Responsibility... How much is enough?

[Crop]

DualWieldRake a lot of what your saying is theoretically correct, unfortunately its not practical, at least at the moment. Like that we don't need so much land for farming. True, but we would need to change the way we farm. That there isn't a food shortage. Also true, the issue is food distribution: you would need to not only end capitalism, you would need to move our focus away from an economy based system to one that focuses more on resource management. Nobel goals but a long way off. But mate your one city idea! I'm not sure why anyone would even want to live in such a place.

11 hours ago, DualWieldRake said:

It's the reality.

Show some proof of supposed problems

You have already been given some good ones by other people, I'll add Calhoun's experiments to the list.

Spoiler alert after 3 decades and around 125 experiments on extreme population density, all ended the same way, insanity and extinction.

 

[DualWieldRake]

How it that proof of anything?

 

It makes no sense.

 

We aren't mice, this is comparing apples to oranges.

A thing that can be easily observed is that people choose to live in dense concentrations that they live in. Theres plenty of empty space in between these.

 

You mention other people gave proof , you'd have to quote that.

Untill then it's just another doomtard baseless crying rally

 

 

Edited June 15, 2018 by DualWieldRake

[bardo]

Crop, I think there is a consensus here about it not being a good thing for a child to smoke lol

Edited June 15, 2018 by bardo
add who i am addressing

[paradox]

8 hours ago, Crop said:

Mate I respect that you are willing to compromise, but I really hate this phrase. 

 

Good thing I wouldn't be so petty as to base the content of my posts on whether someone hates certain phrases then.  You see, we're all different, some people won't mind that phrase, others might hate it, that's the beauty of a (supposedly) free society, how you feel about what I say is your responsibility not mine.  Sure I think common decency should be observed but the fact still remains.

 

i said that simply for the fact that we clearly have different perspectives & the back & forth was just dragging on, I can't foresee any of your points changing my view in any way as I think you are in some ways ignorant in a way that I just don't have respect for (I still very much have respect for you simply as a fellow human being) & vice versa & you know, I think that's fine, I think that's great, I ultimately love to live in a culture where totally different opinions can coexist. It makes me feel all warm inside actually.

 

& herein lies my issue with what you are saying.. your dislike for that phrase is consistent with what seems to be your whole point in this thread, you seem to be intolerant of people with opposing views on reality to you & feel it's your duty to enforce your subjective views on others, so of course the idea that we should agree to disagree is abhorrent to you.  I happen to feel the exact opposite way.

 

honestly, just yesterday I was having a conversation that is really pertinent to this point.  I'm in Thailand right now & on the Main Street just down from where we are staying there is a huge mosque with a constant throng of muslims coming in & out, literally straight across the road there is a happy ending massage parlour & you often see totally dolled up ladyboys walking this street passing by the mosque.

 

what are these people doing if not agreeing to disagree?  How is this not a beautiful thing & a clear sign of a wonderfully healthy, thriving & diverse culture? 

 

Would you feel

more comfortable if sharia law were being inflicted on the Muslims next door neighbours & people were being lynched?

 

seriously, please explain to me how this cultural reality i just described is in any way a bad thing?

[paradox]

8 hours ago, Crop said:

I thought there is no one in this day and age that ignorant. 

 

Sorry brother but the only point you are proving here if that was the case is that you yourself a really rather ignorant. It's just my perspective but I can't see how anyone would or could ever come to that conclusion but maybe you only talk to people with the same opinions as you?

 

& yeah I'm pretty sure there is a strong consensus that smoking with kids on your lap isn't the best thing to be doing, either way in my opinion I kind of feel that anecdote was drawing a needlessly convoluted correlation & didn't nessecarily make your point all that well, at least in terms of what I feel we are discussing but again that too could be very subjective.

[paradox]

Really, I feel the way lies somewhere right in the middle of what each of us are saying.. I agree with part of what you are saying, I'm making an opposing point as I feel what you are saying is tipped toward an end of a spectrum that can be dangerous, just as the other end of that spectrum is equally dangerous.

