Posts by Rebecca Miller2

Solaris said:It seems you aren't reading the full posts.

No one claimed that X and Y possess equal abilities; rather, they should have an equal starting line to prove themselves.

If you truly believe men are superior in everything, why complain? Those who are actually better will prove it.

And who gets to decide the rules for "proving oneself"?

If those rules follow something like "soulless psychology," then the only ones succeeding are misanthropes and feminized Talmudists!

Just look at today's various so-called "psychological tests."

They're designed for a "Planet of the Apes" scenario, not for normal people. It's a swamp where favored, feminized minds thrive—people who only see the surface. Depth is a foreign concept to them!

Then they look at those who don't "meet" these tests and label them "lesser"! It's classic Jewish and female cynicism... ego from a lower consciousness...

Intelligence isn't just frog legs on wires in Dr. Madman's laboratory... intelligence is ADAPTING TO NATURAL, NEW CIRCUMSTANCES!

I've already written about this!

Who would fare better if dropped into the middle of a vast, dark forest in the dead of night... total unknown... just some guy... a regular man... or... a highly educated professor... full of "emancipation" and "knowledge"! Who survives in that wilderness...?

Why didn't I say in the middle of a big city? Because professors can use "illegal" tools there... like using sexuality... to deceive and climb the career ladder. So, a forest... without other humans... but filled with... beasts... and natural dangers... let's see... what happens when a woman has no one left to "sell" her "beauty" or exposed legs to!

Except maybe Me... if Me were thrown in there... like a genetic experiment... tied up... surrounded by... bears!😳 😛

Apple said:"Equality" isn't quite the same thing as "having rights."

Having rights is just a social construct, whereas equality can be something more natural... like physical equality, for instance. We’d all agree we aren't equal there... some women and men can have children while others can't... so there's an inequality there. Or one person might handle intense physical labor better due to their build, while someone else struggles... we aren't equal in that sense either.

But that’s a separate issue from how much that should impact the concept of human rights egalitarianism...

This is the answer to the core of it!

AAAAAAA!!!

Look at that—a philosopher emerged from the dark shadows... 🙂

Exactly: Having rights is a social category! But equality is the very essence of nature itself. If we look through the lens of consciousness, everything eventually... settles into a single formula... the existence of all beings under the stars. Some call it fate, others call it metaphysics!

And some might just call it—well—philosophy!

Everything serves a purpose... even equality, which becomes the weight that balances our obligations!

Glam said:It's just not

Thanks!🙂

Sam Wood4 said:It’s really important to Solaris!
But your premise is flawed from the very start.

Capable, sure... but compared to what?

If men and women are equally capable, then what was the purpose behind why God created them both? To simply perform the same jobs?

If we look at this strictly from a physical standpoint, where exactly do the differences lie? Heh, hey there...

Maybe we should just call "equality" "sameness" instead?

And what exactly did we get out of this?

That which simply doesn't apply. 😛

They don't quite get it!

They were "raised" by those who claim their father was a monkey... oops... well, maybe not a father, just some distant ancestor!😕

And you see how they don't even grasp the subject matter!

Gentlemen,

The issue isn't about women (that debate belongs over on the Religion board), but rather: what is the distinction between "equality" and "having rights"?

If you don't grasp the core concept... then, my apologies...

It seems I've been asking people who just don't know.

What a shame... you all seemed so "brilliant"!😁 😛

So, it looks like we have no actual philosophers here on the philosophy subforum!

Wonderful!🙂

So, Matthew Doyle73 is just running all over the place now??

What’s going on, Matthew Doyle73... are you putting out fires, or what...??😁

Just be careful not to burn out, man!😛 🙂

Here it is... a topic to study, ponder... and connect the dots!

Give me your answers. "Responsibly," of course...😳

http://www.teme.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3436

Orion said:😕

Maybe, but specifically in the Netherlands.
Elsewhere in the world? Unlikely... 🙄

If men started bleeding every month, all their rights would go down the drain. 😁 And let's face it—that’s never going to happen!

The whole "bleeding" thing is just a gimmick!

Look at this... I was clearly uninformed... didn't realize "bleeding" was also a toll fee! Here's to fake equality!😢 👎

Still waiting on an answer: Are "having rights" and "equality" actually the same thing in today's terms... YES OR NO?

Case closed!

*Clap...*😳

Solaris said:😲 😲 😕 😕 explain this using actual facts.

Equality means having an equal right to something—like X and Y both having a shot at a job, but the most qualified person gets it.

But who defines "qualified"?

Is it based on actual biological reality, or just whoever’s been brainwashed by those eco-warrior fairy tales?

That's the real question.

Are X and Y actually on "equal footing"? Where's the proof?

Or is this all just made up out of thin air?

Is a car equal to its driver?

And is some other pseudo-scientist equal to... well, screw it.😁 😛

Calling all amateur philosophers out there! Let's see what you've got. Is it actually the same thing?

Had a little chat with some folks recently... now I'm hunting for a definition.

Take "gender equality," for example. Is "having rights" truly synonymous with "equality"? Based on my take on language and logic—it's definitely not!

To clarify: do women have all their legal rights? They do!

But when activists and certain interest groups use the term "equality"—through all their constant bickering and political maneuvering—it feels like they aren't talking about *that* kind of equality at all.

So, what are they actually after?

Are they actually seeking some form of superiority under the guise of "equality"?

Hmm... I think I just gave you all a bit of a headache, didn't I?

Or look at it this way: in a typical animal farm, everyone is technically "equal," but... some are more equal than others !?😲

Nowadays, certain movements are even threatening the biological survival of men... so what kind of "equality" is this that hasn't yet translated into actual SUPERIORITY over men? Where is the flaw?

Is it in linguistics, the law, or... just a lack of common sense?

Thanks.🙂

steeldrifter6 said:I forgot to mention that healing involves facing whatever is causing the fear directly.

Such a great point... I was just about to say the same thing...🙂 👍

Bradley Fisher20 said:Is it universal? Hard to say. I picture a town somewhere where everyone is sick and poisoned, looking terrible. Then a healthy person walks in, just bursting with energy. I bet even they would look incredibly vibrant by comparison.

So, health really does tie back to your energy levels and how well you can handle life's challenges.

Interesting thought process...🙂

Solaris said:Can anyone provide a universal, precise definition of what is "normal" or "healthy"?

I don't think so...😁 😛

It all depends... on the level of consciousness. On the era and historical layers we live through.

But defining "normal" precisely isn't easy, unless you call it: in alignment with the natural order...

🙂

Quote : Originally posted by Mars
Check out today's edition of The New York Times. They're calling anyone opposed to human cloning a total mafia 😲

It’s like the clock is ticking toward—well, moral midnight! 😲

And... pure chaos!

lonescout2 said:Fair enough, but I'm just stating my opinion.
It bugs me a little...

And the idea that John Carpenter's vampires are sooo much better than FDTD...

I agree.

Carpenter has this certain... mix of realism and grit, style and terror... that creates... a wild cocktail of fear!🙂

Pale Blue Eyes said:First off, let's clarify things... what's actually the difference between a genetically modified human and a "natural" one?

What does "natural" even mean?

Hasn't nature itself been genetically modifying everything around us this whole time?

Is there really a difference when, say, a woman chooses a partner specifically because he has blue eyes, a PhD in nuclear physics, and is an elite athlete—hoping for a blue-eyed, brilliant, healthy child... versus scientists selecting those exact genes to create that child?

My main concern here would be the rights and interests of that unborn child... who asks them how they want to be created?

It’s not just about the child's rights. It's the danger of a tiny handful of corrupt people seizing all the power... acting like "gods" who decide who even gets to live!

Massive ethical questions are surfacing from a very dark future.

Won't a fake version of the "government" reach for the "right" to issue licenses for life? And who gets permission to have a child at all? The world of the future looks like a massive totalitarian threat.

Those who lack morals today—what will they do tomorrow if they grab this kind of power... power over life itself!

😢