General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsKnow who else advocates marrying 15-yr-old girls? The Taliban.
Stop creepy creeping Christian Sharia.
firsttimer
(324 posts)Ami
freshwest
(53,661 posts)~ Speaking at Sportsmen's Ministry in Georgia in 2009.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024206973
Naturally, she won't need education for such purposes, will she now?
And if her parents agree, they might even pay a dowry. Could sell her for a few cows or a car.
Great...
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)The Amish don't let you marry until you've been baptized, and their huge thing is adult baptism - you have to be at least 18 to decide to get baptized, and then do a year of classes before you receive the sacrament, IIRC. The average age of marriage is low compared to rest of society, but that is because pretty much everyone do get married - at about 21-22, I believe.
Now, with Mormons, I'm sure there are Mormons on this board that can reply to that.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)...the age is 16 (sorry for being pedantic). Though I think it would be really, really horrible for 16 year olds to marry ... the thought of a 13 year child marrying anyone was even more repulsive (I would think child abuse/I don't need legal definitions I am speaking of a moral value)
anti partisan
(429 posts)Threads like this offer no substantive discussion with their lazy guilt-by-association fallacious tactics.
If you have a point to make, defend it with logic and reality. This may just be a pet peeve of mine, and my intent is not to go full Godwin.
kcr
(15,316 posts)How is that fallacious? It's the same act. Universal healthcare isn't bad. But marrying teenage girls, at least by our current social norms, is. So, why the objection to comparing the two? I'm not getting how that's fallacious? It would be fallacious to do that with something like universal healthcare, because supporting universal healthcare isn't a bad thing. It wouldn't make one like Hitler, even if Hitler did something like that, because it isn't evil. Comparing an evil act on the other hand, with another evil person that also does that same evil act is.
anti partisan
(429 posts)Especially for a topic so uncontroversial as marrying teenage girls, we shouldn't have to resort to blatant fallacies in order to make a point. We can defeat right-wing arguments without stooping to their level.
kcr
(15,316 posts)And it's a fact. If someone advocates marrying 15 year old girls, they're doing the same thing. If someone is pointing that fact out, I hardly see how that's a fallacy.
anti partisan
(429 posts)Bringing up the slight similarity between two different entities does nothing to contribute meaningful insight to the discussion. That's why it should be avoided in an intelligent discussion.
kcr
(15,316 posts)And I don't think it's as bad as marrying 15 year olds.
anti partisan
(429 posts)kcr
(15,316 posts)JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)WowSeriously
(343 posts)anti partisan
(429 posts)I was just basically taking a silly right wing claim, which is used to create a false equivalency between progressives and Hitler, and making a point out of it.
You can search 'Hitler universal health care' in Google and see a bunch of wingnut sites pop up like below:
https://www.google.com/search?q=hitler+universal+health+care
But "You like universal healthcare! You're just like Hitler!" Fallacy. "You like genocide! You're just like Hitler!" Not a fallacy.
Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)Lewis Black did shit like that against Glenn Beck.
"You like speed limits. You know who else liked speed limits. HITLER!!!!"
kcr
(15,316 posts)Poor, poor Glenn Beck.
anti partisan
(429 posts)While nothing said is actually false or fallacious at face value, it certainly begs the question of "so this must be wrong because Hitler supports it?" Hitler supporting anything doesn't make it wrong. Genocide is wrong on so many levels that Hitler's name should not come up when discussing why it is wrong.
I admit that I'm a bit unconventional on my views of what should constitute discussion about certain topics, but yes I go through effort to avoid using the latter as reason for condemning genocide.
kcr
(15,316 posts)It's not an actual fallacious claim that anyone's made, here. I don't make it a habit of talking to people who like genocide. When people actually talk to genocidal maniacs, I actually doubt they say things like that. You made a actual fallacious claim that people actually make, the Hitler health care bit, because it's absurd. And then used it to compare it to a claim that wasn't. And was nothing close to Hitler. Your claims not to Godwin notwithstanding.
anti partisan
(429 posts)I still stand by not using these associate-with-evil tactics in order to make a point.
kcr
(15,316 posts)And normally I think I'd agree. But this is an instance where I think the OP is right. This is a specific enough act being compared, with the person being discussed invoking religion to justify it. That person and those defending him would very likely condemn the group the OP is referencing as association. This is a case where I think it's a valid point.
anti partisan
(429 posts)WowSeriously
(343 posts)in convincing people that Nazis were atheists and yet the Nazi soldier wore a belt buckle that said Gott mit uns, or God with us.