 

i agree we should listen very carefully to what others feel is important & we should be respected to analyse what they are saying on our own terms & decide for ourselves how we feel about each other's opinions. It's called mutual respect.  Where it gets shit in my opinion & is when people simply cannot accept when the other persons intellect or lack thereof comes to an opposing viewpoint & that person or regimen feels the need to enforce their views regardless.  To me this is equally as insidious to me as the opposing ignorance you  speak of.

 

yes, the right path lies somewhere in the middle & that's what I personally strive for.. but we live in an imperfect world. An intrinsically dualistic world. To not understand this & live accordingly is truly ignorant.

[Crop]

15 hours ago, bardo said:

Crop, I think there is a consensus here about it not being a good thing for a child to smoke lol

So your links defending smoking with children where simply trolling. I must admit I don’t understand the concept.Please help me out. It costs you so much. Posting things like this make you appear stupid. A reputation as a troll devalues everything else you have to say, as it leaves people guessing whether you are saying something you believe or something merely to elicit a reaction. So given this high price what do you get out of it?

[Crop]

Wow Paradox, perhaps you misunderstood me? My post was agreeing with you and telling you I was going to go back through our conversation with a more open mind. It’s all too easy in the passion of debate to miss things. You made some great points, though at times in a slightly condescending way. You then follow this last post up with a series of posts judging me as close-minded, and ignorant. More than a little hypocritical don’t you think. Didn’t we start this conversation with you making the point that you did not think hypocrites should have a say. You seem to have an issue with the fact I understand the meaning of the phrase ‘agree to disagree’, it’s a close-minded statement that means you are reluctantly willing to tolerate someone not agreeing with you, but you do not accept or respect that person’s decision. Not exactly what I strive for, yet it may well fit your following posts.

I too am in Thailand and it is a great culture, but you seem to be a bit confused about lady boys walking past a mosque. Lady boys are very much accepted in sharia. It’s Christians who have a problem. If I remember rightly, the Ayatollah Khomeini himself, once gave a detailed speech explaining how they fitted in to Islamic theology. Unfortunately, I’m ignorant so???

[waterboy 2.0]

So that would be the same UNESCO that gives us this gems like this example @DualWieldRake :

 

 "One of the major challenges of our society is coping with climate change; to this end the need to improve the level of public debate on climate change is vital. Thus, public discussions should be well-informed and realistic. The constituencies made up of research institutes, higher education institutions, international organizations, governments and civil society have responsibilities to ensure that democratic debate is based on cogent argumentation and reliable evidence as much as possible..... "

https://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/396

 

That's a bit inconvenient with them as bringer of truth don't ya think. So let's remember that farm production will be affected by this climate change that UNESCO is onto, as they are trustworthy that's established. 

 

Your unesco spin point....scarcity of food and distribution..Which was pulled for 1998 there was 3000to 4000calories available for the global population at the time....the food is not redistributed due to ownership so it's sold and eaten domestically, sold to the highest bidder for export,  rarely at a profit loss or given away (including meager food aid). 

 

Which is sourced from the distributed global farmland area. With UNESCO only considering "high quality" farmland in the export more scenario, and basically neglecting quality in the others. Inferring it's all equal...  Kinda funny they discuss pesticides but exclude the myriad of land degradation processes. 

 

UNESCO doesn't have any vested interests from its member nations though.... So you can trust them, climate change and all. 

 

So that doesn't help those on starvation rations in a real world scenario. And as you have identified a  chunk gets classified to waste in many societies , with a tiny amount reused/recycled but not for human food. 

 

Soil capability and similar metrics used are not just soil quality. So ya didn't learn anything....aspect, climate (changing) and a bit more shit goes into it. Soil quality here is pretty Damn good

 

Since few countries have around 50% of its land mass below 1 m above sea level like the flat netherlands, and lower (with a chunk "stolen" from the sea) , at the same latitude (and current, however changing climate) it's a bit niave to extrapolate across the world's landmass and climate zones (which are changing). 

