Immigration and multiculturalism news

[King Arts]

Yes,civilized societies protect weak.And also do not welcome lesbians.

Agree,but all who do not leave healthy good children is not good citizen.Which mean,most of people in Europe.

Yes. The biggest issue in Europe and East Asia is the birth rate. Even if Christianity is not true, let's say paganism or Buddhism is. Gay marriage would be wrong you have a duty to your people and nation, sure if Paganism is true you can have gay relationships when you are younger or date like that, but eventually you must settle down with the opposite gender and have children. If you don't you are a bad citizen who is helping society decay just like gangs of criminal "youths" or drug users.

 

[ATP]

Yes. The biggest issue in Europe and East Asia is the birth rate. Even if Christianity is not true, let's say paganism or Buddhism is. Gay marriage would be wrong you have a duty to your people and nation, sure if Paganism is true you can have gay relationships when you are younger or date like that, but eventually you must settle down with the opposite gender and have children. If you don't you are a bad citizen who is helping society decay just like gangs of criminal "youths" or drug users.

One exception - good priests,monks and nuns.Everybody else should have children.

 

[King Arts]

One exception - good priests,monks and nuns.Everybody else should have children.

Because Christianity is true yes.

But if it was not true then no people who take holy orders should help society by having more children. After all the Catholic Church has given indulgences for monks and nuns to marry I think after the 30 years war so many Germans were killed that the Church said to make sure the Germans don't die out the monks and nuns should get married and have kids.

 

[SoliFortissimi]

True but also remember that societies that don’t reproduce or have women and citizens get too high and mighty or selfish and entitled will not propagate themselves either.

By all means, be the change you want to see.

At the end of the day even leaving religion out of it with the western birth rate as it is homosexual relationships like marriage are extremely selfish and those people aren’t good citizens.

As long as they follow the law and pay their taxes, they're good citizens.

es,civilized societies protect weak.And also do not welcome lesbians.

Both are contradictory. If you protect the weak, that naturally means protecting vulnerable groups from violence aimed against them.

What you seem to be going for instead is something like feudalism, where the Lord doesn't protect his subjects so much as he monopolizes oppression.

 

[King Arts]

By all means, be the change you want to see.

What makes you think I don't? Now true I'm not married yet, but there are people with my ideas who are. And while it's true that I'm not fulfilling my obligations that doesn't mean what I said was wrong and that I shouldn't fulfill my obligations.

As long as they follow the law and pay their taxes, they're good citizens.

Nope, that dirt low standard means literal communists and fifth collumnists are good citizens. Hell a public defender who would work to get those guys who beat the lesbians off and donates to groups that mass import rapefugees is a good citizen under your standard.

 

[SoliFortissimi]

What makes you think I don't?

Your rhetoric.

Now true I'm not married yet

And there it is.

And while it's true that I'm not fulfilling my obligations that doesn't mean what I said was wrong and that I shouldn't fulfill my obobligations

It does make you a bit of a hypocrite.

Nope, that dirt low standard means literal communists and fifth collumnists are good citizens

You're seriously implying that these people obey the law and pay taxes?!

What is it with reactionaries and inadvertently lionizing communists? You people are really the best propagandists they have.

Hell a public defender who would work to get those guys who beat the lesbians off and donates to groups that mass import rapefugees is a good citizen under your standard

If supporting policies that harm your own people because you think they deserve it was a crime, most of the country would be in jail. And almost all of the perpetually online radicals.

 

[King Arts]

Your rhetoric.

And there it is.

Again there are many people who say what I do who are married with kids. So the messenger is meaningless what matters is the message.

It does make you a bit of a hypocrite.

True IF my complaint was ONLY you must have a family and do it NOW.

My secular objection to LGBT was that they won't 'eventually' have biological kids and settle down with the opposite gender. Again with modern lgbt it's "not just a phase" if you are getting gay married the assumption is that this is your life partner you are staying with for the rest of your life, possibly.

