UK Politics Thread XII: The Lockdown

[Albennia]

Some people. It definitely wasn't as widespread as it is now.


We're also the only species with complex language, vaccines, the wheel, space flight, and complex, organised societies that aren't utter shit (see: ants and bees). So I'm really not sure why you're trying to use the fact we're the only species that has something to argue against that something.

You've still not explain why premarital sex is bad. Even if it wasn't the norm at certain points in history, that doesn't make it bad

You've still not addressed my point

[Nuroblav]

So why should everyone else follow your views rather than having there own?

You are a self-professed anarcho-communist. It is a bit strange to ask me why I would want to change society to fit my views.

I don't want to force people to accept my views. These are just merely the observations of someone who just happens to not like the concept of a government. If that not be to your liking - or to the majority of people - then so be it. I merely speak my mind because I can.

My question still stands. Why should the people accept you view of what is 'disgusting'?

[Novus America]

That's the sort of puritannical uptightness that was the public hallmark of the Victorian Era.

Victorian morality also abolished slavery and the slave trade, ended child labour, gave animals rights, encouraged education, and reformed the prison system.

And we all know what happened behind the scenes.

You mean that, while remaining decent in public, they were perfectly accepting of sexuality within marriage and indeed encouraged it as part of love? Uh, yes.

I mean I even support the concept of marriage, and sure the Victorian era helped in many ways.
But prostitution and mistresses were also common (although less open them they had been before), it was not some paragon of morality either.

[Bear Stearns]

And the conservatives only really care about the victims as far as they can use them as weapons.

Yeah, how is that Pulse Nightclub Memorial going?

Wasn't the perpetrator there a Muslim whose parents immigrated here as refugees?

[Albennia]

Arranged marriages of children were a general European aristocracy and royalty thing, but they aren't anymore (and that's been the case in western Europe for two or so centuries). The age at which most Britons married was actually rather high. And no, sex outside of marriage is not part of our culture - it is a rather recent occurrence that is the result of the breakdown of society and community and needs to be stopped.

Lol, what? You genuinely don't think people in Europe had sex outside of marriage even during the halcyon era of European aristocracy? Have you looked at a European royal family tree lately and counted the number of illegitimate bastards fathered out of wedlock?

Are you seriously arguing that the practices of royalty were those of an entire culture? Because throughout the vast majority of history that's never been the case.

[Andsed]

Sure. In particular, arranged marriages of children are part of our culture. Sex outside of marriage is also very much a part of our culture. This is not an argument.

Arranged marriages of children were a general European aristocracy and royalty thing, but they aren't anymore (and that's been the case in western Europe for two or so centuries). The age at which most Britons married was actually rather high. And no, sex outside of marriage is not part of our culture - it is a rather recent occurrence that is the result of the breakdown of society and community and needs to be stopped.

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

[Fartsniffage]

'Man responsible for attack was under police surveillance'
The man responsible for the attack in Streatham this afternoon was under active police surveillance at the time of the incident, it is understood.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-5135 ... type=share

Well this will be fun.

[Bear Stearns]

Arranged marriages of children were a general European aristocracy and royalty thing, but they aren't anymore (and that's been the case in western Europe for two or so centuries). The age at which most Britons married was actually rather high. And no, sex outside of marriage is not part of our culture - it is a rather recent occurrence that is the result of the breakdown of society and community and needs to be stopped.

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

Do grown adults ever willfully have arranged marriages?

[Andsed]

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

Do grown adults ever willfully have arranged marriages?

How does that relate to what I said?

[Albennia]

You are a self-professed anarcho-communist. It is a bit strange to ask me why I would want to change society to fit my views.

I don't want to force people to accept my views. These are just merely the observations of someone who just happens to not like the concept of a government. If that not be to your liking - or to the majority of people - then so be it. I merely speak my mind because I can.

My question still stands. Why should the people accept you view of what is 'disgusting'?

Because it is right.

[Fartsniffage]

I don't want to force people to accept my views. These are just merely the observations of someone who just happens to not like the concept of a government. If that not be to your liking - or to the majority of people - then so be it. I merely speak my mind because I can.

