3 ms·

>> No, these are universal human rights. > A group of people, mostly men, got together and wrote some things down and declared that they are "universal" "right

>> No, these are universal human rights. > A group of people, mostly men, got together and wrote some things down and declared that they are "universal" "rights". That's false, as I pointed out; they've been endorsed and embraced worldwide for centuries. Generally speaking, almost any group given a choice has endorsed them, men and women. Also, the supporters of oppression like to frame it as a matter of opinion, and then invoke some extreme relativism: Your opinion is X, mine is Y, therefore there's no real basis for X. We could say it about anything: You think murder is wrong, I think it's ok, therefore it's just a matter of opinion. It's not a meaningful argument and doesn't address the real and very strong basis for universal human rights. Another consideration: Should you and others be allowed to debate this issue with me? Why? ... The rest of the parent comment attributes things to me that I haven't said, so I'll pass commenting on it.

mistermann 8y ago
> That's false, as I pointed out; they've been endorsed and embraced worldwide for centuries. What does "they've" refer to? > Also, the supporters of oppression like to frame it as a matter of opinion Am I one of these "supporters of oppression"? What oppression are we talking about here? This feels like one of those situations where two people wearing a blindfold are describing an elephant to each other, I have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe you feel the same about me? But I certainly don't think I'm trying to oppress anyone. > and then invoke some extreme relativism: Your opinion is X, mine is Y, therefore there's no real basis for X. Have I done that? Where? > We could say it about anything: You think murder is wrong, I think it's ok, therefore it's just a matter of opinion. I've seen this technique before, I wonder what the name is for it. I'd offer a comparable retort, but I don't enjoy protection due to my politics. > Another consideration: Should you and others be allowed to debate this issue with me? Why? In the real world, that is a matter of opinion, but let's try not to change the subject shall we? > The rest of the parent comment attributes things to me that I haven't said, so I'll pass commenting on it. The irony.

mistermann 8y ago

> That's false, as I pointed out; they've been endorsed and embraced worldwide for centuries. What does "they've" refer to? > Also, the supporters of oppression like to frame it as a matter of opinion Am I one of these "supporters of oppression"? What oppression are we talking about here? This feels like one of those situations where two people wearing a blindfold are describing an elephant to each other, I have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe you feel the same about me? But I certainly don't think I'm trying to oppress anyone. > and then invoke some extreme relativism: Your opinion is X, mine is Y, therefore there's no real basis for X. Have I done that? Where? > We could say it about anything: You think murder is wrong, I think it's ok, therefore it's just a matter of opinion. I've seen this technique before, I wonder what the name is for it. I'd offer a comparable retort, but I don't enjoy protection due to my politics. > Another consideration: Should you and others be allowed to debate this issue with me? Why? In the real world, that is a matter of opinion, but let's try not to change the subject shall we? > The rest of the parent comment attributes things to me that I haven't said, so I'll pass commenting on it. The irony.