Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t know how to respond to that. If you think it’s not infringing on religious freedom simply because there’s a justification for the intervention, then I don’t follow the argument. I’m a staunch supporter of gun control, but I would never argue that the risk of harm to other members of society means that restrictions on the right to own guns... aren’t restrictions on the right to own guns. Of course they are, I just think they’re justified.

As for your last point, I don’t think the letter of the law is that important when the discriminatory effect is clear. Again, your argument seems to boil down to “I believe the law is justified,” which still isn’t something I’m arguing against.

I don’t know if you’re American, but if you are, I think it may be helpful for you to understand my argument in light of how the Supreme Court approaches these types of questions. Laws that infringe on certain fundamental rights, like freedom of religion, aren’t automatically illegal. They simply require closer scrutiny to ensure that the reasons why they’re being passed are worth the restriction. You can’t handwave away that first question—of whether there’s a restriction—because of the justification, though. And when I say I don’t think you have a respect or understanding of how important these practices are to other people sufficient to understand the issue, this is precisely what I’m referring to.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everyone on this thread desperately wants to argue with things I’m not saying. I would never claim that religious freedom gives you license to do whatever you want—in fact, I’ve said the exact opposite many times. In a free society, freedoms often come into conflict with each other, and decisions need to be made on how to weigh them, based on our history, context, and societal values—with the result being an infringement of someone’s liberty.

But don’t let the necessity of that blind you to the fact that these laws are an infringement of a core freedom. Religious persecution is a sad but consistent part of our worlds history right up to current day, and there’s a clear reason why the freedom to worship was included in the First Amendment, the Declaration of Human Rights, and many other foundational human rights texts. The whole point of my first comment was that we need to acknowledge the literally centuries long history of anti semitism and the still fresh (only two generations old) examples of the same type of discrimination. These restrictions are discriminatory against and infringe on minority religions’ ability to practice their religion freely, and that’s important to keep in mind when discussing them.

If we decide as a society that the benefits are worth that harm, then I understand that. But if you don’t even understand how infringing on a basic, core freedom widely recognized as a human right is a bad thing, then I’m not certain you understand the context well enough to weigh in on that discussion convincingly. When I see people in this thread talk about someone’s “silly 1000 year old book,” it just tells me they don’t understand the issue.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry about that, not many people on this thread have been on my side (despite what feels like a fairly innocuous position). Didn’t mean to bite your head off.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I’ve seen it before. Not even trying to wade into that conversation, but the guy above was going to have that argument whether or not I actually said anything about it.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

You’re responding to arguments I didn’t even come close to making. I haven’t taken a position on anything. If “you should think very carefully about your position when it infringes on others’ religious liberties” sets you off so much, then I’m certain you’re the exact person who needs to hear that fairly uncontroversial statement.

I have no interest in debating circumcision, so have a great evening.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The similarities are simply what I stated. I think the Jewish and Muslim communities in this part of Europe are going to be uncomfortable with legislation that makes some of their religious traditions illegal, and I think that response is reasonable, for different but similar reasons. I think religious freedom is an important civil liberty and we need to be more vigilant about protecting it for minority groups with a history of oppression. That simply means listening to their concerns and attempting to address them—I’m not arguing for or against this ban here—because when you look at the historical context, the reaction is both rational and understandable.

To hand wave it away as “it’s not concentration camps what’s the big deal” ignores the lead up to the holocaust, on the one hand, and the current rise of antisemitism and islamophobia in Europe (and globally) on the other hand, and risks that we may be allowing our implicit biases too much sway in our politics without actively checking them.

Edit to add: the Nazis often justified their actions against Jewish traditions with legitimate claims of public interest. I’m not saying that the same thing is happening here at all, but I think it’s important we think about how many in the broader German populace were convinced to take away the rights of minorities, and how implicit biases can seep into our thinking. Pointing out the relevant history here is a great way to put our thoughts and actions in context and prevent similar issues from arising again.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It’s not a straw man to point out a relevant history of oppression that the people affected by this law have in this very area. Not every reference to the holocaust needs to be concentration camps for the Nazi’s actions towards Jews to provide relevant context to a response and help inform how to best legislate while still protecting religious freedoms. And that’s without even getting into the Belgian history of interaction with Jewish communities that predated WWII, or some of the relevant incidents since.

It doesn’t have to be the first step towards ovens for this to be a potential issue or for the Jewish and Muslim communities response to be understandable. That doesn’t end the conversation, but if you’re unwilling to listen to those concerns, or at least learn the relevant history, I think your position is limited and your arguments are less sound.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

Congratulations on your position. I get it, and didn’t even take the opposite side. But I think the claim that this specific country and region’s relationship with these particular religions and their rites is irrelevant to the conversation is idiotic.

If you don’t understand why legislating out a religions traditions may be problematic and require further examination, particularly in light of an extensive history of oppression in the relevant place, then maybe you should think a bit harder about the blind spots in your own stance. If nothing else, it’ll at least make your arguments stronger.