 

Dump a piece of the netherworld in Siberia or African desert as an examples... It's performing different mate. Even under glass horticulture,you could change some inputs, some will be reduced.... Some scarce  ... If you can get all inputs, it's at the expense of the cost of production or worse profit

 

So the greater world still relies on domestic farmland within its capability to grow crops that are suitable, and imports of other staples at a mininum if they have the economy. Just to not be on starvation calories. A few try to export and cash in, but it's corporate owned not country so there's no import balance. 

 

Agricultural reforms and infrastructure  bring some productivity increases for sure, and some increased degradation where sustainability is ignored chasing the dollars above all else. 

 

Really world practicalities....

 

You reckon you'd feed your mega city if it was plunked next to the netherlands which would be the go based on export (Still has to import some staple foodstuff), and remember your other global farms start failing the further you are from them as they wont have the Labour force and infrastructure . So your already reducing your source, and increasing the costs of production  there's no wins there. 

 

Let's forget about resource deficits... Like mineral resources, and... Dont want to complicate it

 

Then you've got to deal with the waste of this mathematicians contrived metropolis.I suppose it's all good to dump "some" of it to rivers and the sea....thats not working  well for the distributed smaller population, even with decent technology the ecosystem services can't clean up, absorb of magic it away.

 

Potable water source for population and industry..... Eutrophication.... Shhh

 

You'd have to take the advice of this documentary and scale it up to be more feasible....

 

So you can move on when youve shit and raped the site to death still have to be close to your food and at least key resources at each site abandonment. 

 

Responsibility... How much is enough? As much as you think IMO... If you think,and that's considered thought not dreaming.

 

Was worth it... Lol

Edited June 16, 2018 by waterboy 2.0

[paradox]

@Crop I said you were ignorant if you think there is no one who is ignorant in this world. Nothing to do with ladyboys.  I can't lie man, i think that is incredibly ignorant, i'm not just trying to insult you if thats what you think, i'm not 'judging you' as ignorant, i'm stating that your comment seemed ignorant to me.  i never said you were close minded.

 

& no I'm not reluctant at all to tolerate someone who does not agree with me. I think it is act of love & a truly positive & beautiful notion to agree to disagree with someone after you have tried hard & failed to see eye to eye on a particular topic.  As i said it is not a reluctant move whatsoever.  I don't think i have a single friend whom shares my opinion of half of all topics & i love that, i like to be challenged in my thinking & i love to love another human being regardless of their opinions on most topics.  I love! a good discussion & as long as we don't lose our shit & have it descend into total insanity then it's all the better if you have different opinions, that's just one reason why I think it's important to be tolerant of different views of reality.  So that a real discussion is possible at all..
 

my views on humanity in many ways are similar to my understanding of ecology, the analogy is that biodiversity of ideas is a strength & species which learn to coexist with as many other species as possible tend to do much better than those that don't & in the long run this leads to a greater more stable ecosystem in the long term.

 

That's really interesting what you said about the ayatollah speaking on transgenderism, it really informs me of something that I have been thinking about recently..  that's cool but at the same time it's deeply sad.. it's like a loophole in the bigortry of fundamentalist Islamic ideology.  If you are gay you get the chop but if you identify as a woman you slip through the cracks.. either way is all very interesting.. like most things that are interesting it doesn't fit neatly into some easy to digest category, it's complicated & fucked up & wonderful all at the same time.

Edited June 17, 2018 by paradox
tagging

[paradox]

Actually that bit of information has really burst my bubble  that's actually so sad.. that's why there is so many lady boys in Thailand, because being gay is not tolerated  at all but being trans is 'ok.'  so even if you don't remotely identify as female, if you are gay it's just so much easier & so much less risky as a lifestyle to be a lady boy.

 

so @Crop, I guess the obvious question in the context of this conversation is do you think everyone should be 'telling off' every Muslim they see for their horribly bigoted intolerance of gays? & if not then why? are people who smoke around their children worse than people who's belief system advocates death to gay people? What gives?

