text stringlengths 0 9.69k |
|---|
I mean, I just told you why it's not going to be apolitical, so that doesn't really engage with the analysis that I just gave you, but also Hewlett is going to be less accessible, which means that that message won't even get out there. So I think that you don't get that benefit. Anyways, |
On inclusion, we get three different back business from the OP government team as to why this hurts the safe space that pride is discouraging people from attending and building the community. Claim, number one, that the presence of police officers is incredibly damaging for many people who choose to come to these march... |
The second thing that we get is that they're going to be significant right wing parties who attend these marches without any analysis. Again, the argumentation is that mostly parties. Don't want to be right wing as we get from closing I want to go to these marches as we get from closing government. Then that's probably... |
The last thing we get is on alcohol, and that there's lots of alcohol at these parties, so lots of people don't feel comfortable, sure, but I think lots of people actually enjoy the alcohol environment. They actually draw some people in, presumably too. If you shift some of these people to who live, that means that tha... |
But what did we tell you? No, thank you. First of all, I told you that you're less likely to create a relatable community, because the loss of internationalization means that you don't see people from halfway across the world who are also gay but have friends and are able to live day to day. You don't actually include ... |
The final claim that we get is from closing government. And I think they give a very simple claim. They say that this is going to polarize the right this is going to polarize moderates, because this is seen as extreme or will be endorsed by right wing parties, as Dorothy points out, is it rebutted? This is symmetric, b... |
At the end of this debate, we give you the clearest path forward. We provide hope for vulnerable youth, and we also make sure that we have political change that is plausible and likely very proud to oppose. Thank you. |
</ow> |
Motion: This House, as religious individual would prefer to be a part of a religious community that proselytizes over the one that does |
not. |
<pm> |
PM Speech Transcript: |
This is a debate about what the good life looks like for someone who's already religious. It is not a debate about the general elements of religion, organized or otherwise that are not specific or unique to the fact that a community has an intention and a doctrine, a support mechanism to proselytize. Moving forward, we... |
So first argument on the metaphysics bit, I think there are two possible reasons why a religious community might decide not to attempt facilitation of a large scale. One is a deeper doctrinal belief, as some religions hold, that you simply cannot be saved, and making any attempt to try and save you by telling you about... |
More importantly, it also becomes hard to build those relationships over time, because you you just struggle with the fact that on some level, they're doomed. There's nothing you can do about it that makes you feel incredibly helpless as well. But the second conceivable explanation for this is that you think they can b... |
Second your belief in faith is struggling. Why is this? When you proselytize, you have to answer and respond to challenges to that faith and how it fits the modern world, because you are so many individuals who, by definition, don't already buy into the belief system who are trying to get them to buy into why is it goo... |
Why is this important? Three reasons. One, because a lot of religions involve surviving temptation, either to switch to an alternate religion or to just become secular. The easiest way for you as a religious individual, as the motion stipulates to fight that is to have a strong, grounded belief in the talents of that s... |
<poi> |
What explains why you be happy when you're proselytizing. What happens when you're not? |
</poi> |
Cool, we’ll get to that. Well I mean look we're not proselytizing, you will be reaping the benefits of the proselytization to be much more secure in most belief. That's the way this argument, by the way, applies. |
The last thing I want to say here is that it is also put conversely easier to persuade religious leaders to accept moderate changes to the depth and time on the premise that this is beneficial to a proselytizing end. This argument does or this appeal does not exist in religions who do not actively seek to proselytize f... |
Last of all, this allows you to be charitable the way that is unique. The first thing I want to deal with, very briefly, is that at some point this part might say it is better to channel resources internally, as opposed to persuade people outside. And this is 100% true for the reason that there is a balance to be struc... |
In other words, the way you proselytize is partly about explaining the validity of your system, but it's also about showing that members of your community are thriving, that they are leading good life, and the needs are taken care of, both soulfully and spiritually as well as materially, which is why there will be a go... |
The reason it is superior to the secular version of it is one on the secular end of things, there is this whole media justification for why you were doing this, which means that it either happens a lot less frequently, or even when it does happen, it feels a lot more like a chore, as opposed to something you are happy ... |
</pm> |
<lo> |
Okay, opening opposition case is going to be very simple. We're going to talk about how this kind of communities reduce the liberty and opportunity of make chose, to choose by these people, because the community is so close and makes so clear dogmas that you're not going to be able to choose between different alternati... |
First, they make a really weird argument about people cannot be safe and like you abandon these people if you are not making proselytism What I think is just the other way around most religions, or at least most mainstream religions in the world. What they think is not that they are abandoning the people which does not... |
And secondly, about the reformat and religion, I don't think, I don't really trust why it's so important to put all your effort to your intellectual effort in like reaffirmating Your religion when you can reaffirmate other things, for example, in relation with other people, which also brings happen to you. But secondly... |
Now going to the case of the opening opposition. Our main point is that this is going to reduce vastly the freedom and the liberty of the people in this community. Why we think this community has to be really, really, really strict and they have to share really common values which are really common and very like limit ... |
First, we think that we will have really little space to have a different kind of religion than a community. That means that in our world, we have, like, the possibility of reinterpret their religion and leave the religion or way. But in their case, it is much more difficult, because we are in a process of constant ma... |
<poi> |
Being a member of a community that proselytize does not imply that you are personally doing it as a full time job. |
</poi> |
Obviously it's not, but in the comparative with our world, it's more in the our world than in his world. I mean, probably if you don't spend so much time doing this, there will be no such a proselytized community. What we think with this argument is that obviously it's communities which do not proselytize, which are al... |
