Yes, did you not understand the question I asked him ? Would you like me to repeat it with smaller words ?
I understood the question perfectly, just seemed a bit pointless given he already said there was no reason.
I'm not objecting. My point is that in a country like Iran, not wearing a hajib incorrectly could be considered liberal. In China agitating for less lockdown restrictions could again be considered liberal views. In a western country like say Denmark these views would not be considered as liberal but as pretty ordinary. A standard view in such a country could consider LGBTQIA+ rights equals to those of the heterosexual society whereas in some other western societies LGBTQIA+ equality is still work in progress. As you yourself have pointed out a liberal view in the states could be considered quite right of centre in the UK hence my comment about liberalism as a relative concept.
No. It might be considered deviant behavior. And some Muslim countries consider failure to adhere to their restrictive dress code as criminal, or perhaps even blasphemous But I doubt that any Muslim country, enforcing strict Islamic law, even possesses the concept of "liberalism" Moreover, if you were to introduce a political concept, like liberal-democracy, to Iran, it would entail far more than alterations to the national dress code. Less conservative does not equal "liberal" To use you example above. A strict Islamic state could allow women to not only uncover their eyes but their whole face. This is not "liberal", it's slightly less conservative. Liberalism is alive and well in the USA However to many on the right, the very word "liberal" equates to socialism. I once debated a right winger here who claimed Hitler and Stalin were "Liberals" To his, the logic went: Liberalism is bad Hitler and Stalin were America's enemies, therefore they were bad Therefore they were liberals We were debating gun control, New York state has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the USA, whilst Alaska has much fewer restrictions. I refereed to Alaska's gun laws as "liberal". That caused him a mental melt down as he saw Alaska as a "red" or Republication state and therefore its gun laws were "conservative", not "liberal". The US Democrat party sits to the right from the UK Conservative party on issues like the economy, energy and health. But in other areas, its policies are more liberal than that pursued by the UK Conservative party. LGTB rights for example. "Liberal", doesn't concern your views on the distribution on wealth (capitalist V socialist), but rather on the distribution of political power and individual rights.
Indeed our "right" leaning party here in Australia is called the Liberal Party, which confuses the bejesus out of Americans, we also have a National Party, which isn't what some right wingers think it is either, more farms and countryside orientated. Liberal is one of those terms that has been hijacked by the media and now doesn't quite mean what it originally did which is freedom, hence your comment about liberal gun laws in Alaska. The examples I gave of China and Iran, whilst I agree with your points above, were intended to show a trend towards freedom of the individual in these countries which is a core concept of Liberalism and that such steps in an oppressed society could perhaps be viewed as huge, in a more liberal society they would be viewed as almost trivial, hence the relative nature of liberalism.
Apparently a small school in New Zealand on the southern most tip have been encouraging the kids to catch rats in a purge on the rodents and the youngsters have been on top form catching over 600 in their traps in around three months,and displaying them on the school lawn with proudness..... how about inviting them over to clear out the rodents in Westminster and displaying them on the bridge in triumph .....that would be a hunt worth televising
If you want a definition of childish Roger, just take a look at your responses to Poly, basically a load of ****ing memes. Well done Roger, well done In my experience, you're the most toxic poster on here. Several times you've responded to a post I've made with immediate vitriol and called me a liar. You ask for proof, when it's provided you ignore it and change the subject. You accuse people of saying things they never said, contradict yourself, claim you didn't say something when you said it literally minutes earlier. Then as always, you end (or even start) by reverting to name calling (boo hoo !!) and a stream of childish memes because you've been made to look like a right prick and have nothing to say. Take a look at any of our "interactions" and it's always you that gets into a strop, and once you do it's gloves off. Like I said, I don't think this thread has any place being on a Leeds United forum. There are plenty of your peers spouting their **** on the General Chat page. And as you're so offended by my signature, I've changed it for you.
Hey Shako, I went to see Status Quo at the weekend, supported by the one and only Shakin' Stevens !!!! Still rocking at 72 (him not me !)
Yes, you could characterize liberalism as a lack of restrictions and increase in freedom The "Founding Fathers", who wrote and signed the US Declaration of Independence and later the US Constitution, were definitely liberal in nature. In the UK, the reform movement was carried by the Whig party (who later became the liberals) Just that in the USA now, the very word "liberal" is virtually synonymous with "socialist", by those on the right. Not too different with the way "gay" has been hijacked as referring to sexuality. Nevertheless, the right here in the USA want more liberalism on issues like gun control and energy, it is the left that seek more gun controls and to pass tighter regulations regarding energy production and the environment Conversely, the right seek more restrictions on LGBT issues and abortion. Americans use words differently and those on the right are also quite xenophobic too. I can't tell you how many times I've heard Americans say that the USA isn't a democracy, it's a republic.
When you press him, he substitutes abuse for anything resembling reasoned argument You're right about him being the most toxic poster on here.
Latest news here this morning: there has been prisoner swap, one American "Basketball star" for one "Merchant of death". Why not one drug smuggler for one arms smuggler?