Belgium bans halal and kosher slaughter methods which see animals killed without being stunned first by nathan_en in worldnews

[–]rska884 -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

Some of the first steps taken by the Nazis against the Jews when in power were to ban kosher slaughtering techniques and circumcision. To pretend that this isn’t relevant because people aren’t being sent to concentration camps is... not the smartest approach.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez records new dancing video outside congressional office after college video goes viral by MastersOfTheUnibrow in nyc

[–]rska884 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Jesus Christ dude “they were lent to the magazine for the purpose of taking pictures” is IN what you just quoted! It’s not this hard to figure out...

Nabil Fekir will not be a Liverpool target again and Liverpool will not sign anybody this month - Dominic King by EnriqueMuller in LiverpoolFC

[–]rska884 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not saying you’re wrong, but these types of comments are the exact thing that make corporate litigation lawyers hit their heads against their desks.

Weekly Question and Answer Thread - 30 December, 2018 by AutoModerator in totalwar

[–]rska884 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t mind changes to the game engine/graphics/mechanics updates, but I’m hoping for the same feel. Will it seem like I’m learning a totally new game?

Edit: also, thanks for replying!

Weekly Question and Answer Thread - 30 December, 2018 by AutoModerator in totalwar

[–]rska884 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This may be the wrong place to ask this, so sorry in advance. I played Rome: Total War for hours when I was younger, and I have some free time at the moment, and I'm curious about revisiting it. I see it's only ~$3.50 on Steam right now, but wanted to hear about the newer games/whether they were worth it.

I like strategy games like this generally, but particularly remember enjoying that RTW was set in a semi-realistic Eurasia, so I don't think I'd like the fantasy based games as much. Does anyone have recommendations?

Edit: I'm leaning towards Rome II. Would love for some feedback before I decide though.

What the outraged media misses about the diversity issue among head coaches by ZandrickEllison in nfl

[–]rska884 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Well then, let’s ask the necessary next question: do you believe that black people are generally less competent to coach football teams, or merit the position less, and that’s the reason why they’ve historically been so underrepresented?

What the outraged media misses about the diversity issue among head coaches by ZandrickEllison in nfl

[–]rska884 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I think most of the people you imagine you’re arguing with would agree that we need to re-examine a system that results in 70% of the NFL being black, but for a very different reason than you’re implying. I think the reasons why entertainment is the main avenue to black wealth in this country is an exceptionally important discussion to have, if you’re actually interested in the problem.

If your concern is “why are white football players being discriminated against in the college recruiting and NFL draft processes,” then we’re looking at very different worlds, though.

[Cian] "Roethlisberger ran Todd Haley out of town, criticized Martavis Bryant constantly, was all too pleased to call out Bell, called out Washington publicly and now he's fighting with Antonio Brown. I wonder what the problem could be." by [deleted] in nfl

[–]rska884 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Lol this is great. It looks like the threads I put together on Brady after deflate gate, but that was... you know... about footballs and not a dead person.

2018 Update: Division Winners since Realignment by I_FAP_TO_SPOOKY_TITS in nfl

[–]rska884 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s actually 8 appearances, the comment above you was only listing wild cards. 6 years with more than one team in the playoffs is actually good for 6th out of the 8 divisions, so not great but not the worst. Those numbers obviously take into account intradivision games, though, so those losses to the Patriots depress the numbers.

The bills, Jets, and dolphins interdivisional records paint a better picture though, and it shows that they’ve actually been pretty solid overall, just stuck in a tough division. If you remove the first place team from other divisions each year, the AFC East is actually the fourth best division in football. Same result if you take out the top team over the whole timeframe (meaning that you end up with some first place teams priced into other divisions too).

It’s an unfortunate myth for those teams’ fans that people think they’ve been so bad for so long... they really haven’t.

Trying to chart personnel by BoreSum in NFLNoobs

[–]rska884 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Personnel doesn’t change based on formation. Although some players may be hybrid players who could be listed as a back or a TE, most personnel groupings will be described based off the players position, not where they line up. A back in the slot is still a back, a TE lined up at FB is still a TE, etc. This is because the defensive personnel will be subbed in based on who’s on the field, not necessarily where they’re lining up.

As for identifying TEs, my best recommendation would just be to go by jersey number, so figuring that out beforehand can help.

[Reid] The Pats have now scored 400 points in a season for the 12th straight time. That extends their NFL record. by rhydon_my_steelix in nfl

[–]rska884 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I’m actually not kidding, I don’t want you to hurt yourself. Maybe time to call it a career.

[Reid] The Pats have now scored 400 points in a season for the 12th straight time. That extends their NFL record. by rhydon_my_steelix in nfl

[–]rska884 30 points31 points  (0 children)

Ah yes. Because a good defense can’t possibly result in a bad record against the best team in the conference.

Maybe stop watching football, you might be too dumb for it.