Edited June 17, 2018 by paradox
tagging because this thread has multiple simaltaneous convos going on

[DualWieldRake]

8 hours ago, waterboy 2.0 said:

So that would be the same UNESCO that gives us this gems like this example @DualWieldRake :

 

 "One of the major challenges of our society is coping with climate change; to this end the need to improve the level of public debate on climate change is vital. Thus, public discussions should be well-informed and realistic. The constituencies made up of research institutes, higher education institutions, international organizations, governments and civil society have responsibilities to ensure that democratic debate is based on cogent argumentation and reliable evidence as much as possible..... "

https://whc.unesco.org/en/activities/396

 

That's a bit inconvenient with them as bringer of truth don't ya think. So let's remember that farm production will be affected by this climate change that UNESCO is onto, as they are trustworthy that's established. 

 

Your unesco spin point....scarcity of food and distribution..Which was pulled for 1998 there was 3000to 4000calories available for the global population at the time....the food is not redistributed due to ownership so it's sold and eaten domestically, sold to the highest bidder for export,  rarely at a profit loss or given away (including meager food aid). 

 

Which is sourced from the distributed global farmland area. With UNESCO only considering "high quality" farmland in the export more scenario, and basically neglecting quality in the others. Inferring it's all equal...  Kinda funny they discuss pesticides but exclude the myriad of land degradation processes. 

 

UNESCO doesn't have any vested interests from its member nations though.... So you can trust them, climate change and all. 

 

So that doesn't help those on starvation rations in a real world scenario. And as you have identified a  chunk gets classified to waste in many societies , with a tiny amount reused/recycled but not for human food. 

 

Soil capability and similar metrics used are not just soil quality. So ya didn't learn anything....aspect, climate (changing) and a bit more shit goes into it. Soil quality here is pretty Damn good

 

Since few countries have around 50% of its land mass below 1 m above sea level like the flat netherlands, and lower (with a chunk "stolen" from the sea) , at the same latitude (and current, however changing climate) it's a bit niave to extrapolate across the world's landmass and climate zones (which are changing). 

 

Dump a piece of the netherworld in Siberia or African desert as an examples... It's performing different mate. Even under glass horticulture,you could change some inputs, some will be reduced.... Some scarce  ... If you can get all inputs, it's at the expense of the cost of production or worse profit

 

So the greater world still relies on domestic farmland within its capability to grow crops that are suitable, and imports of other staples at a mininum if they have the economy. Just to not be on starvation calories. A few try to export and cash in, but it's corporate owned not country so there's no import balance. 

 

Agricultural reforms and infrastructure  bring some productivity increases for sure, and some increased degradation where sustainability is ignored chasing the dollars above all else. 

 

Really world practicalities....

 

You reckon you'd feed your mega city if it was plunked next to the netherlands which would be the go based on export (Still has to import some staple foodstuff), and remember your other global farms start failing the further you are from them as they wont have the Labour force and infrastructure . So your already reducing your source, and increasing the costs of production  there's no wins there. 

 

Let's forget about resource deficits... Like mineral resources, and... Dont want to complicate it

 

Then you've got to deal with the waste of this mathematicians contrived metropolis.I suppose it's all good to dump "some" of it to rivers and the sea....thats not working  well for the distributed smaller population, even with decent technology the ecosystem services can't clean up, absorb of magic it away.

 

Potable water source for population and industry..... Eutrophication.... Shhh

 

You'd have to take the advice of this documentary and scale it up to be more feasible....

 

So you can move on when youve shit and raped the site to death still have to be close to your food and at least key resources at each site abandonment. 

 

Responsibility... How much is enough? As much as you think IMO... If you think,and that's considered thought not dreaming.

 

Was worth it... Lol

 

Your point beeing?

 

[waterboy 2.0]

You get the point

 

[bardo]

On 16/06/2018 at 7:50 AM, Crop said:

So your links defending smoking with children where simply trolling. I must admit I don’t understand the concept.Please help me out. It costs you so much. Posting things like this make you appear stupid. A reputation as a troll devalues everything else you have to say, as it leaves people guessing whether you are saying something you believe or something merely to elicit a reaction. So given this high price what do you get out of it?