Again if these lesbians were instead just "lesbian until graduation" then this argument would not apply, or if they had an agreement with their husband where they would marry procreate do their duty, but be allowed to have a female paramour, or they were in a polyamorous relationship with a man.

But those don't seem to be the case do they?

So I can assume that they don't plan on eventually finding a man and getting pregnant and raising kids? So no my argument isn't hypocrisy if I intend in the future to settle down after I'm ready financially and all that.

You're seriously implying that these people obey the law and pay taxes?!

What is it with reactionaries and inadvertently lionizing communists? You people are really the best propagandists they have.

Are you delusional?
Is she a criminal or terrorist?

Cécile Cukierman - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Ian Brossat - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Enrique Santiago - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

These people are legally part of society and elected to high office. You have any proof they aren't considered law abiding? I don't think the are good citizens, under your logic they are though they aren't openly breaking any laws, most of Europe has freedom of speech and allows political parties that espouse communism.

If supporting policies that harm your own people because you think they deserve it was a crime, most of the country would be in jail. And almost all of the perpetually online radicals.

This is a red herring we are talking about "good citizens" Your standard would allow the person who donates to groups that import migrants to be a "good citizen" because they don't break the law and pay their taxes.

 

[ThatZenoGuy]

So uhh, British government has swapped from "INFINITE MIGRANTS!" to "INFINITE MIGRANTS!".

I know london is already minority-british, but exactly how much does the overall population have to change before the country itself needs a new name?

I propose Britainstan but that's awfully predictable.

 

[PsihoKekec]

Northern Pakistan would be more appropriate.

 

[strunkenwhite]

At the end of the day even leaving religion out of it with the western birth rate as it is homosexual relationships like marriage are extremely selfish and those people aren’t good citizens.

A society that only extends its promises of protection to citizens it deems to be "good" is living in a sandcastle on a slippery slope, and on top of that it's quite difficult to accurately implement such a policy.

 

[Morphic Tide]

So uhh, British government has swapped from "INFINITE MIGRANTS!" to "INFINITE MIGRANTS!".

I know london is already minority-british, but exactly how much does the overall population have to change before the country itself needs a new name?

I propose Britainstan but that's awfully predictable.

The thing is that the switch is entirely Tory losses to Reform rather than any statistically significant gain of votes for Labor, meaning that Parliament now has a noticeable anti-immigration block (provided the Reform PM picks are worth anything) AND the new government is in a strictly weaker parliamentary position than the old one to make that matter.

 

[ATP]

Both are contradictory. If you protect the weak, that naturally means protecting vulnerable groups from violence aimed against them.

What you seem to be going for instead is something like feudalism, where the Lord doesn't protect his subjects so much as he monopolizes oppression.

Protect weak from attack.Not healthy adults.According to lesbians they are as good as man,right? then,we could not defend them.
And you mistaken feudalisn with current banksters rule,becouse real feudals protected their subjects,when banksters steal from us for nothing.Or rather,less then nothing,but sending to our cities muslims.

 

[King Arts]

A society that only extends its promises of protection to citizens it deems to be "good" is living in a sandcastle on a slippery slope, and on top of that it's quite difficult to accurately implement such a policy.

Wow, that's not what I said. If those guys who beat the lesbians did it unprovoked then they should be punished.

I was objecting to @SoliFortissimi and how he was wringing his hands and brought it up like three times "Oh those poor ladies, they even said homophobic slurs!" he even said that he couldn't get it out of his mind.

This is a minor issue compared to the story @mrttao gave earlier both because a minor(actually unsure if 15 is aoc in Spain or not so maybe not minor) but possible minor was harassed by a gang of youths, and there was a cowardly murder of the man who saved the girl when they came days later and ambushed him. Yet apparently this was not stuck in his mind, don't know if it's because the victim was a white man instead of the alphabet people but hey.

Again I'm not saying there needs to be some "ladder" for only protecting "good" people. No if the law is broken the criminals should be punished.

