whatever the punishment might be in the afterlife, it only involves those who consume pork. In a sense, it's a victimless crime. Again, putting animal rights aside. However, having sex with young boys involves the unwilling young boy. There is a victim that needs protection here.
  • inDigiNeous 11y ago
    How can you say this when you very well know, eating pork means killing innocent animals, keeping them locked down, in the same way these people are holding small children locked down and abusing them. Eating pork is as much abuse as is abusing little children, or even more, as the animal is brutally killed, a thinking, living being. You cannot just put animal rights aside like that, this is probably along the lines people who abuse children are thinking, that it is their right to abuse children, like the western world thinks "It is our right to kill, slaughter and eat animals". Maybe if we wouldn't think that we can just raise, kill and eat other living, conscious, thinking, feeling beings, just like we are, all the time, then we would have less abuse of ourselves too? Compassion goes a long way. If we cannot have compassion to other living beings inhabiting this planet, how can we have compassion to other people inhabiting this planet. Can you see the analogy ? And if you're making the comparison to intelligence as being the factor that limits what we should eat and kill, then I can remind that it has been studied that pigs are as intelligent or even more intelligent than dogs even. Now, what do you think such intelligent beings are thinking when they are being held captive and tortured in their poor living conditions, just to be force fed, force breeded and then violently killed just to fill our bellies ?
    • cm2187 11y ago
      Islam doesn't ban eating pork to protect the life of these innocent creatures.
• cturner 11y ago
  Culture is a distraction. The actions in the articles against boys and girls fail the live-and-let-live principle on the most basic levels. The word 'uncivilised' gets thrown around a bit, and loses weight. Here we see it in the raw. These practices are uncivilised behaviour. They favour might-is-right over the freedom of the victims. People should not be slaves. Humans should be able to live their lives to pursue their own interests.
  • coldtea 11y ago
    >The key issue is individual rights vs might-is-right. Culture is a distraction. Your very conception of "individual rights" (and what they should be) is cultural itself. (Not to mention abused all the time to support hypocritical interests).
    • berntb 11y ago
      No, the "individual rights" are declared by UN. And ratified by Afghanistan, as another commenter noted. I think you are trolling. (This would probably not be deleted, I'm hellbanned. Too easily trolled.)
    • coldtea 11y ago
      >No, the "individual rights" are declared by UN The UN is just a bunch of big powers bullying and doing what they like to lesser countries. And those big powers don't even sign or ratify all decisions made by the UN, or selectively pick what they care for and ignore those that don't favor them. The US for example has refused to cooperate in a international war criminal court that asks to trial its own. Or how about the fact that in the 60's, decades since the signing of those rights, blacks still have to fight against seggregation in schools, hotels, etc? And modern stuff like torture, drone killings, rampant police killings of innocents, death penalty (including for minors) and all that stuff against basic human rights? Heck, when the declaration of UN was signed, most of the countries doing the signing were still colonies, and all of the major ones had colonies themselves. Hurray for hypocrisy -- and selective enforcing of them as an excuse and as a weapon against lesser countries.
• remarkEon 11y ago
  Well I'd simply submit that, after spending time there, I'm tired of the mental gymnastics required for the culturally relativistic perspective espoused in your comment. So, you're simply wrong.
  • coldtea 11y ago
    How about the mental gymnastics of "we invade them for their own good"?
• venomsnake 11y ago
  While I think that the question what to do with the acceptance of cultures that don't accept our core values is valid. And will become more and more potent with the immigrant waves flooding Europe, you are being somewhat more inflammatory than necessary. There are things we should not accept - end of story. Nonconsensual sex and cult brainwashing are some of them.
• nivel 11y ago
  Your cowardly attempt at legitimizing an abhorrent practice that violates individual rights by attaching it to the mystical word "culture" is downright disgusting. If this is not a troll post, you are the most despicable human being I have ever personally encountered. To even debate the merits of your argument is an insult to humanity and only an ad hominem will suffice. Fuck you.
  • lotsofcows 11y ago
    Are you American? Do you support the mass imprisonment of your (mainly black, male) poor? Do you support the death penalty? Are you anti "ObamaCare"? Do you suppory the casual ownership of guns? Is the death of children as a direct result of pointlessly having a gun in the house an "acceptable risk"? Different cultures have different values. You can dislike it and work to correct it but your attitude makes you look like a child.
    • nivel 11y ago
      Your attitude makes you look like a devil, I'm sure you think you are so edgy and sophisticated now that you try to compare a primitive culture with the west. We are not talking about America here and I am not American. Debating rape of children is heinous, and rape of children is heinous.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • erikb 11y ago
    Do I really attempt to legitimize anything?
    • simonh 11y ago
      Yes. You are advising that these practices should be accepted, and therefore imply that they are acceptable and therefore in some way legitimate.
• steven2012 11y ago
  Your analogy is utterly wrong and broken, because you are mistakenly calling raping young boys "cultural". It's not cultural, and it's not something that happens across all of Afghanistan, otherwise all Afghani males could be considered pedophiles. It's a select group of pedophiles that have attained military status such that they won't be prosecuted for their crimes. That's not culture, that's corruption. It's the same thing with the Catholic Church. Widescale sexual abuse of young boys by priests occurred, but not because it's a cultural aspect of the Catholic Church. It's a disgusting corruption that somehow manifested itself by pedophiles that infiltrated the Church and abused their positions, just like in Afghanistan. So there's no lens of morality to view things with. What happened in both cases is that it's a crime that has grown due to widespread corruption. I'm sure you will find that a lot of money was stolen by the Afghani military as well, but theft is not cultural as well, that's corruption and abuse. The same thing happened in the British government where a widespread sexual abuse ring was discovered recently. Is that also "cultural" aspect of British people? No, it's corruption and a heinous crime.
  • sigma2015 11y ago
    The assumption that only pedophiles rape very young children is wrong - there is a "phenomenon" of substituting preferrred sex partners with what is available. That's why there is a rape problem in prisons which is certainly not caused by gays ...
  • rimantas 11y ago
    Ok, let's talk about female genital mutilation. Will you claim that is not cultural? Or the "honor" killings? Something being a part of culture or tradition does not make it right or valuable.
  • erikb 11y ago
    >you are mistakenly calling raping young boys "cultural". I'm not.
• gadders 11y ago
  I am entirely happy to judge paedophiles and rapists. I'll also judge thieves, racists and murderers.