And instead of referring to them and using them to defend your country, you talk as though Verdonk and Balkenende were the ones you have to defend; and miss the opportunity to point out that not all the Dutch are as craven and murderously cowardly as I made them. You think you are defending your country, when you defame it worse than anything I could do. Well, I only read that excuse for an editorial you posted and the article I linked you to on Wikipedia. But if you say that the affair is not over and that things can get better for Aayan Hirsi Ali, aren't you a bit quick to judge? Besides, I don't really think I was defending Verdonk or Balkenende, but pointing out a couple of things that Melanie Phillips seems to have forgotten about in her rush to sympathise for Aayan Hirsi Ali. War against radical Islam or not, I don't like it when people try to manipulate me, wittingly or not. I'm not saying that nobody ever manages to manipulate me, because that's probably false, but at least I try to use my brain, if it were only because it wouldn't make radical Islamists happy. I am biased against the Dutch. I think I noticed that before. Maybe it is because there are some ideas that are deeply ingrained in the Dutch mind that are very much at odds with what it required for you as a Catholic (and I may be wrong in this, but if I am, please try to tell me so without crushing my ego. It never killed anyone, baby or not, and it even didn't drive a brave activist out of the country). Dutch people are thouroughly convinced that you should be free to do whatever you like, no matter what religious leaders say, as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. That's why they approve of legalizing drugs, of euthanasia (at the time of the big debate, I looked at the actual rules for it: to be able to get euthanaized, you need the signature of at least a couple of doctors and the certainty that there is really no hope whatsoever). The theory is that, if something is legalized, at least it happens in a controlled environment, in the open, and everybody can see that nobody was murdered for the inheritance or their life insurance, nobody was fed bad chemicals that damaged their bodies even more and they weren't lured to consume even viler stuff. It's a very pragmatic approach that is thouroughly uncatholic. I know that you're a devout Catholic, and that's admirable. I know that you don't understand the Dutch mind and that you think it's absolutely horrible, but can you please be content that we're all going to Hell and not ruin my day when it's hardly started?
no subject
Well, I only read that excuse for an editorial you posted and the article I linked you to on Wikipedia. But if you say that the affair is not over and that things can get better for Aayan Hirsi Ali, aren't you a bit quick to judge? Besides, I don't really think I was defending Verdonk or Balkenende, but pointing out a couple of things that Melanie Phillips seems to have forgotten about in her rush to sympathise for Aayan Hirsi Ali. War against radical Islam or not, I don't like it when people try to manipulate me, wittingly or not. I'm not saying that nobody ever manages to manipulate me, because that's probably false, but at least I try to use my brain, if it were only because it wouldn't make radical Islamists happy.
I am biased against the Dutch.
I think I noticed that before. Maybe it is because there are some ideas that are deeply ingrained in the Dutch mind that are very much at odds with what it required for you as a Catholic (and I may be wrong in this, but if I am, please try to tell me so without crushing my ego. It never killed anyone, baby or not, and it even didn't drive a brave activist out of the country). Dutch people are thouroughly convinced that you should be free to do whatever you like, no matter what religious leaders say, as long as it doesn't hurt anybody else. That's why they approve of legalizing drugs, of euthanasia (at the time of the big debate, I looked at the actual rules for it: to be able to get euthanaized, you need the signature of at least a couple of doctors and the certainty that there is really no hope whatsoever). The theory is that, if something is legalized, at least it happens in a controlled environment, in the open, and everybody can see that nobody was murdered for the inheritance or their life insurance, nobody was fed bad chemicals that damaged their bodies even more and they weren't lured to consume even viler stuff. It's a very pragmatic approach that is thouroughly uncatholic. I know that you're a devout Catholic, and that's admirable. I know that you don't understand the Dutch mind and that you think it's absolutely horrible, but can you please be content that we're all going to Hell and not ruin my day when it's hardly started?