Muslims upset at in-your-face lesson in Dutchness

[The_Knight]

You facking hypocrit. Does it matter if they get their news from SG, from a newspaper or from a book, as long as it if factual? The only difference is that now more information is available to more people, on all kinds of forms and shapes.
Twenty years ago most kids were ignorant about most issues outside their day-to-day life in their countries, and now we all have first-hand access to different realities. I don't know how our present situation can be worse.

Is it hand-picked? Two points, before answering:
1) That is not the important issue when we're talking about teenagers being executed by something as personal as sexual orientation. At least not to me. But we all know you like to divert everybody's attention into details that, in comparison, are not important.
2) Most people here aren't bashing muslims, but rather discussing something that goes on in Iran, which is an Islamic Republic. Stop acting like a girl.

Now, is it hand-picked or not? A certain person has been lately creating a number of threads on the same line. However, long before him, political issues were discussed here as well. All sorts of political issues.
Anyway, if the stories posted are factual, what do you expect everybody to do? Ignore it?
But you're such a facking hypocrite. Didn't you open a thread about 9-11 recently? Isn't our information also hand-picked outside the internet? And are all types of books available to, lets say, any woman in an Islamic country? How did you, as a muslim, express your revolt against the lack of personal freedoms in countries like Iran?


You, my little friend, seem to come here riding on a high horse, looking down at all 'youngsters formulating philosophical ideas', and I bet that is the high point of your day. That is when you wet your pink panties in excitement, convinced Allah has in you a Knight ready to champion all muslim-related causes, always serving enlightment to this crowd of misguided teenagers.

By the way, do you think an Islamic regime has the right to punish homosexuals?

INFESTA, I'm sorry I gave you the impression of 'looking down at" youngsters or anything.

And yes, it does matter the source of news you get.

And by Hand-picked, I wasn't reverting to fh_28 or any member. i was relating to the general direction of bizzare news about Muslim countries circulating the net and news networks. They are "hand-picked".

You could "hand-pick" certain news and events, ALL TRUE, ALL FACTS, NO LIES, about a certain country/people/civilization, and give people a general FALSE impression about this entity your reporting. And all for the sake of higher ratings and/or more web visitors/attention.

Imagine in Arab countries if all what you know about America is its high crime rates, its endles alcohol consumption related issues, its social collapse, drug0use..etc..etc.
And the only instance you see an American, is as a soldier, roaming on occupied land, where many of your people have died.

Everything in this previous example is 'factual' as you say. It's all true, no lies, no exaggerations. But it's "hand-picked". Did it deliver a right impression/thought/belief? No. And most probably, watever philosophy you adopt out of it will be completely wrong.

Now maybe this government is using this technique to serve its political agenda. To maintain its hold upon its people, and discourgae foreign political changes...etc.

Now similarily, the process of broadcasting "hand-picked" info could serve a similar agenda in any other country... and on a smaller level, this "agenda" could be to raise ratings, attract visitors...etc.

So regarding your "Does it matter if they get their news from SG, from a newspaper or from a book, as long as it if factual?" belief... well I find this simply, and don't feel offended, naive.

You could dig up dirt and bizzare stories of about any repulsive matter in any country. Especially in the matter of human rights... But sometimes "hand-picking" won't serve certain needs.

And I posted this 9/11 thread because I was amazed at the extent of misinformation concerning 9/11. And when I read this article I posted, I thought I cud share it with others who may be interested to read its contents.

There you go, another example of "neglected hand-picking".. You can dig for all you want into the 9/11 incident. But digging in their won't serve any interests. And this is a BIG issue... but won't serve any interests. So basically only small private efforts are done regarding the matter. With absolutely no authority whatsoever.

And concerning you last question, I don't agree with that. And I also find the new President of Iran very politically immature and unfit for the task.

 

[Bobby]

Dinnae mess son

I remember that, after that player took a dive and got Nixon sent off.

He was NOT happy.

 

[rpvankasteren]

I don't know, maybe I'm getting something mixed up, it's been awhile since I took biology.

Quite right, if it were one gene making up someone's sexuality (if at all). It's a lot more likely to be more complex in the real world.

Multiple genes affect a certain outcome in most cases, and not all are needed to give the outcome. Genes don't work like the binary system, it's almost never either "yes" or "no". Mutations usually make it a "maybe if".

 

[INFESTA]

So regarding your "Does it matter if they get their news from SG, from a newspaper or from a book, as long as it if factual?" belief... well I find this simply, and don't feel offended, naive.

You could dig up dirt and bizzare stories of about any repulsive matter in any country. Especially in the matter of human rights... But sometimes "hand-picking" won't serve certain needs.

And concerning you last question, I don't agree with that. And I also find the new President of Iran very politically immature and unfit for the task.

I also don't want to offend you, but I think what's naive is expecting news to not be hand-picked.
News have to be sorted out, first to distinguish between what's news and what's not - we all know hanging homosexual teenagers in Iran is news, but not hanging them in other muslim countries is not news -; then to select which news, from an infinitude of information from every continent, region and country out there, will be shown. Naturally - and not that I agree with that -, we get more negative news from countries like Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan because nasty things happen there a lot.

But it's not like we think those countries are all about that, or its people is evil and enjoys seeing teenagers being cut to pieces, if that is your concern. Sure you can question that not everybody will be mature enough to perceive things that way, but hey:
a) we only let people vote when they're at least 18.
b) they'll grow.