No i am not trolling, the links don't defend smoking with children and i wouldn't smoke with a child in close proximity (in fact i quit smoking) the point i was attempting to make perhaps crudely is i could believe a study that contradicts your beliefs, when someone claims to have the ultimate truth and enforces that belief or personal truth onto others with a belief that is not congruent with your own is what i would call somewhat authoritarian in attitude and a bit condescending, then i further elaborated by showing many examples of toxins that children are commonly exposed to and how you choose to attack one but not the others, where it is that you draw the line with that type of attitude. re-read the comment if you like, honestly i have no control what you think, say or do and i wish not to control any of those aspects of your personal freedom, i am simply testing the validity of your beliefs, views and statements.

 

 

 

[bardo]

On 16/06/2018 at 7:56 AM, Crop said:

Wow Paradox, perhaps you misunderstood me? My post was agreeing with you and telling you I was going to go back through our conversation with a more open mind. It’s all too easy in the passion of debate to miss things. You made some great points, though at times in a slightly condescending way. You then follow this last post up with a series of posts judging me as close-minded, and ignorant. More than a little hypocritical don’t you think. Didn’t we start this conversation with you making the point that you did not think hypocrites should have a say. You seem to have an issue with the fact I understand the meaning of the phrase ‘agree to disagree’, it’s a close-minded statement that means you are reluctantly willing to tolerate someone not agreeing with you, but you do not accept or respect that person’s decision. Not exactly what I strive for, yet it may well fit your following posts.

I too am in Thailand and it is a great culture, but you seem to be a bit confused about lady boys walking past a mosque. Lady boys are very much accepted in sharia. It’s Christians who have a problem. If I remember rightly, the Ayatollah Khomeini himself, once gave a detailed speech explaining how they fitted in to Islamic theology. Unfortunately, I’m ignorant so???

Man i have just read through the thread to catch up cause i had missed a lot and i think paradox and i are trying to express basically the same view/point but it is going way over your head with your right fighting ways.

You can have your views as others can there own, what is condescending is thinking you know better than everyone else and your view is Superior to views which conflict your own and why do we need to accept or respect your your views or decisions ? whats wrong with being diplomatic and agreeing to disagree lol

As for the sharia law lady boy scenario, yes it seems it is true that transsexuals are widely accepted by Muslims but i think you get the point he was trying to make yeh ? just alter the scenario a little and hypothetically place a church in place of the mosque.

[Crop]

15 hours ago, paradox said:

Actually that bit of information has really burst my bubble  that's actually so sad.. that's why there is so many lady boys in Thailand, because being gay is not tolerated  at all but being trans is 'ok.'  so even if you don't remotely identify as female, if you are gay it's just so much easier & so much less risky as a lifestyle to be a lady boy.

 

so @Crop, I guess the obvious question in the context of this conversation is do you think everyone should be 'telling off' every Muslim they see for their horribly bigoted intolerance of gays? & if not then why? are people who smoke around their children worse than people who's belief system advocates death to gay people? What gives?

Mate, so much assumption, where to start, Thailand is overwhelmingly Buddhist not Islamic, and being gay is certainly tolerated. Mate it's probably a simple matter of Thailand being one of the, if not the, best and cheapest places in the world to get either surgery or medicine that caters for lady-boys particular needs.Of cause I think anyone that witnesses bigoted intolerance of gays should stand-up and help. Yet why do you single out Muslims, you do realise the Christian bible is also anti-gay? You do realise being anti-Muslim is also bigotry?

[paradox]

1 minute ago, Crop said:

Mate, so much assumption, where to start, Thailand is overwhelmingly Buddhist not Islamic, and being gay is certainly tolerated. Mate it's probably a simple matter of Thailand being one of the, if not the, best and cheapest places in the world to get either surgery or medicine that caters for lady-boys particular needs.Of cause I think anyone that witnesses bigoted intolerance of gays should stand-up and help. Yet why do you single out Muslims, you do realise the Christian bible is also anti-gay? You do realise being anti-Muslim is also bigotry?

 

you are speaking BS bro, i'm not assuming anything, what are you talking about?  i know very well the religious demographics of this country, right now i'm in krabi province which is predominantly islamic but what on earth has that got to do with what i'm saying?   

