Ghana: anti-gay bill proposing 10-year prison sentences sparks outrage

[stvdv]

All I’ve really said is that I’m not against the way Ghana chooses to govern themselves. This doesn’t mean I share their worldview. Or yours.

Correction:
It's not the way Ghana chooses, it's the way these anti LGBT discriminating (exterminating) people creatures choose

 

[Valjean]

All I’ve really said is that I’m not against the way Ghana chooses to govern themselves. This doesn’t mean I share their worldview. Or yours.

Understood. But simply stating opinions is no more interesting than if you'd stated your favorite color or food. What's interesting and thought-provoking is why you hold a particular opinion.
Please provoke my thoughts. Don't you think their laws are unjust? Aren't you against injustice?

 

[Valjean]

No. It is not right or wrong. If it is the law, it is lawful, and I do not oppose it. If it is not the law, I would suggest they enjoy their freedom and try not to take it for granted. Things could be so much worse.

But a law deserves no respect just because it's law. Many laws are unjust. Historically, many laws have done great harm. These laws are wrong, and the only moral stance is to oppose them.
Why do you not oppose this?

"One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. -- Martin Luther King.
"When a law is unjust, it is only right to disobey." -- Mahatma Gandhi.
"If a law is unjust, a man his not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." -- Thomas Jefferson.
"Anyone in a free society where the laws are unjust, has an obligation to break the law." -- Henry David Thoreau.

 

[Valjean]

It appears Ghana wishes to preserve their values and culture. Culture evolves obviously and I’m sure they are open to new ideas that operate in harmony with their current Weltanschauung, but it looks like lgbt lifestyles and activism is not among them. That’s Ghana’s choice and I have nothing against them for it.

Preserving an ineffective culture or immoral values is foolish and wrong.
Culture evolves, true. Culture is a learned survival strategy and, like biological survival strategies, evolves by natural selection.

They do not seem to be open to new ideas. They are digging in their heels and mandating traditional propriety, religious doctrine, and conventionalism. This never ends well....

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No. It is not right or wrong. If it is the law, it is lawful, and I do not oppose it. If it is not the law, I would suggest they enjoy their freedom and try not to take it for granted. Things could be so much worse.

Are you serious?

So a law cannot be unjust?

 

[Meow Mix]

Moral relativity taken to sociopathic levels up in this thread (and I’m a moral noncognitivist!)

 

[Valjean]

Are you serious?

So a law cannot be unjust?

He seems to be saying it's not his place to criticize it, just or not. He seems to respect law just by virtue of its being law.

Me, I think it's everyone's duty to judge a law, and criticize it if unjust.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

He seems to be saying it's not his place to criticize it, just or not. He seems to respect law just by virtue of its being law.

Me, I think it's everyone's duty to judge a law, and criticize it if unjust.

Something tells me that this would not be their attitude if it were an unjust law that negatively affected a group that they cared about.

 

[Twilight Hue]

So, to be clear, you think that it is morally wrong to imprison people for up to ten years just for being gay?

It makes me wonder, is Ghana a theocracy?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

It makes me wonder, is Ghana a theocracy?

Good question.

 

[Aštra’el]

Something tells me that this would not be their attitude if it were an unjust law that negatively affected a group that they cared about.

You’ve assumed so much.

There are countries who would execute my loved ones for their religious views. Not just send them to prison for 10 years, as horrible as that can be, but burn them alive and send them to their deaths shrieking in agony as their flesh melts off their bones. People might even cheer the act on. I am not out there advocating for those laws to end. If they seek to preserve or expand their culture within their country by culling of those who do not embrace it, or who present a threat to their way of life, who am I to demand they adopt some other culture instead? One more “civilized” and “just”? Is that not what Christians did? And yet, they get so much hate for destroying people’s cultures and way of life, and replacing it with one more “civilized” and “just”. So which is it?

Yes, my Weltanschauung is forbidden and unlawful in some places, as is the world-views of many of my family and friends. I understand that. Were I forced to live in places that forbid my views, I would do my best not to express them there, at all, and would likely adopt the traditions of the people, and assimilate as much as I could out of respect for their culture, and out of respect for my own life. Regardless of how much my worldview might or might not change in that particular scenario, to everyone else I would appear to have become one of them. I would hope that those I care about would be just as willing to do so, though, I know some who wouldn’t, and I’d probably end up watching them die for it. So am significantly grateful and appreciative that in a place like the United States of America, I can experience the freedom to exist as I am, as I have become. I am forever grateful.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You’ve assumed so much.

There are countries who would execute my loved ones for their religious views. Not just send them to prison for 10 years, as horrible as that can be, but burn them alive and send them to their deaths shrieking in agony as their flesh melts off their bones. People might even cheer the act on. I am not out there advocating for those laws to end. If they seek to preserve or expand their culture within their country by culling of those who do not embrace it, or who present a threat to their way of life, who am I to demand they adopt some other culture instead? One more “civilized” and “just”? Is that not what Christians did? And yet, they get so much hate for destroying people’s cultures and way of life, and replacing it with one more “civilized” and “just”. So which is it?

Yes, my Weltanschauung is forbidden and unlawful in some places, as is the world-views of many of my family and friends. I understand that. Were I forced to live in places that forbid my views, I would do my best not to express them there, at all, and would likely adopt the traditions of the people, and assimilate as much as I could out of respect for their culture, and out of respect for my own life. Regardless of how much my worldview might or might not change in that particular scenario, to everyone else I would appear to have become one of them. I would hope that those I care about would be just as willing to do so, though, I know some who wouldn’t, and I’d probably end up watching them die for it. So am significantly grateful and appreciative that in a place like the United States of America, I can experience the freedom to exist as I am, as I have become. I am forever grateful.