So it all boils down to what your sources are, and in that sense you get nothing better than the internet, where you can pick them yourself (the news, that is) at the click of a mouse. More people than in any period in history have now the abbility to be confronted with other realities outside their own, and events they'd never even hear of, whenever they want to. It is better this way than it has ever been, and that was my first point.


Now I don't know about your countries, but at least here we get news from both sides of the story. In fact, more attention is generally given to reports of abuse commited by coalition troops than the daily bombings perpetrated by insurgents in Iraq. We also get the occasional report of how daily life in Iraq is, with locals being interviewed, which is more than we ever got in most western countries.



That is all I got to say about this subject, at least on this thread. It is immensely inferior in importance to what we should be discussing instead.
And that was my second point.

 

[jatin]

Hahaha...u guys need to get some more knowledge of bioloagy...there is nothing like a "gay" egen or "straight" gene...

Although scientists say that homosexuality is genetic..its not as simple as the gay and straight genes..dat happens only for some physical traits...homosexuality depends on a combination of various genes..if ever it were genetic..which as of now has not been proved...

BTW run_DMB..ur biology is not all dat bad!

 

[Joe Star]

My friend is gay because he got molested as a kid by some other guy.......so I guess some psychology is involved as well

 

[Virgo]

Hahaha...u guys need to get some more knowledge of bioloagy...there is nothing like a "gay" egen or "straight" gene...

Although scientists say that homosexuality is genetic..its not as simple as the gay and straight genes..dat happens only for some physical traits...homosexuality depends on a combination of various genes..if ever it were genetic..which as of now has not been proved...

BTW run_DMB..ur biology is not all dat bad!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

I think that although nothing has been proved as in "we know it works this way", but if you read that you'll find that it's pretty safe to say that genomics plays a bigger part in someone's sexual orientation than socio-cultural factors.

 

[Kibe Kru]

I'd say "gayness" is more about phenotype than genotype, but that's only my personal belief...

 

[jatin]

actually that is where you are wrong. A person inherits 2 genes for every trait. You can get one trait that says your straight and the other that says your gay. Now if the Straight gene is dominant and the gay gene is recessive your straight, and if its the opposite your gay. Now eventhough somebody is straight they still MAY have the gay gene, but in its recessive form. Now lets say you mate with a female who also has the gay gene in recessive form. the baby may acquire both gay recessive genes meaning he shall be gay.

Let's look at a family in which both the mother and father are carrying a gay recessive gene.

S = straight
s = gay

The mother and father are both Ss. They have four children. Statistically, this is what they get:

Child #1 is SS
Child #2 is Ss
Child #3 is Ss
Child #4 is ss

#4 is gay. #4 doesn't reproduce. Child #2 and #3 would have the same chance of producing a gay offspring IF they marry another Ss. But child #1 has absolutely NO chance of producing gay offspring. Only 2 of the four can produce a gay offspring.

So statistically, if the couple has two children, as is about the average, only one of the two will carry on the gay gene. We start with two people (the parents) who are carrying the gay gene and we end up with one. As this process continues, wouldn't the number of homosexual people decrease with each generation?

If we use the same example with the left handed gene (using R for right handed and r for left-handed) we get the same results, except the rr child can go on and reproduce, balancing out the RR child. That doesn't happen with the "gay gene".

I don't know, maybe I'm getting something mixed up, it's been awhile since I took biology.

Errm Virgo..my reply was with respect to this posts...i understand biological factors are involved..but not as explicitly as a "gay" gene!
BTW I think i wud agree wid kibe kru...

 

[Virgo]

Errm Virgo..my reply was with respect to this posts...i understand biological factors are involved..but not as explicitly as a "gay" gene!
BTW I think i wud agree wid kibe kru...

I'd say "gayness" is more about phenotype than genotype, but that's only my personal belief...

then you both aren't even worth discussing with because I don't know much about biology but I do know phenotype is the total physical appearance of an organism, and its observable traits and therefore has absolutely no relevance to this issue whatsoever.

Good try to sound intelligent and knowing though.

 

[jatin]

Err..to be honest..i didnt loook up the meaning of phenotype..just wikied it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype

So..i guess i thought the Eqn
genotype + environment → phenotype
kinda summed it up..a person with some homosexual genes in a seductive environment might be more likely to give in then in another environment..altho he would be kinda trapped..

..got trapped trying to sound intelligent ..me back to cracking stupid jokes!

 

[Kibe Kru]

So..i guess i thought the Eqn
genotype + environment → phenotype

That's what I meant, and that's what I was taught in school... if it applies only to appearance, then my mistake...

also, wouldn't "gayness" be a trait (which according to my dictionary is "particular quality in someone's character")?

 

[Virgo]

also, wouldn't "gayness" be a trait (which according to my dictionary is "particular quality in someone's character")?

do you spot a homossexual if he's dressed "normally" and isn't speaking?

 

[Kibe Kru]

nah, I guess I was wrong from the beginning... but if you understand what the point was, then it's ok...

one thing though... is wearing a Sao Paulo shirt "normal" dressing?

 

[rpvankasteren]

then you both aren't even worth discussing with because I don't know much about biology but I do know phenotype is the total physical appearance of an organism, and its observable traits and therefore has absolutely no relevance to this issue whatsoever.

Good try to sound intelligent and knowing though.

Phenotype also includes behavioural characteristics.