Reading it 10 more times won't change anything. Yes English is my first language (so what?). I understand perfectly the words but the attempts to draw parallels with Singapore makes absolutely no sense.
> I understand perfectly the words but the attempts to draw parallels with Singapore makes absolutely no sense.
That may be the case but the fact that he was making an analogy between the way governments and private industry are setup, the mix of conservative ideology and lack of some of the freedoms was obvious. Again, whether you agree with that, is another issue, but your phrased you answer as if you didn't understand that he was making a comparison.
Basically it seemed you were skimming through comments about Turkey saw a comment on Singapore and just replied "what is this doing here, we are talking about Turkey".
It is also interesting that the gp post indicated clearly what he thought it has to do with Singapore if you want to continue the argument you can perhaps provide counter-arguments to their point, instead of insinuating that they got lost and thought we were discussing an article about libertarian city states or something.
Are you seriously trying to say you can get caned for littering in Singapore? It is exactly this kind of ignorant statement spoken as if it were fact that irks me.
> If caning its own citizens is not evidence of a nanny state that treats people like children, I don't know what is.
Not that I want to sound like a supporter Singapore's judicial system but I didn't expect to hear this from a citizen of a country that is allowed to kill as a form of punishment.
(Making the assumption that you are from the US, apologies if I got that wrong).
No, you got it right (I'm not american, but I live here). And I absolutely agree with you - like caning, capital punishment has no place in an enlightened country, and I sure hope it is eradicated from the US, and throughout the world, soon.
I was merely disagreeing with the parent's assertion that Singapore has some form of enlightened government that doesn't trample on personal freedoms, and treats its citizens with respect.
> I was merely disagreeing with the parent's assertion that Singapore has some form of enlightened government that doesn't trample on personal freedoms, and treats its citizens with respect.
I made no such assertion. But perhaps you should enlighten yourself on exactly what personal freedoms are being trampled upon here, and how exactly Singapore's citizens are being disrespected. You just made a bullshit statement that you can get caned for littering in Singapore. What else of your opinion of Singapore is based on similar ignorance?
Next you are going to tell me chewing gum is banned in Singapore (gasp!). And I'm going to quote you something random from http://itthing.com/100-weird-laws-from-around-the-world (let's go with "In Indiana, it’s against the law to dress ‘Barbie’ in ‘Ken’s’ clothes" this time)
>If caning its own citizens is not evidence of a nanny state that treats people like children, I don't know what is. //
Surely the issue - assuming active littering is punished by caning and in this narrow area - is that any adult in such a place would never come up against the consequences of the law.
It's not treating mature people like children it's treating antisocial adults as immoral.
>Singapore also differs from the United States where penalties are determined by a judge;breaking certain laws in Singapore can come with mandatory decisions that still include cane beatings.