But again we humans won't whine over assholes getting bad things done to them. For instance in prison rapists, frequently get attacked by other criminals. This should not happen(ideally the punishment for rape should be death depending on certain factors) but am I going to cry and wring my hands "Oh no the child victimizers are getting hurt by other criminals" No I won't. I generally don't support sadism unless there is a judicial punishment or some form of bennefit, and even then not by random people it should be judged with a trial and all that. Even the criminals who are doing this are trash just like the rapists. Does that mean if someone told you "I can't get what's happening to those criminals out of my head." that you wouldn't just roll your eyes, and think this is just bleeding heartism?

Sure prison guards should maintain order but calm yourself. Now I know lesbians aren't as bad as rapists, I'm not saying that. I was just responding to your "good citizen" comment and how we should protect even the "bad" people among us. The answer is yes, but we don't have to be passionate about the "bad ones" save our passion for the good ones.

 

[SoliFortissimi]

It's perfectly natural to be more scandalized by harm done to women than to men. Especially when it's something as disgusting as ten men ganging up on two women, and only one at the beginning.

 

[King Arts]

It's perfectly natural to be more scandalized by harm done to women than to men. Especially when it's something as disgusting as ten men ganging up on two women, and only one at the beginning.

Not when the damage is so minimal. Maybe if they were equally victimized you'd have a point.

But there is a second reason to be against what you said. Women and feminists asked for equal rights, to be able to be allowed to have the right to do the same things as men.

That means they should face the same standards and be treated the same way as men. Giving one group rights AND protections is unjust. If women had no rights but had protections, and men had rights but no protection that would be balanced. If both men and women have rights but no protection then they would be equal, still balanced(maybe not ideal and inefficient since men and women are different)

But here is the thing you and the establishment conservatives don't get everything is give and take. If you want some benefit from society then you have to give up something to society.

 

[SoliFortissimi]

But here is the thing you and the establishment conservatives don't get everything is give and take. If you want some benefit from society then you have to give up something to society

But we do want that? It's we who stand against the welfare bloat and other dependent creating policies while the Bible thumpers are busy demanding tax free status for their Megachurches even as their pastors live in expensive mansions with the tithes of their sheep.

However, as I previously noted, all citizens are entitled to protection. The glee over these women getting beaten just because they're homosexuals is....disturbing. And makes one realize, once again, why Conservatives are getting blasted across the Western world.

 

[ATP]

But we do want that? It's we who stand against the welfare bloat and other dependent creating policies while the Bible thumpers are busy demanding tax free status for their Megachurches even as their pastors live in expensive mansions with the tithes of their sheep.

However, as I previously noted, all citizens are entitled to protection. The glee over these women getting beaten just because they're homosexuals is....disturbing. And makes one realize, once again, why Conservatives are getting blasted across the Western world.

Conservatives are blasted becouse of leftist propaganda,which support,among other groups,lesbians.They are part of cabal which try to destroy us.
So,when their tools/muslims/ beat leftist groups,i simply do not care.Or,to be precise,it is good when our enemies fight.

 

[Marduk]

But we do want that? It's we who stand against the welfare bloat and other dependent creating policies while the Bible thumpers are busy demanding tax free status for their Megachurches even as their pastors live in expensive mansions with the tithes of their sheep.

If the people who pay for it are ok with it, who are you to say no?
Leftist NGO "charities" are worse in that regard, they share the money between mansions and actually destroying the countries they are in.

However, as I previously noted, all citizens are entitled to protection. The glee over these women getting beaten just because they're homosexuals is....disturbing. And makes one realize, once again, why Conservatives are getting blasted across the Western world.

The glee is not simply because they are homosexuals. The glee is because by all chance they supported the policies that allowed the men who did it to be there.

 

[ThatZenoGuy]

So uh.

Any theories as to why women absolutely adore immigrants despite the fact they universally come from countries which treat women like actual property?

 

[The Whispering Monk]

So uh.

Any theories as to why women absolutely adore immigrants despite the fact they universally come from countries which treat women like actual property?

It's all about scoring points on their 'social credit score'.