I have refuted you Z, but I can't help it that you are not bright enough to notice.
I said it doesn't matter what a sub culture does? It does if that sub culture breaks the law...and if they don't violate the law then they should be allowed to exist.
Most sub cultures are reactionary in nature to the primary culture, and often engage in criminal behavior because they deviate for the norm and mores in some respect...some lawful, some unlawful.
The KKK is a subculture who have a history of violence and criminal activity.
So a sub culture deviates, but they don't consider themselves deviants at all. The primary culture labels them deviants because they hold the primary culture as absolutely right, and if you are not in agreement with them you are a deviant. This is all relative morality, comparative morality, which generally is used to justify one's own moral position.
You can't even follow a simple argument to its conclusion, you think spewing more volume of garbage out constitutes an argument... I was still commenting on your original statement...
That is a matter of faith, and a matter of a particular society's law, which I don't believe is really any of our business to pass judgment on other cultures...especially when our culture is so far from perfection
...by saying that it is our business to pass judgment on other cultures because sub cultures are still cultures no matter how many adhere to it, your position is a logical non answer by re-iterating a thousand times the vacuous and obvious assertion that sub cultures can break laws.
A subculture is a culture, period. The KKK is a subculture, and therefore a culture. Breaking laws is irrelevent and laws themselves can be immoral, we pass judgment on the KKK and we should regardless of whether they break laws.
Hey, congratulations on contradicting yourself within a few lines of the same post, that's quite a dazzling display of sophistry:
The laws reflect the values and morals of the primary culture...
....The law doesn't differentiate between the primary or sub cultures, it is blind to the culture aspect
Now if you can't understand the logical contradiction there within your words, then I'm sorry but you are beyond help. You are trapped in an ignorant vortex of absolute belief in your world view without a rigorous assesment of it.
So you are saying "we" are more evolved than them, and some other country who has abolished the death penalty looks at the US and claims they are morally superior...
yup, that's what people do. Having sex with ten year olds is what cavemen did, therefore I deem that practice less evolved. Medically and psychologically it is a bad idea to marry and have sex with ten year olds.
I also notice you have no effective response to my point that at one time slavery was a lawful practice, and according to you then judgement should not have been passed.