My question still stands. Why should the people accept you view of what is 'disgusting'?

Because it is right.

I think your opinion is actually quite sinister.

[Andsed]

I don't want to force people to accept my views. These are just merely the observations of someone who just happens to not like the concept of a government. If that not be to your liking - or to the majority of people - then so be it. I merely speak my mind because I can.

My question still stands. Why should the people accept you view of what is 'disgusting'?

Because it is right.

By what objective standard? Because opinions aint objective chief.

[Nuroblav]

I don't want to force people to accept my views. These are just merely the observations of someone who just happens to not like the concept of a government. If that not be to your liking - or to the majority of people - then so be it. I merely speak my mind because I can.

My question still stands. Why should the people accept you view of what is 'disgusting'?

Because it is right.

That is down to your opinion and is not fact. What is religion to one is blasphemy to another.

[Philjia]

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

Do grown adults ever willfully have arranged marriages?

Er, yeah, pretty common for Hindus and Muslims.

[Albennia]

Arranged marriages of children were a general European aristocracy and royalty thing, but they aren't anymore (and that's been the case in western Europe for two or so centuries). The age at which most Britons married was actually rather high. And no, sex outside of marriage is not part of our culture - it is a rather recent occurrence that is the result of the breakdown of society and community and needs to be stopped.

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

Do you guys really want me to cite Unwin again, because the last couple of times I've been told "stop depending on sources"

[Bear Stearns]

Do grown adults ever willfully have arranged marriages?

Er, yeah, pretty common for Hindus and Muslims.

Those marriages are usually already in the works well before they become adults.

[Albennia]

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

Do you guys really want me to cite Unwin again, because the last couple of times I've been told "stop depending on sources"

(this goes for all the replies I've got so far on this page)

[Albennia]

Because it is right.

I think your opinion is actually quite sinister.

Because I both hold humans to a higher standard than animals and acknowledge Unwin's findings? How is that sinister?

[Souseiseki]

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

Do grown adults ever willfully have arranged marriages?

yes

[Andsed]

Why does it need to be stopped though? If all parties involved are consenting adults why should we give a shit if their married or not when they have sex?

Do you guys really want me to cite Unwin again, because the last couple of times I've been told "stop depending on sources"

Depends on how well this Unwin fellow makes the absurd argument that two consenting adults having sex is bad.

[Nuroblav]

Do you guys really want me to cite Unwin again, because the last couple of times I've been told "stop depending on sources"

Depends on how well this Unwin fellow makes the absurd argument that two consenting adults having sex is bad.

I don't even know which Unwin bloke this is. Stanley Unwin? That would make for an interesting argument

[Fartsniffage]

Do you guys really want me to cite Unwin again, because the last couple of times I've been told "stop depending on sources"

Depends on how well this Unwin fellow makes the absurd argument that two consenting adults having sex is bad.

If you fuck around then you don't have the mental energy to penetrate invade other countries with your army or erect mighty symbols to the greatness of your nation. Basically.

[Philjia]

I think your opinion is actually quite sinister.

Because I both hold humans to a higher standard than animals and acknowledge Unwin's findings? How is that sinister?

Because Unwin's findings were bogus. Benedict (1935) helpfully pointed out that he never assessed post-nuptial sexual restrictions, and that his definition of what constituted civilisation was complete nonsense, and that he somehow managed to come to the laughably incorrect conclusion that no North American or Mexican peoples had ancestor cults or temples.

[Celritannia]

Boris removed Parliamentary Sovereignty to scrutinise new trade deals.

EU to support Spain's claim to Gibraltar since UK left EU.

[Salandriagado]

And I'm sure you've got some evidence to support this outright lie.

My personal definition of premarital sex as in the sort I oppose does not, as I have stated previously, include relationships leading to marriage. For quite a long time people were married simply by saying so and then consummating their union even if, as time went on, clergy were usually in attendance for the former. It was only with the state's assertion of control over marriage that this really changed, at which point premarital sex in relationships leading to (formal) marriage became the norm.

So no, you don't have any evidence to support your outright lie.