None of this says anything whatsoever about whether or not it is right to oppose laws you view as unjust. Your language implies that we we are opposed to here is culture, which is flagrant mischaracterization of our position. Our position is against unjust laws.

Your attitude indicates that you believe any law is just, provided it is a law. If you do not undertand why this position is morally flawed, I cannot help you.

I ask again: the holocaust. Good or bad?

 

[Wildswanderer]

The USA.

Lol, what nonwhites are getting thrown out?
You mean the people who came here illegally?

 

[Aštra’el]

None of this says anything whatsoever about whether or not it is right to oppose laws you view as unjust. Your language implies that we we are opposed to here is culture, which is flagrant mischaracterization of our position. Our position is against unjust laws.

I have given my own perspective and answered your responses as best I can. I find it kind of ironic that you claim I am mischaracterizing your opposition towards what you subjectively consider to be “unjust” laws, when the only reason I am still responding is to clear up any mischaracterizations here regarding my own views. For example, you say the following:

Your attitude indicates that you believe any law is just, provided it is a law. If you do not undertand why this position is morally flawed, I cannot help you.

My mind does not divide laws into “just” and “unjust”. It is inaccurate to say that I view all laws as just, because I do not.

I ask again: the holocaust. Good or bad?

For the answer you seek, I recommend consulting a clergyman or a psychiatrist. They can help you with that better than I can. I unfortunately am not the sole authority on what is right or wrong, just or unjust, or good or evil. I can not give an honest answer to your question because words like “good” and “evil”, “just” and “unjust” have little meaning to me. It could be one of my many strengths, or one of my many flaws... or some combination of both. “Lawful and unlawful”, has far more meaning and is almost always objective. So I operate within the confines of the law while keeping in mind how my own actions will affect myself, those I care about, and the world around me... and how those outcomes make me feel, if anything.

There is a lot that can be said about the success and downfall of the Third Reich, and the human suffering that has occurred and can occur in any war, but I will say this: I find the Jewish peoples’ tremendous resilience in the face of adversity one of the things I admire most out of any group in this world, and I am glad that the holocaust was not the end of them. Their cultural foundation is strong, and incredibly resistant to those who would seek to alter their way of life by claiming to be more “just” or “civilized”, who attempt to overwrite Jewish views with their own, and fail absolutely.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I have given my own perspective and answered your responses as best I can. I find it kind of ironic that you claim I am mischaracterizing your opposition towards what you subjectively consider to be “unjust” laws, when the only reason I am still responding is to clear up any mischaracterizations here regarding my own views. For example, you say the following:


My mind does not divide laws into “just” and “unjust”. It is inaccurate to say that I view all laws as just, because I do not.

Then what is your issue with people judging laws to be unjust?

If you accept that just because something is a law doesn't make it just, your original post in this thread becomes asinine. People are perfectly justified in calling Ghana's law unjust, so your criticism of them for doing so makes no sense.

For the answer you seek, I recommend consulting a clergyman or a psychiatrist. They can help you with that better than I can.

I am asking YOU for YOUR opinion. Why on earth would a clergyman or psychiatrist be better able to tell me YOUR opinion than you are?

Do you defer to the clergy or psychiatrists for all your personal moral evaluations?

I unfortunately am not the sole authority on what is right or wrong, just or unjust, or good or evil. I can not give an honest answer to your question because words like “good” and “evil”, “just” and “unjust” have little meaning to me. It could be one of my many strengths, or one of my many flaws... or some combination of both. “Lawful and unlawful”, has far more meaning and is almost always objective. So I operate within the confines of the law while keeping in mind how my own actions will affect myself, those I care about, and the world around me... and how those outcomes make me feel, if anything.

There is a lot that can be said about the success and downfall of the Third Reich, and the human suffering that has occurred and can occur in any war, but I will say this: I find the Jewish peoples’ tremendous resilience in the face of adversity one of the things I admire most out of any group in this world, and I am glad that the holocaust was not the end of them. Their cultural foundation is strong, and incredibly resistant to those who would seek to alter their way of life by claiming to be more “just” or “civilized”, who attempt to overwrite Jewish views with their own, and fail absolutely.

This is a very long-winded way of refusing to give an answer to an extremely straightforward question.

 

[Aštra’el]

Then what is your issue with people judging laws to be unjust?

If you accept that just because something is a law doesn't make it just, your original post in this thread becomes asinine. People are perfectly justified in calling Ghana's law unjust, so your criticism of them for doing so makes no sense.

When did I criticize or express issue with people judging laws as unjust? If I recall, I said I am not against Ghana’s position, or yours. Could it be that it is you who is judging me for not judging laws as just or unjust?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

When did I criticize or express issue with people judging laws as unjust? If I recall, I said I am not against Ghana’s position, or yours. Could it be that it is you who is judging me for not judging laws as just or unjust?

Why can you not own your own position or answer a simple question?

Let us try shifting gears here, for a second.

Do you understand WHY many people are outraged about this new bill in Ghana?

 

[Friend of Mara]

It appears Ghana wishes to preserve their values and culture. Culture evolves obviously and I’m sure they are open to new ideas that operate in harmony with their current Weltanschauung, but it looks like lgbt lifestyles and activism is not among them. That’s Ghana’s choice and I have nothing against them for it.

You realize that Christianity isn't part of Ghana's historical culture. Ghana had a rich history of LGBTQ presence until it was criminalized in 1860 after aggressive missionary work that started in 1828. It wasn't like it is now until after the Methodist evangelical push starting in 1910.

And not to act as a moral arbiter but oppression of minorities is always a bad look.