 

i'm not anti muslim in the least.  you aren't saying anything dude.  Arguing that i am in any way an anti muslim bigot is the most convoluted contention, where are you pulling that from?  I will stand up for the rights of muslims to believe anything they like as much as i would stand for the freedom of my own thoughts & yours.  i strive to be as consistent as i can possibly manage in my feelings about individual rights.  what i am trying to understand is why it appears that you yourself are so inconsistent?  Please, if it's possible can you address my point?  the last thing i am saying is that muslims should be told off for their beliefs about anything.  if you have noticed i have been consistently arguing that i fundamentally think that is wrong.  What i am asking you is why you think that telling off strangers for how they bring up their own children is saving the world but you believe telling off someone who believes that gays deserve to die is bigotry?  do you get my point man?  i honestly want to consider your point in a mature & intelligent way but these kind of blatant inconsistencies make it really difficult to take seriously.  If at all possible can you please explain it without resorting to obviously baseless accusations about things i didn't even remotely come close to saying?

 

i never said thailand wasn't tolerant of gays, i said islam is intolerant of gays.  It's not some kind of profound secret, it's common knowledge that in sharia, homosexuality is illegal & often punished with death.  why would you make any assumption about what i do or don't feel about Christianity?  i fundamentally disagree with many of the basic principles of all the major religions but i will stand for the rights of any of their followers to believe anything they please any day of the week. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Crop]

Mate are you all right, I'm serious are all right? You don't seem to be able to follow the conversation and your forgetting a lot of what you say.

15 minutes ago, paradox said:

i never said thailand wasn't tolerant of gays, i said islam is intolerant of gays.

 

16 hours ago, paradox said:

that's why there is so many lady boys in Thailand, because being gay is not tolerated

 And there's more, not to mention you are either totally misunderstanding what I'm saying or at time claiming I said thing I didn't. Mate I'm being genuine are you all right?

[paradox]

just to be real, your pointing out this one thing is not very productive in the scheme of this conversation.  I'm just want to have a decent discussion man.  Do you have any intention to actually make your point in a coherent & reasonable way?  or should we just agree to disagree?  because this is getting really boring

[paradox]

3 hours ago, Crop said:

Mate I'm being genuine are you all right?

 

No ones buying it brother

[Crop]

8 hours ago, bardo said:

No i am not trolling,

Mate for a start the smoking 'studies' you linked aren't actually studies there newspaper articles, that quote other newspaper articles, that apparently quote unnamed studies. In other words a total wast of time. Further more you admit to not even agreeing with them, which by definition is TROLLING. The only real question that remains is if you have the integrity or stones to own that.

 

9 hours ago, bardo said:

you choose to attack one but not the others,

Mate to be honest I stopped reading after I realised the poor quality of your first links. I've gone back now and I totally agree about the phones. It's not a big problem where I am. However I have, a couple of times, spoken to families about that. Your other examples are about industrial pollution in manufacturing. Definitely a big problem. A bit outside my work with children and their families. Nevertheless a worthy thing to stand up to.

[bardo]

Man you are impossible.

I will just appease your ego and say you are right about everything and i am wrong, yes i am a troll and i don't have the same stones as you because i am nowhere near the same caliber of a man as you, you are divine and supreme to all others in this thread and possibly even the world, i am not able to attain your level of enlightenment nor am i worthy.

You are a savior of smoking and phone using families, you are the bringer of righteous justice and a caster of pearls. 

You are the voice of change and all are in debt to you and all you do.

Thank you oh mighty savior, all are blessed by your presence and beg of your mercy for all we do wrong and not in accord with your will and wisdom. May your voice be heard through out all lands as to save us from our selves and bring all to peace, security and safety.

For all this we all are forever indebted to you oh supreme one.

I will no longer burden you with words of a lower and lesser being and submit and agree with all your words, ways and wisdom.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2018 by bardo
add

[bardo]

On 17/06/2018 at 9:10 AM, Crop said:

about industrial pollution in manufacturing. Definitely a big problem. A bit outside my work with children and their families. Nevertheless a worthy thing to stand up to.