It's a pain in the ass during the who is responsible for more death, atheism or religion, debate.
Just my pet peeve.
anti partisan
(429 posts)While it's true that most of the soldiers were Christians, Hitler felt threatened by centralized religion. The belt buckles were more of an appeasement than anything, and most of the anti-Jewish sentiments were grounded in ethnic/racial propaganda centered about the Jews being a bunch of selfish parasitic money-grubbers. It's obviously very complicated and multifaceted, but I don't believe that Christianity itself was the main driving force, although it was certainly an influence and part of the cultural identity which the Germans wanted to be purified.
WowSeriously
(343 posts)A driver in WWII other than as a concern of central authority. The same was true for Stalin.
You summarized quite well.
Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)And Stalin.
Come off it, guy. Logical leaps like this are not productive. If you're going to throw the Hitler name about people who think it's honky-dory for 15 year old girls to get married, you lose all credibility before you finish your first sentence.
anti partisan
(429 posts)Response to anti partisan (Reply #22)
kcr This message was self-deleted by its author.
Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)15 year old girls the way that douche-tacular asshat on Schmuck Dynasty said?
anti partisan
(429 posts)Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)Except one is hated upon in the US and the other is glorified.
Both are religious fundie. . .both are bigoted, racist and xenophobic. Both are completely destructive.
But wrap your religious idiocy in the New Testament and American will accept it. Wrap it in the Koran and you'll have protests.
I see the correlation. Surprised you don't.
What is this? Be kind the bigots week?
anti partisan
(429 posts)Before you compare them to some faux backwoods hillbilly.
This faux backwoods hillbilly is nothing like the Taliban. The false equivalency is disingenuous at best.
Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)anti partisan
(429 posts)Not to mention extremely insensitive to the victims of Taliban brutality.
I wonder what Mr. Robertson thinks about civilian massacres, and death by stoning, and brutal forced oppression of women.
Not even remotely close to the same anything. Try again.
Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)Again. Same turd. . .different polish.
But again, thanks for playing. You defend bigots, we at DU don't.
anti partisan
(429 posts)There is no indication that this personal Christian fundie (probably just a publicity stunt anyway which you are perpetuating) endorses killing for Jesus, or any of the horrific practices of the Taliban. If you see this as me "defending a bigot", please take a step back and re-assess.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)"my intent is not to go full Godwin."
And yet, I think you dove right into the Godwin, there, didn't you?
anti partisan
(429 posts)I wasn't personally comparing anyone to Hitler. I was just using a ludicrous right-wing Godwin-ism as an admittedly poor reference point.
Squinch
(50,949 posts)anti partisan
(429 posts)Godwin-ing is the act of comparing something to Hitler.
I was bringing up how right-wingers compared something to Hitler, with the purpose of showing how ludicrous the Godwin-ing was.
I was the Anti-Godwin!
Squinch
(50,949 posts)anti partisan
(429 posts)SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)anti partisan
(429 posts)ErikJ
(6,335 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)thanks..... gonna send it around
WowSeriously
(343 posts)We owe our rocketry and stealth technologies to the science of Nazis.
Sorry.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)In the checklist I would have
notated that in the yes or no answer otherwise I still like the checklist.
WowSeriously
(343 posts)But I also like the list.
napkinz
(17,199 posts)Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)Schmuck Dynasty asshat didn't fly airplane or run an international terrorist organization. He's just a fake douche in it for the Benjamins.
Paulie
(8,462 posts)Fla_Democrat
(2,547 posts)Oh, wait, she was 13.. and he didn't marry her.... Jerry Lee Lewis, no, she was 13 as well. Ok, I'm stumped.