The Student Room Group

Brunei passes gay stoning law

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Georgie_M
Heavily aid them whilst also refusing to write off their debt so we can control them through the IMF and maintain their subordination to the west.


Why should it be written off? We don't pay taxes in this country for them to be sent abroad and written off because of corrupt, autocratic dictators and rulers. But I think you'll find that huge amounts of international loans are written off. The point stands that they take our money but give us the middle finger when we ask them to treat homosexuals with a bit of respect.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Reluire
Why should it be written off? We don't pay taxes in this country for them to be sent abroad and written off because of corrupt, autocratic dictators and rulers. But I think you'll find that huge amounts of international loans are written off. The point stands that they take our money but give us the middle finger when we ask them to treat homosexuals with a bit of respect.

Loan repayments to the IMF absolutely cripple many developing countries, fact.

and whhhaaattt? We should be able to place our ideologies on other countries because we give them money? Why should they adhere to westernisation? Why should we be allowed to control the way their country is run because we give them money?
We might have to agree to disagree because that statement is too ridiculous IMO.
Original post by Reluire
Why should it be written off? We don't pay taxes in this country for them to be sent abroad and written off because of corrupt, autocratic dictators and rulers. But I think you'll find that huge amounts of international loans are written off. The point stands that they take our money but give us the middle finger when we ask them to treat homosexuals with a bit of respect.

And you may not agree with your taxes going to these countries well I do, don't like it then vote.
Let me guess Brunei is a muslim country ????
Original post by Ibn AbdulFatah
Whether i approve it or not is not the issue. I am simply saying the UK getting involved is none of their business regardless of their garrisons stationed their. If they don't like the bill withdraw your troops and don't trade but putting pressure on their bill which you may agree or not agree shows you're trying to shove down secular ideas down the sultan's throat.


So you agree with it? :rolleyes:
Reply 25
Avatar for Flauta
Flauta
9
Original post by Ibn AbdulFatah
Why does it matter to you and if you yank his chain wouldn't make a difference. Britain shouldn't be intervening in others counties laws.


So if there was a country where those who identified as muslims were being systematically murdered (in a perfectly legal state sanctioned manner) you wouldn't care and you'd agree that islamic states shouldn't intervene?
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Georgie_M
Loan repayments to the IMF absolutely cripple many developing countries, fact.

and whhhaaattt? We should be able to place our ideologies on other countries because we give them money? Why should they adhere to westernisation? Why should we be allowed to control the way their country is run because we give them money?
We might have to agree to disagree because that statement is too ridiculous IMO.


That's why we give them aid which doesn't have to be paid back. Loans are another matter.

There comes a line when cultural relativism is what becomes 'too ridiculous'. You could justify absolutely anything with it and say 'well that's just the way they do things'. I mean, going by your logic we should have just cast a blind eye to things like the Rwandan genocide, the war crimes of dictators like Saddam Hussein and the disgraceful human rights abuses in North Korea.

I'm not saying we should impose things on other countries, but there should be some kind of respect shown to the countries which give their own money to help them. It's not a case of Westernising these countries, it's a case of saying - look, you don't have to like homosexuals, but stoning them is a step too far. It's asking for compromise, it's not demanding it.
Reply 27
Avatar for lerjj
lerjj
13
Probably going to get some hate for this.
I don't think that we should give aid to other countries if they are going to retain such barbaric practices as stoning. They should choose between developing on their own and accepting their place in modern culture.
Original post by Flauta
So if there was a country where those who identified as muslims were being systematically murdered (in a perfectly legal state sanctioned manner) you wouldn't care and you'd agree that islamic states shouldn't intervene?


Yes i do agree with it anyway just to clarify. There is no such thing as legal systematical murder, the intervention from these countries would make things worse. Look at Iraq and Afghanistan, there intervention fuelled more attacks than it was meant to contain. I would like to point out for example Syria is being meddled with by several countries not just internal conflict, it is basically like a free for all arena for any countries. All of them saying they have the civilian in mind, what bull**** is that. All in all regarding your example yes Islamic states can intervene if there is systematic murdering and not for self interest but for the people.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Ibn AbdulFatah
Yes i do agree with it anyway just to clarify. There is no such thing as legal systematical murder, the intervention from these countries would make things worse. Look at Iraq and Afghanistan, there intervention fuelled more attacks than it was meant to contain. I would like to point out for example Syria is being meddled with by several countries not just internal conflict, it is basically like a free for all arena for any countries. All of them saying they have the civilian in mind, what bull**** is that. All in all regarding your example yes Islamic states can intervene if there is systematic murdering and not for self interest but for the people.


and who decides what action is 'in interest of the people' -? al queda pretend they are doing so, so does Hezbollah, assad etc etc. everyone acts in their own disguised interests, muslims and islam are no exception
Original post by Meenglishnogood
and who decides what action is 'in interest of the people' -? al queda pretend they are doing so, so does Hezbollah, assad etc etc. everyone acts in their own disguised interests, muslims and islam are no exception


The British who proclaim peace and in the interest of others are far worse in my opinion than Al Qeada. I hate Assad and Hezbollah.
Original post by Ibn AbdulFatah
The British who proclaim peace and in the interest of others are far worse in my opinion than Al Qeada. I hate Assad and Hezbollah.

al queda are the worst, followed by hamas hezollah and assad. british saved millions of muslim from extinction in bosnia when al queda couldn't be bothered
At first, I thought that the title said 'Brunel passes gay stoning law.' It seemed like a bridge too far.
Original post by Meenglishnogood
al queda are the worst, followed by hamas hezollah and assad. british saved millions of muslim from extinction in bosnia when al queda couldn't be bothered


Whole point is no one should get involved, if Britain disagree with have a dialogue which wouldn't really deter them from passing the bill anyway.
Original post by Ibn AbdulFatah
Whole point is no one should get involved, if Britain disagree with have a dialogue which wouldn't really deter them from passing the bill anyway.

I don't think Britain can really do anything with the silly laws these Islamic governments pass, I was saying Islamic aims rarely are in the interests of everyday people. brtiain has less influence over Islamic nutjobs in east asia than the Saudis do, who control all the suni muslim countries like puppets
Original post by Reluire
It's tiring that we heavily aid countries like Brunei, Nigeria and Uganda, only for them to spit in our faces when we ask them to stop lynching and being unnecessarily cruel to homosexuals. Cultural relativism is a ridiculous justification for disgraceful and inhumane practices like stoning.
Perhaps we could send some guillotines along with the aid and export some of our hypocrisy at the same time.
(edited 9 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you