And how would one stand up to this ? with your wisdom what alternatives may we adopt ? and what process must take place for us to adopt the alternatives ? please oh mighty help us transition from our erroneous ways and implement your system of world peace and pollution free society.

Teach us how we can be 100% in synergy with the environment without creating any harm at all with our current and growing population.

Please find us worthy to share your wisdom with us lesser beings.

 

P.S  I am sorry for being a bit of a dick, truly, i don't want to offend you and i will if wanted share seeds and plants with you when i put things up for give aways etc. and respect you as a human being, i think its great you care about earth, animals and people. however it seems we just won't see eye to eye about some perspectives, we may agree about many things and issues tho not share the same outlook about those things and issues, i feel that is good thing not a bad thing, expressing differing views can very well help an individual to encompass more knowledge and broader views and understandings etc.

Being dismissive and to disparage others with differing views is the opposite of evolving in understanding of the human and earthly experience we are all currently undergoing, can we agree on that ? if not that's cool : ) we don't all have the same upbringing, opinions and views etc. what is important to you may mean little to nothing to others, are you able to accept that ? if not you are in for a stressful and hard time during your very short earth experience.  

[Crop]

58 minutes ago, bardo said:

Man you are impossible.

Mate strange reaction, I take it I was not supposed to agree with your links. As for the trolling, you were caught red handed. I would like to hear about that. I am genuinely interested. If you where genuinely trying to make a point, I don’t get what it was.

 Talking to families about this stuff is my job. Sure it’s a small part. Usually I am dealing with extreme at risk children. A lot of the parents of kids in this extreme category, come across the same way you have throughout this thread. As a result, I have probably been harsh on you. Why do you find helping others so strange?  Both Paradox and yourself think ego is motivator. I’ve been in the non-profit sector for decades and I can only think of a few people with anything resembling an ego problem. If you understood the shit you need to wade through on a daily basis you would get why.

31 minutes ago, bardo said:

Being dismissive and to disparage others with differing views is the opposite of evolving in understanding of the human and earthly experience we are all currently undergoing, can we agree on that ?

Mate I was only dismissive once you started posting dodgy newspaper articles claiming smoking is not bad for you. Can we agree that was stupid! regardless whether you were trolling or not? You might not take child safety seriously, but I do. Not smoking around children is an important message. One that has gone way past the debate stage. One you were undermining for what reason?

[Crop]

15 hours ago, paradox said:

 

No ones buying it brother

Mate my concern for your well being is real. Looking back, you have been a little like that all along. So maybe it’s just the way you are. You also got more nasty on Friday. 

Not sure why you think I have been inconsistent. I have always been consistent. I strongly believe everyone should help out others. That’s how the world becomes a better place. You don't have to agree with that. My only problem is with people which are hurting others. In particular those that can't defend them selves, like children. I've taken that so far as to make a career of it.

Our conversation started with me stating that pear pressure is one of the main drivers of social change. A statement you were not comfortable with. I’m sure you can understand; social change is a big part of my business. It’s something I very much like to hear others perspectives on.

For the record I don’t much like how big a role, peer pressure plays in social change, nor do I think the people in my examples went about it in the best possible way. unfortunately, that alone does not affect the reality we live in. Nor do any of your objections. I personally think it’s all our responsibility to try and steer that change in the direction we want it to go. Make no mistake there are plenty of others out there trying to steer it in theirs.

Which brings us to Sharia. Sure Sharia is a threat to some people’s freedoms in some parts of the world. However, you live in Australia, where all the extremist political parties are based on Cannon Law not Sharia. The Christian lobby, along with the coal lobby, remain the biggest threats to democracy in Australia. Constantly influencing law, policy and the media. The once clearly defined line between religion and state has openly becoming blurred. I know the main stream media keep pumping the fear the Muslim message, I’m sure you can see through that. If there is any credible, religious threat to your freedom, isn't it from Cannon Law not Sharia? So why do you keep bringing up Sharia?