a victim, his friends believe, of the country's deepening friction between an increasingly liberal society and its entrenched conservative traditions.

Don't you find it interesting that fundamentalist Muslims are considered conservatives when they stifle personal freedoms and liberals when they are fighting against Democracy?

Dmtdust wrote:

You wouldn't know what Democracy was if it even came up and bit your ass, really.

Maybe you could enlighten me by giving me an example of one country that has adopted your definition of Democracy.  No form of government is close to being perfect.  You can only judge governance by the overall standard of living and satisfaction of the citizens.  I'm talking about world-wide Democracy, so don't throw at me some canard about how the whole world hates the US.

phreddy wrote:

a victim, his friends believe, of the country's deepening friction between an increasingly liberal society and its entrenched conservative traditions.

Don't you find it interesting that fundamentalist Muslims are considered conservatives when they stifle personal freedoms and liberals when they are fighting against Democracy?

Phreddy, I think you misunderstand the definition here. Turkey is liberalizing, however there are significant numbers in the population that are distrustful of what they regard as Western immorality (such as homosexuality) and would not be classified as liberal in any sense. No one is calling any of the fundamentalists "liberal" and there is a rapidly growing rift between the liberal secular population and the fundamentalist religious population.

Taint wrote:

phreddy wrote:

a victim, his friends believe, of the country's deepening friction between an increasingly liberal society and its entrenched conservative traditions.

Don't you find it interesting that fundamentalist Muslims are considered conservatives when they stifle personal freedoms and liberals when they are fighting against Democracy?

Phreddy, I think you misunderstand the definition here. Turkey is liberalizing, however there are significant numbers in the population that are distrustful of what they regard as Western immorality (such as homosexuality) and would not be classified as liberal in any sense. No one is calling any of the fundamentalists "liberal" and there is a rapidly growing rift between the liberal secular population and the fundamentalist religious population.

I understand the relationships of the fundies in Turkey to the liberalizing populace.  This is the case where the fundies are called conservative.  However, when it's fundamentalist Hamas or Hezbollah vs. Israel, or Al Queda vs. the US, the terrorists are referred to as the liberals.

Taint wrote:

phreddy wrote:

I understand the relationships of the fundies in Turkey to the liberalizing populace.  This is the case where the fundies are called conservative.  However, when it's fundamentalist Hamas or Hezbollah vs. Israel, or Al Queda vs. the US, the terrorists are referred to as the liberals.

OK. I've never seen Hamas or Hezbollah or al-Qaeda referred to as liberal anywhere by anyone.

Seconded.

phreddy wrote:

jesusluvspegging wrote:

Taint wrote:

OK. I've never seen Hamas or Hezbollah or al-Qaeda referred to as liberal anywhere by anyone.

Seconded.

Well, you've certainly heard Israel and the US referred to as the conservatives in the conflicts haven't you?  I'm too busy to dig up news stories right now.

Here we go again with the old dodge-em routine from Phwedd.  Just take your lumps like a man, 'kay

The world is too complicated for Chico.

Perhaps everyone should go back to the beginning of this thread and read it.  I said:  "Don't you find it interesting that fundamentalist Muslims are considered conservatives when they stifle personal freedoms and liberals when they are fighting against Democracy?"

Ok, maybe fundie Muslims are not known as Liberals per se, but they are often and selectively supported by Liberals when they are engaged in conflicts with Democracies.  Whereas, when they are murdering and subjugating their own, they are referred to as Conservatives (said with spittle spewing from the lips).

Ahmet Yildiz, 26, a physics student

I think y'all are jumping the gun here, many of these ultra-conservative religious groups would have shot him for studying physics. 

Why does it always have to be about the Gay?

Taint wrote:

Even the term "liberal" is widely misused nowadays, but that's another semantics argument and more a case of evolving language, anyway.

Yes, people are much too liberal with that word.

phreddy wrote:

Perhaps everyone should go back to the beginning of this thread and read it.  I said:  "Don't you find it interesting that fundamentalist Muslims are considered conservatives when they stifle personal freedoms and liberals when they are fighting against Democracy?"

Ok, maybe fundie Muslims are not known as Liberals per se, but they are often and selectively supported by Liberals when they are engaged in conflicts with Democracies.  Whereas, when they are murdering and subjugating their own, they are referred to as Conservatives (said with spittle spewing from the lips).

Wow, your bicycle's pedals seem to function in both directions.  Fascinating.

Last edited by jesusluvspegging (2009-01-15 01:20:16)

For chrissakes, Turkey is a country where half the women are kept under bedsheets and considered akin to say, Julie Strain or something if they switch to only a pillowcase or something, I'd say this guy wasn't shot so much for being gay as being openly human.

I skip over all the political infighting, I only like it when you guys talk about sex, your families, your feelings or your lives.

Fled wrote:

http://i39.tinypic.com/i5vtds.jpg

Actually, that makes a lot of sense.

jesusluvspegging wrote:

Taint wrote:

Having sex with my family members makes me feel alive.

I considered saying almost the exact same thing, but I decided to let someone else go for the low-hanging fruit.

http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc26 … rage_2.jpg

Seeing those photos of executions in Iran always make my skin crawl. I'm opposed to the death penalty, anyway, but the fact that they strangle their condemned rather than letting them die instantly with hanging as it's practiced most elsewhere only strengthens my convictions that the Iran is governed by barbarians.

Taint wrote:

Seeing those photos of executions in Iran always make my skin crawl. I'm opposed to the death penalty, anyway, but the fact that they strangle their condemned rather than letting them die instantly with hanging as it's practiced most elsewhere only strengthens my convictions that the Iran is governed by barbarians.

Me too. But, unlike you, I am all for the death penalty. But not for torture. Seem kind of backwards? But it makes sense in my mind. Vengeance makes sense to me but cruelty does not.

Did no-one see the part about how men wishing to get out of military service have to provide proof that they're gay?  Proof meaning an anal examination or...pictures? 

What kind of pictures would they want?  Porn pictures of them getting reamed?  And what if you're the pitcher, not the catcher?  Does that mean you're not gay because the anal examination wouldn't show anything?

That was MY favorite part.

Last edited by feisty (2009-01-22 17:37:41)

HI feisty! Welcome back!!!