How did they fare before condoms were invented
I know this is more complex than that. Missionaries and colonisation when together were generally disruptive.
The more mobility the greater the threat of disease.
-
Features
Because Anti-Muslim Bigotry, Islamophobia
- Thread starter NightSky
- Start date
The more mobility the greater the threat of disease.
Why do criticisms of Islam and how horrible it is always get responded to with criticisms of Christianity and how horrible it is? Is it not obvious that both are horrible? Are both being horrible mutually exclusive somehow? Fuck both these religions. We need rational secular thought and to get out of the dark ages of fairy tales.
repoman
Contributor
And do the same people who do that complain about other "whataboutisms"?
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
How did they fare before condoms were invented
I know this is more complex than that. Missionaries and colonisation when together were generally disruptive.
The more mobility the greater the threat of disease.
Why travel when there are enough at home, but it's still the more partners, the more chance of disease. Nowadays with better transport we should be okay.
whichphilosophy
Contributor
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2004
- Messages
- 6,803
- Basic Beliefs
- Energy is itself a Life form
How did they fare before condoms were invented
I know this is more complex than that. Missionaries and colonisation when together were generally disruptive.
Depends on what you mean by 'condom' I guess.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_condoms
Actually during my first dates or one night stands, I was told my mouth is a condom. All I had to do is speak and then there was definitely no sex.
fromderinside
Mazzie Daius
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,945
- Basic Beliefs
- optimist
We need well informed and curious citizens. What exists here in the states for brown communities is a fundamentalist christian law and education failing in both humanity and rationality. The most important aspect is humanity.
What is seen as the exact benefit of either exercise? Any broad body of opinion/believers will contain a very mixed bag indeed, and it would seem to me more useful to concentrate on the positive.
More pleasant certainly. But more useful?
In the old days there was very little travel, little opportunity for disease to spread.
Look at what happened to the New World. The inhabitants mostly lived in fairly small societies deadly diseases would burn out. Thus there were no plagues. The Old World had more travel, plagues could spread instead of burning out.
Look at HIV--it almost certainly dates from around 1900 but it was nothing but a minor footnote until trucks started moving around a lot and turned it into a pandemic.
J842P
Veteran Member
It is not true that the inhabitants of the New World mostly lived in small communities. Sure, perhaps that was true in the far north and in the Amazon. But there were large population centers in North America and South America, and *enormous* population centers in Mesoamerica. When the Conquistadors landed and found Tenochtitlan, it was probably the biggest city most of them had ever seen. In Europe, it was only rivaled by perhaps Paris and Constantinople.
Indeed, it was a plague that mostly wiped them out.
J842P
Veteran Member
Fundamentalist Christian law in the United States?
Seriously?
Sure, there exist Christian dominionists amongst us, but the US is far from a Christian theocracy, as much as the theocrats in the Republican party would like it to be.
And why only "brown communities?" If anything, the whiter a place is the more likely it is to have anything resembling "Fundamentalist Christian Law".
Christianity as a political force is mostly dead in the West. The only real last vestiges are the Vatican and some areas of Eastern Europe.
J842P
Veteran Member
There is no indication that this was a hate crime. Although, it is interesting how the Left automatically jumps into that narrative.
I'm surprised the Right hasn't been screaming about how this is really about illegal alien crime.
One city, no matter what the size, can't support a plague. It will burn out.
Plagues can only survive when you have a large number of cities with plenty of travel between them.
That's what I'm saying didn't exist in the New World, at least until soon before Columbus brought Old World plagues.
'Most 'religions', in practice, tend in normal times to move people to behave rather better, though there are elements within them that make a nasty minority behave worse. If we wage a wide-front attack on the religion, we merely increase sympathy for that nasty minority.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 39,807
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Do they?
Yes - difficult to believe the buggers could be worse, admittedly, but they really could!
Derec
Contributor
Is he more of a scum than this Nafri who stabbed a police officer at the Flint airport?
FBI investigating officer's stabbing at Flint airport as terrorism
untermensche
Contributor
Nobody is a bigger or lesser of a criminal because they are a Muslim.
Crimes are crimes.
And the individuals responsible for them are the people responsible for them.
But when massive premeditated violence is carried out by states that is crime as well.
And in the world of talking apes violence begets violence.
Massive violent attacks creates randomly dispersed violent people in response.
Crimes are crimes.
And the individuals responsible for them are the people responsible for them.
But when massive premeditated violence is carried out by states that is crime as well.
And in the world of talking apes violence begets violence.
Massive violent attacks creates randomly dispersed violent people in response.
That point really needs to be driven home, to both those who demonize Muslims and those who make excuses for them.
Religion should be neither a justification to attack somebody, nor a shield from responsibility for one's actions. No special rules for the religious.