Second part of our case, we think that this will enforce a lot the relationship with third person, or persons outside this community. First, because of the characterization of these people as the people look to these people, most people think that the witnesses of rawa, all these people, are really intense people, whic... |
</lo> |
<dpm> |
So, I think the crucial clash which is developing this debate is between two different visions of proselytism, a proselytism was about flexibility and attempted to persuade people in a reasonable way, and a proselytism, which consists of constantly repeating a single dog or in the home that someone else will adopt it, ... |
Three points in this speech before that, rebuttle to what we get kind of opening opposition. So I think the most important claim they actually make is that this is a clash between religions who see themselves as exclusively saved, and religions which say, Well, you know, if you're it doesn't really matter if you're a C... |
Secondly, in terms of frustration, we would say that if you are constantly shouting people, they are going to go to hell, and then they don't, they don't change your religion, but it's going to be a deeply frustrating experience if what you are trying to do is engage in meaningful conversations with people about someth... |
In terms of the analysis about why there is going to be a turn towards homogeneity and backwardness in religions which engage in proselytism, the first thing you know, just you need a message that's definitely true. What they don't make and what they don't show analytically is why that message therefore needs to be inf... |
<poi> |
Do you think most people join a religion after a long, confounding theological debate? |
</poi> |
No, we think most people join a religion because their parents give them that religion. However, when people change their religion, then they generally do think about it at least quite carefully, like closing opposition might object to the level of certainty or thought people put into it, they probably put a greater le... |
In terms of centralization, that we think it makes it less centralized, because you're dependent upon your followers. And even if you are centralized, it's the more pragmatic people who end up in the center, because they have to be those who are constantly engaging with other people, as described by tech way, and which... |
But moreover, you're not going to for the previously explained reasons about crudeness and proselytizing the intelligent way. You're not going to tell people to constantly get their children to talk to everyone at school, because that would be actively counterproductive for exactly the reason to describe by opening opp... |
</dpm> |
<dlo> |
I am going to do two things. First, I'm going to tell you what most of the benefits they claim are not unique to religions and strong communities and rather achievable by other means. Secondly, we tell you where do you get better relations? And thirdly, reduce individuality is harmful or not when it happens. |
First, on OG, basically they clearly there are a lot of benefits of joining a strong community. I have two things to say here. First, most of the families, they claim are perfectly achievable by really easy alternatives. So most of the things that Raffy tell you are not unique. For example, the satisfaction of life and... |
Second Consistency with your life, probably not, very importantly, not that religious, and most importantly, strong support from the community. It is true that you can get strong support from your community if you are religious. It is also true that you can get that symmetrically from your friends if you spend time wit... |
<poi> |
When you're trying to sell your ideas and trying to recruit more people, you're much more likely to actually adapt in trying to actually move according to? |
</poi> |
That’s not very new, that's about the that Raffy gave also to this one, we say that there's competition, and this is false to a large extent. So yes, there is competition between religions with a because of the fact that they told you the men take it though you don't sweep religions. When you're 30 and you're Christian... |
</dlo> |
<mg> |
Three things in my speech, first thing why practically it is more empowering ti individuals who are member of these groups. Why it helps them to achieve more political capital? And makes their lives much better. Second of all why moral is unacceptable to be a part of a religious community? that is not trying to spread ... |
Second of all, they say that look you disagree with the fundamentals if you are trying to spread the words and its much more difficult for you to be a part of this religion I don't actually get this point when you look at the catholicism or Islam if you see that some parts of these religious communities are discriminat... |
Let's start with why it's practically more empowering? A because if more people are believing into your religion which is similar world views to you the better, because more people understand you in a global scale. That means you're much more likely to find an appropriate community that you can actually belong and you ... |
<poi> |
Judaism is not initializing. Are we a bunch of cuckoos who think everybody else is going to. |
</poi> |
thank you very much. I'm pretty sure, like, exceptions exist on both sides of the house. And I don't think Judaism necessarily the only close community religion that is not necessarily, you know, cuckoos. And I could also say that, like, majority of this case doesn't necessarily apply to Judaism. There are many other r... |
Second of all, why it's morally it's unacceptable to be part of a religious community, because you're basically selfishly benefiting from salvation, but you're not necessarily sharing the salvation with other people. We think morally, as a religious individual, you have a moral obligation to also save others. This is n... |
And lastly, by what kind of characterization of close religious communities we are talking about? So obviously, these people think that they are chosen, they are special people, and they are born special, which incentivize the closely, mixed, tight community. This has two implications. First of all, it is very, very di... |
</mg> |
<mo> |
So two points on framing, and then two things in constructive. The two things in constructive were going to be, who are the people joining those communities, and therefore, and who are the people joining those communities, and therefore, what do they look like, and how do those power dynamics play out and technically u... |
First, governments think being religious is very easy. They seem to think that religious people are a bunch of sheeple which are just satisfied with the Word of God and with the simplistic answers and never challenge anything and have no internal world to speak of, which is why they're like, Oh, you'll be religious, yo... |
Secondly, which communities are we talking about? And this confusion it has to do mostly with is most of my answers to closing government. Why? Because they've just confused two axis. One axis is piety. How extreme is your religion? How like life controlling it is? The other axis is proselytizing. Those two axes are se... |
Okay, so how does the people joining those religions? And this answers pretty much everything, because everything had to do with strictness rather than anything else. So how do we how can we talk about the people joining the boom? Who are the people joining those religions? We say joining a religion is a major life eve... |
The second thing that impacts it is that saving Lost Souls is always going to be a priority for the community, because it's like the, it's like the zero to 100 gamut, right? You save someone completely from the dead to be able to do that effectively. How do those things shape the services that the believer gets from th... |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.