User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 54

  1. #21
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    This is a terrible regression. I don't remember where I read this, but I think there was a period shortly after the fall of the Roman empire where there were courts that would judge Romans according to Roman law, Franks according to Frankish law, and so on. I believe it was related to the ascendancy of a German called Odacer or something.
    I think it came right before the period ruled by "Kill them all and let God sort them out."
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #22
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    You're talking about the ascendancy of the Catholic Church and the Holy Roman Empire (the latter of which was none of those three things, ironically.)

    In any case, it could hint at the breakdown of centralized order in Germany (if not Europe), and means that the influx of new peoples with new values is tearing the nation apart, because the people all believe in different laws. You cannot have different laws for different peoples, there must only be one. Either the newcomers must obey the tenets set down by the original inhabitants, they must conquer them, or the original inhabitants must surrender to them. This is a poorly designed stopgap solution that has failed before in the distant past.

  3. #23
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    In any case, it could hint at the breakdown of centralized order in Germany (if not Europe), and means that the influx of new peoples with new values is tearing the nation apart, because the people all believe in different laws. You cannot have different laws for different peoples, there must only be one. Either the newcomers must obey the tenets set down by the original inhabitants, they must conquer them, or the original inhabitants must surrender to them. This is a poorly designed stopgap solution that has failed before in the distant past.
    Hmmm, that's a nice analysis of group dynamics. All sorts of examples came to mind when I read it -- from the issue of Mexican (il)legal immigrants here in the US to the INTP vs non-INTP problem on INTPc a few months ago.

    At least the example in the OP self-corrected and set a precedent for future disagreements.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #24
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    ...Franks according to Frankish law...

  5. #25
    Member Llenyd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    60

    Default

    It seems most agree that multiculturalism is a poor excuse for condoning harmful actions, but what about harmful inaction? Something I've seen come up a lot recently is the issue of parents refusing live-saving medical procedures for their children for religious/cultural reasons. Should courts have the right to force medical procedures on a child in order to save a child's life?

  6. #26
    Senior Member Sahara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Llenyd View Post
    It seems most agree that multiculturalism is a poor excuse for condoning harmful actions, but what about harmful inaction? Something I've seen come up a lot recently is the issue of parents refusing live-saving medical procedures for their children for religious/cultural reasons. Should courts have the right to force medical procedures on a child in order to save a child's life?
    I think they should have that right, just because the parents religion forbids that medical treatment, why should the child be allowed to die?

    Weird religious myths should not be allowed to endanger the lives of those unable to protect themselves.
    "No one can be free of the chains that surround them"

  7. #27
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Llenyd View Post
    It seems most agree that multiculturalism is a poor excuse for condoning harmful actions, but what about harmful inaction? Something I've seen come up a lot recently is the issue of parents refusing live-saving medical procedures for their children for religious/cultural reasons. Should courts have the right to force medical procedures on a child in order to save a child's life?
    Individuals have always had the right to refuse medical treatment, and parents have always had the right to make such decisions for their minor children. I know that sometimes the result is harmful, but I think on balance it's better to allow individuals that autonomy rather than to take it away.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Sahara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon67 View Post
    Individuals have always had the right to refuse medical treatment, and parents have always had the right to make such decisions for their minor children. I know that sometimes the result is harmful, but I think on balance it's better to allow individuals that autonomy rather than to take it away.

    I don't have any issues with allowing individuals the freedom to choose for themselves, but the child is not yet an individual who can choose for itself, that's different don't you think?
    "No one can be free of the chains that surround them"

  9. #29
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sahara View Post
    I don't have any issues with allowing individuals the freedom to choose for themselves, but the child is not yet an individual who can choose for itself, that's different don't you think?
    Yes, that is different. That's why parents make choices for them.

    In the vast majority of cases, you can expect parents to care more about their child's welfare than the state does.

    You also need to consider unintended consequences. Do you really want the state to have the authority to mandate that medical services be provided to individuals who don't want them? Or to minors whose parents don't want the services? That kind of authority gave rise, in this country, to such horrors as state-mandated sterilization of those adjudicated to be "mentally unfit" or otherwise undesirable.

    And I would very much prefer that my local Child Protective Services agency not have the power to mandate that my daughter have a therapeutic abortion, just to pick an example.

    That being the case, I prefer that the authority to make such decisions remain with the parent...as I said earlier.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Sahara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon67 View Post

    You also need to consider unintended consequences. Do you really want the state to have the authority to mandate that medical services be provided to individuals who don't want them? Or to minors whose parents don't want the services? That kind of authority gave rise, in this country, to such horrors as state-mandated sterilization of those adjudicated to be "mentally unfit" or otherwise undesirable.
    I am strictly speaking of Jehovah witnesses and the like, and the risk they take with the lives of their children. If a blood transfusion will save the life of that child, why can they not give it to them?

    And I would very much prefer that my local Child Protective Services agency not have the power to mandate that my daughter have a therapeutic abortion, just to pick an example.
    That's a far out example your picking to make your case, I am talking about LIFE saving procedures, nothing more.


    That being the case, I prefer that the authority to make such decisions remain with the parent...as I said earlier.
    Thanks for clarifying your position.

    Not ALL parents have the childs best interest at heart, so in certain circumstances I am all for the state laws to step in to that role.
    "No one can be free of the chains that surround them"

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] How idyllic is your life, How idyllic is your spirit?
    By Alienclock in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 05-10-2013, 05:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO