"Brexit"

[ChrisCross]

24 minutes ago, Rodinski said:

 

i would say that the EU geos with the time. the fact that there will be no roaming contracts starting next year is just one example.

but the refugee crisis wasnt the EU's at all. starting with the americans who helped the IS at the beginning to get rid with assad and with russian turkey conflict which made everything more complicated. and after this mess was created the stupid UNO decided to cut the pay for the refugee camps in yemen. this was the initial cause for all the people to come to europe. and because of bad luck greece was the country that should have close the outside border of the EU. they cant even pay their police....

and the last stupid thing that happened after that is that all the conservative countries didnt want to distribute the refugees evenly which is just egoistic and unfair to the countrys which have some interest in preserving the human rights of those people. all of those happenings is the fault of small minded idiots who only think in election periods rather than the EU's!

the brexit is by no means a win-win since its putting europe in a position where we have problems politically but we are still millitary allies. and britain is financially unsafer than ever before. it just needs one of those gamblers in the bank headquarters to fall and your done. we have seen this in 2008 and this time nobody is there to save you. let alone the upcoming 2 years which already started shitty for you. you would be very lucky if your getting decent decent trade agreements with the EU because people are quite pissed...

britain was by no means enslaved by some of the more stupid european laws. they cant force you to apply them to your own country, get this populistic propaganda out of your heads.

[Misanthrope]

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

Interesting that the USA funds and supplies these political abominations... War has no religious preference.  Profit needs no religious affiliate.  It is a machine not perpetuated by any religion, but by stupidity.  The inability to form a proper method by which to gather evidence to use in order to better oneself.  Ignorance is too blame, good luck fixing that with any sort of restricting policy or by demonizing cultural groups.

 

Are the one to three million women being trafficked around the world subject to "Sharia Law" (I hate having to actually use that term). 

 

Are innocent non-muslims only being killed by muslims on a systematic level?

 

We have a big problem here on earth.  We kill each other.  Stop trying to say that this problem will be fixed by blaming a designated percentage of perpetrators. 

 

I am willing to argue conceptually, but don't link unverifiable "studies" as a pretense to try a prove an argument that is wholly unfounded.

 

Anyways, have a good day Misanthrope.

 

 

I actually alluded to this on a previous posts (though I'm not faulting you if it went past you) but my position on this is fairly simple: We must demand world wide separation between church and state. True separation of church and state.

 

That means among many other points:

1) Economic embargoes on Muslim or Christian or any other openly religious government

2) Immediate and final end to all tax exempt status for all Churches and Clergy: It doesn't matters that they do volunteer work they shouldn't be allowed to mix that with their religious believes to proselytize and preach hate while being tax exempt. 

3) Observance to public access and public services secularism: This means strictly secular schools, strictly secular outreach and communitary work programs, etc. 

4) Outlawing the indoctrination of children: This means that forcing kids to go to Church and Sunday schools or Religious education should not be acceptable in modern society. One must be of a certain age before one can legally consent to sex, to use certain substances, to drive a car, to have a job. Yet we're ok with telling our children they'll burn in hell for all eternity for discovering their sexual impulses, 10x worst if they're not heterosexual impulses?

[stconquest]

8 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I actually alluded to this on a previous posts (though I'm not faulting you if it went past you) but my position on this is fairly simple: We must demand world wide separation between church and state. True separation of church and state.

 

That means among many other points:

1) Economic embargoes on Muslim or Christian or any other openly religious government

2) Immediate and final end to all tax exempt status for all Churches and Clergy: It doesn't matters that they do volunteer work they shouldn't be allowed to mix that with their religious believes to proselytize and preach hate while being tax exempt. 

3) Observance to public access and public services secularism: This means strictly secular schools, strictly secular outreach and communitary work programs, etc. 

4) Outlawing the indoctrination of children: This means that forcing kids to go to Church and Sunday schools or Religious education should not be acceptable in modern society. One must be of a certain age before one can legally consent to sex, to use certain substances, to drive a car, to have a job. Yet we're ok with telling our children they'll burn in hell for all eternity for discovering their sexual impulses, 10x worst if they're not heterosexual impulses?

Sorry, I am still groggy (slept in).  Reading through to catch up has not helped. =P

 

I agree with you, mostly.

 

Religions are most likely dying in many good parts of the world... as long as we can steadily raise that standard for living in the world, religion will phase itself out.  Developing situations of despair with war and domestic policy will assure the spreading of religion.

 

I have been going to church my whole life.  I like church... but man... does that word of god bullshit trigger something inside me.  I see church as a community thing, a safe place for people to gather; that does not really require the religion though

[Rodinski]

52 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

i disagree with covering it up but so what? its not a muslim problem its a poverty problem. you think if you take christians or some other religion of people from a poor country that the same thing isnt going to happen and this is unique to muslims? you are kidding yourself. also im gussing those crimes are happening to other refugees so to protect the refugees from rape we must leave them to be killed by isis and discriminate against them

If it was a poverty problem, mass rapes would be common in most of Eastern Europe and any povish community. It doesn't appear the be the case in the majority (if not all) the Western cultures. To say this is a poverty problem is just closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears. It is indeed a clash between cultures (obviously not all, but it is significant enough that it holds weight). 

[NotJude]

67.27% of us still want to pay 20% VAT from G2A games if we stay in the EU, tragic.

[stconquest]

2 minutes ago, Rodinski said:

If it was a poverty problem, mass rapes would be common in most of Eastern Europe and any povish community. It doesn't appear the be the case in the majority (if not all) the Western cultures. To say this is a poverty problem is just closing your eyes and putting your fingers in your ears. It is indeed a clash between cultures (obviously not all, but it is significant enough that it holds weight). 

Psst, you have your eyes closed.

[Jack Longman]

1 hour ago, spartaman64 said:

all i have to say is rip economy

this is a short term reaction, uncertainty always causes a currency to drop value, in short no-one knows how we will end up, richer or poorer in the long run. Just with uncertainty a currency will lose value

 

[Misanthrope]

5 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Psst, you have your eyes closed.

More common than in Africa? More common than in the middle east? 

 

Come on. Fine forget Islam. Attribute it to simple geography: for whatever cultural reason you want to adhere to it, rape and sexual assault are far more prevalent on the nations these immigrants come from regardless of poverty.

 

Does that fact alone doesn't warrants being particularly vigilant? Why must we just accept whatever mentality they have for whatever reason? THIS is this main problem many have with the progressive left in Europe and in the world today: negating the blatantly obvious in favour of poorly construed narratives not backed by any facts.

 

And yes I realize you might not hold this particular views yourself, consider my reply not really specific to you even though I am quoting you it's mostly for the sake of argument.

[stconquest]

4 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

More common than in Africa? More common than in the middle east? 

 

Come on. Fine forget Islam. Attribute it to simple geography: for whatever cultural reason you want to adhere to it, rape and sexual assault are far more prevalent on the nations these immigrants come from.

 

Does that fact alone doesn't warrants being particularly vigilant? Why must we just accept whatever mentality they have for whatever reason? THIS is this main problem many have with the progressive left in Europe and in the world today: negating the blatantly obvious in favour of poorly construed narratives not backed by any facts.

 

And yes I realize you might not hold this particular views yourself, consider my reply not really specific to you even though I am quoting you it's mostly for the sake of argument.

Unfortunately, people that commit rape and sexual assault are like a sub culture here on earth.  It is a fucked up thing.  I have such a hard time putting myself in these assailant's shoes... but I can when needed.

 

IDK what to say about this.  You find these tendencies in the poor, and you find these tendencies in the rich.  Maybe it has something to do with the constructive use of one's time... but then again... I am a lazy ass with too much time on my hands.  I don't feel any need to sexually assault anyone other than myself

 

@Misanthrope  Maybe the rich hide it better, or the privileged have mainstream cultural support.

 

The kid that drugged and raped a fellow class member (Uni) in the USA just got 6 months in jail because any longer would inflict damage to his future(according to the judge...wow).  He was caught in the act by strangers... in a fucking alley.

 

Holy off topic, I will close it out on my next post if it is necessary.

[AstroBenny]

The backlash could be pretty significant.

 

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/131215

[CostcoSamples]

9 hours ago, Moress said:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/nogozones.asp

 

Stop using bullshit to spread your hate.

Nice try man.  I lived in France for two years (2001 to 2003).  I'ver personally experienced these no-go zones, so you can post quotes from politicians all you like, I've seen them.  I had my life threatened because I went to one by mistake.  A group of 5 Muslim men, armed with pistols, pointed them at my friend and I and shouting in Arabic telling us basically to leave or die.  In a later discussion with police, I was told not to go there, that they don't even go there unless absolutely necessary.  So listen man, I'm not spreading hate.  Unfortunately it's a common thing now where if you disagree with someone you accuse them of spreading hate, bigotry, xenophobia, racism etc etc etc.  it's intellectually dishonest.  If you want to have a rational discussion I'm good with that, but lets keep it honest ok?

 

9 hours ago, SurvivorNVL said:

Far from hate when many police agencies in Germany and France, won't go in to refugee / Muslim communities due to the high risk and political backlash / incentivations.  It's not hate when it is the truth and the truth about the incredibly insane crime has been getting out.  A lot.  Integration isn't happening.  The experiment is a bust.

 

6 hours ago, laminutederire said:

First of all, the issue with politician is that it's their employment, so they hold onto it like crazies, since it's their job, they live off that. Democracy has always been a pain in the ass, and frankly, we need non democratic decisions based on rationality, which politicians clearly don't have when it comes to common good!

 

As for the debt and everything... if the Europe is in bad shape because of that, everyone is, the US, Canada, China even India etc are all burdened by huge debts as well. Why? Because the economic system thrive on the creation of debt and because the money isn't well distributed. But that problem touches every country which is benefiting from the globalized economy.

 

First of all, nobody in the world is doing the right thing about Syria, but only the EU suffer from the consequences. But alas we deserve it, we helped north America doing shit in Syria and we're at least partly responsible for what happens there.

Secondly,  what the fuck is that vision of Islam? Not all Muslims aren't sharia enforcers. I am french and I don't see those evil islands you describe.

Don't talk to me like I'm stupid I know what it is. But I think I understood a bit more than you do. The problem isn't Islam or whatever. The real issue lies in our bad societies. If we had better societies, more equal societies, societies where everyone would be educated and would have a place, where their best interest will be protected and where some part of population weren't shit on,  we wouldn't have people turned into terrorists on our soils. A rational thinking would tell you that fighting terrorism isn't about fighting radical meatheads, it's about fixing the fundamental wrongs of our societies. Once you do that, ISIS isn't funded anymore, they can't recruit lost peoples, and they're basically left out as a weak minority, just like the neo-nazi community is a weak community.

As Winston Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government in the world, right after all other forms of government.  It's what we've got so we need to make the best of it.  And as a general rule, the more distributed and dispersed political power is, the more it tends to represent the will of the people.  To me, that is an argument against the EU.

 

You are correct about the debt problem.  All major world economies are in the same boat in this regard.  We have a debt based monetary system and we are speeding toward the cliff of financial ruin.  Sooner or later, ALL fiat based currencies fail.  We've got this global experiment going on and it's not going to end well.  Sooner or later we'll have to get back to something more concrete like gold, crypto-currency, or a commodity backed currency.

 

And you are correct about Syria as well.  The west has done great evil to the middle eastern nations.  It should not be a surprise to anybody that these people hate the west.  If your family got vaporized in a drone strike, you'd hate the bastards that sent the drone.  It's pretty simple in that respect.  BUT there is another aspect to consider that is also extremely important.  Islam is a very violent ideology.  When taken literally, the Quran teaches a women is half the value of a man and should be beaten into submission.  It teaches that gays are to be executed, along with non-believers.  It teaches Shariah law, which is a pretty damn barbaric system by anyone's standard.  All it takes is for a Muslim to decide to take his holy text literally and he has justification for murder and all other manner of evil.  Islamism is a very real threat, and pointing that out doesnt mean I am spreading hate or bigotry etc.  It is a statement of fact and ignoring facts doesn't make them go away.

[stconquest]

1 hour ago, CostcoSamples said:

Nice try man.  I lived in France for two years (2001 to 2003).  I'ver personally experienced these no-go zones, so you can post quotes from politicians all you like, I've seen them.  I had my life threatened because I went to one by mistake.  A group of 5 Muslim men, armed with pistols, pointed them at my friend and I and shouting in Arabic telling us basically to leave or die.  In a later discussion with police, I was told not to go there, that they don't even go there unless absolutely necessary.  So listen man, I'm not spreading hate.  Unfortunately it's a common thing now where if you disagree with someone you accuse them of spreading hate, bigotry, xenophobia, racism etc etc etc.  it's intellectually dishonest.  If you want to have a rational discussion I'm good with that, but lets keep it honest ok?

 

 

- -

I call bullshit...

 

My brother and 4 of his friends were mugged on the streets of New York by American citizens.  I guess we have an American citizen problem in the USA.

 

Like wtf... 2001-2003... what have the police been doing since then?  Anything?  I know you will say nothing, but really.

 

Pro Tip:  If I stranger on a public street asks you to come closer to him or follow him down an alley... DON'T.

[laminutederire]

1 hour ago, CostcoSamples said:

 

Where was it?

I've been in France for 20 years now, and I've never seen one of those, so... I'm curious to know which places you are referring to.

 

Well as you said, when it is interpreted too literally it is violent, but I think the bible has its fair share of immoral statements when  interpreted too literally. During the gay marriage controversy, I saw more catholics attacking gay people than there were muslims. That introduces the nuance I want to make. To me the real issue is stupidity. Stupidity is violent, and it sees any excuse to be violent, and the Islamic text give them plenty of those indeed.

I say that because I've met an awful lot of Muslims, and none of them were violent, some of them were rude or reckless sure, but none were violent: question is why? Because I've met them in academic excellence programs, so I saw muslims through the filter of smart muslims, and they aren't as violent as any other people. The most violent people I've met in person were the idiot hooligans who weren't muslims at all. I just think the issue you point out is due to the fact those people are idiots, nor due to their religion.

[CostcoSamples]

17 minutes ago, stconquest said:

I call bullshit...

 

My brother and 4 of his friends were mugged on the streets of New York by American citizens.  I guess we have an American citizen problem in the USA.

 

Like wtf... 2001-2003... what have the police been doing since then?  Anything?  I know you will say nothing, but really.

 

Pro Tip:  If I stranger on a public street asks you to come closer to him or follow him down an alley... DON'T.

I'm just telling  my personal experience, you don't have to believe it.  But for myself, I have empirical evidence that the no go zones do in fact exist.  You do not have the same proof and must go by what you read.

 

I have no idea what the cops have been doing in France since 2003.  I do know that Muslim immigration has steadily increased, and the general approach by the French government has not changed a lot.  

[Collide]

I voted to stay.... ;(

[Uzukami]

Thank you people who will die in 10-30 years for fucking up my next 50-70.

 

In the bright side the GTX 1080 for £619 looks like a much better deal now....

 

If we don't get decent trade deals I am bailing, I'll have QTS by then and I doubt I'm alone in that decision.

[TheElt]

5 minutes ago, Uzukami said:

Thank you people who will die in 10-30 years for fucking up my next 50-70.

 

In the bright side the GTX 1080 for £619 looks like a much better deal now....

 

If we don't get decent trade deals I am bailing, I'll have QTS by then and I doubt I'm alone in that decision.

 

It's called democracy, if you don't like it you more than have the means to leave to another country. Everyone has their say, everyone's say is of equal value, just focus on making this decision work instead of bitching about losing

[Kimmers]

I'm happy for the UK. Take your country (or would it be countries? lol.) back! I'm all for the people being represented and the people have spoken.

[CostcoSamples]

4 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Where was it?

I've been in France for 20 years now, and I've never seen one of those, so... I'm curious to know which places you are referring to.

 

Well as you said, when it is interpreted too literally it is violent, but I think the bible has its fair share of immoral statements when  interpreted too literally. During the gay marriage controversy, I saw more catholics attacking gay people than there were muslims. That introduces the nuance I want to make. To me the real issue is stupidity. Stupidity is violent, and it sees any excuse to be violent, and the Islamic text give them plenty of those indeed.

I say that because I've met an awful lot of Muslims, and none of them were violent, some of them were rude or reckless sure, but none were violent: question is why? Because I've met them in academic excellence programs, so I saw muslims through the filter of smart muslims, and they aren't as violent as any other people. The most violent people I've met in person were the idiot hooligans who weren't muslims at all. I just think the issue you point out is due to the fact those people are idiots, nor due to their religion.

I moved around a lot while I was there, exploring a lot of the northern half of France.  I think it was in Chartres, if I remember correctly.  But I remember seeing a lot of these subsidized housing immigration centers, especially around the outskirts of Paris.  Pretty scary places to be during the day.  Avoid at all costs at night.

 

And yeah, the bible has a lot of violence in it as well, and thankfully Christianity went through a violent reformation which gave rise to the renaissance.  Islam has not gone through anything like that, but it really needs to.  If stupidity is the problem, perhaps we should look at the distribution of IQ?  The average IQ in most Islamic countries is in the low 80s.  Syria for example has an average IQ of 83.  

 

Average IQ by country

 

If you look at IQ compared to where functioning democracies are encountered, there is a strong correlation to suggest that nations with average IQ below 90 are not capable of sustaining a functioning democracy.  The highest crime rates are almost always found where IQ is in the mid 80s.  Below 80 and crime is low, above 90 and people are smart enough to avoid crime.  So that is a problem as well.  If we could figure out a way to increase the IQ of these countries, we would lift them out of poverty and conflict very quickly.

 

For sure there are plenty of good, honorable, and virtuous Muslim people.  I've known quite a few, and have some good memories of time spent with these kinds of people while in France.  I have encountered very few in Canada, but I do occasionally work with a guy from Lebanon who is very smart and runs his own company here.  These kinds of people are welcomed openly in the west.  We all know this and these people are not the problem.

[Uzukami]

I'm pretty sure Democracy allows me to bitch the decision it made, especially since the uneducated and old tipped the decision in favour of leave.

 

I understand that not everyone who voted leave didn't do it because of a low level of education or racism, but leave won by 1.9% I highly doubt that less than that percentage wasn't driven by racism.

[dalekphalm]

13 hours ago, Rune said:

American here, so my POV on this may not matter much or be completely incorrect.

 

From what I can gather, a large portion of the anger that is motivating "leave" voters seems to be stemming from EU border control laws. I really don't understand why it is such a big issue for an exception to be made (or continue to be made as I understand it) for the UK to continue its own enforcement on that. It would be like Texas being angry it had to accept refugees from New York because Canada invaded, and threatening to succeed (again) if being forced to let them in. Sure, everyone would hate each other and disagree over stupid things like guns, but thats how life works. You can't just say "I don't like you so you don't get to come here." Or at least, that is what I thought before Trump became one of our nominees.

 

Regardless, this has me super bummed. Without major financing from Britain the ESA is probably going to tank worse than NASA has and other technology related areas are going to slow at least temporarily as well. Progress should be constantly increasing speed...not stopping because the slow guy in the back doesn't like the color of the shirt of the dude in front of him...

Just an FYI, the ESA isn't actually formally part of the EU at all. The ESA is owned and operated by 22 different European Nations, including the UK. The EU DOES want to officially adopt the ESA as a EU Agency, but as of yet, this has not happened. The EU is also already the largest financial contributor as well.

 

The only reason the ESA would suffer from Brexit, is if the UK independently decided to cut ESA funding - and that has nothing to do with Brexit.

[Centurius]

3 hours ago, CostcoSamples said:

Nice try man.  I lived in France for two years (2001 to 2003).  I'ver personally experienced these no-go zones, so you can post quotes from politicians all you like, I've seen them.  I had my life threatened because I went to one by mistake.  A group of 5 Muslim men, armed with pistols, pointed them at my friend and I and shouting in Arabic telling us basically to leave or die.  In a later discussion with police, I was told not to go there, that they don't even go there unless absolutely necessary.  So listen man, I'm not spreading hate.  Unfortunately it's a common thing now where if you disagree with someone you accuse them of spreading hate, bigotry, xenophobia, racism etc etc etc.  it's intellectually dishonest.  If you want to have a rational discussion I'm good with that, but lets keep it honest ok?

 

 

As Winston Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government in the world, right after all other forms of government.  It's what we've got so we need to make the best of it.  And as a general rule, the more distributed and dispersed political power is, the more it tends to represent the will of the people.  To me, that is an argument against the EU.

 

You are correct about the debt problem.  All major world economies are in the same boat in this regard.  We have a debt based monetary system and we are speeding toward the cliff of financial ruin.  Sooner or later, ALL fiat based currencies fail.  We've got this global experiment going on and it's not going to end well.  Sooner or later we'll have to get back to something more concrete like gold, crypto-currency, or a commodity backed currency.

 

And you are correct about Syria as well.  The west has done great evil to the middle eastern nations.  It should not be a surprise to anybody that these people hate the west.  If your family got vaporized in a drone strike, you'd hate the bastards that sent the drone.  It's pretty simple in that respect.  BUT there is another aspect to consider that is also extremely important.  Islam is a very violent ideology.  When taken literally, the Quran teaches a women is half the value of a man and should be beaten into submission.  It teaches that gays are to be executed, along with non-believers.  It teaches Shariah law, which is a pretty damn barbaric system by anyone's standard.  All it takes is for a Muslim to decide to take his holy text literally and he has justification for murder and all other manner of evil.  Islamism is a very real threat, and pointing that out doesnt mean I am spreading hate or bigotry etc.  It is a statement of fact and ignoring facts doesn't make them go away.

So seeing as you quoted Churchill, here's some other stuff he said.

 

"We must build a kind of United States of Europe"

 

"The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by their contribution to the common cause.

The ancient states and principalities of Germany, freely joined together for mutual convenience in a federal system, might each take their individual place among the United States of Europe. I shall not try to make a detailed programme for hundreds of millions of people who want to be happy and free, prosperous and safe, who wish to enjoy the four freedoms of which the great President Roosevelt spoke, and live in accordance with the principles embodied in the Atlantic Charter. If this is their wish, they have only to say so, and means can certainly be found, and machinery erected, to carry that wish into full fruition.

But I must give you warning. Time may be short.

At present there is a breathing-space. The cannon have ceased firing. The fighting has stopped; but the dangers have not stopped.

If we are to form the United States of Europe or whatever name or form it may take, we must begin now."

 

"Under and within that world concept, we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe.

The first step is to form a Council of Europe.

If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can.

The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny.

In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together.

Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia - for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine."

[gcubed]

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

I actually alluded to this on a previous posts (though I'm not faulting you if it went past you) but my position on this is fairly simple: We must demand world wide separation between church and state. True separation of church and state.

 

That means among many other points:

1) Economic embargoes on Muslim or Christian or any other openly religious government

2) Immediate and final end to all tax exempt status for all Churches and Clergy: It doesn't matters that they do volunteer work they shouldn't be allowed to mix that with their religious believes to proselytize and preach hate while being tax exempt. 

3) Observance to public access and public services secularism: This means strictly secular schools, strictly secular outreach and communitary work programs, etc. 

4) Outlawing the indoctrination of children: This means that forcing kids to go to Church and Sunday schools or Religious education should not be acceptable in modern society. One must be of a certain age before one can legally consent to sex, to use certain substances, to drive a car, to have a job. Yet we're ok with telling our children they'll burn in hell for all eternity for discovering their sexual impulses, 10x worst if they're not heterosexual impulses?

As an agnostic, I feel compelled to ask:

 

I get that you view a theocratic society as an abomination. Has it not occurred to you that they view secularism in a similar light? You propose economic sanctions against any and all people who do not agree with you in this matter. Have you considered they may not just roll over and say, "You are right, we promise to be good." Look to history. You will find that course of action is very rarely selected.

 

 

 

[Misanthrope]

44 minutes ago, gcubed said:

As an agnostic, I feel compelled to ask:

 

I get that you view a theocratic society as an abomination. Has it not occurred to you that they view secularism in a similar light? You propose economic sanctions against any and all people who do not agree with you in this matter. Have you considered they may not just roll over and say, "You are right, we promise to be good." Look to history. You will find that course of action is very rarely selected.

Seemingly so, however if you pay attention I am not advocating for any adult not to believe whatever they want. I wouldn't dream of restricting Freedom of Speech by restricting Freedom of Religion.

 

The point of secularist government bodies is actually based on Individual Freedom: While a government should represent their citizens elected through a democratic process, it should not actively discriminate against them. As such, favoring any single religion means that you'd un-favor all others in turn. This is simply because of the divise nature of religious believes to begin with. This is not me saying "You guys will fight each other" this is just observation after the fact.

 

The second point is that you seem to think that secularism is incompatible with morality. This is incorrect. As long as there is a fair consensus among citizens, morality is actually acceptable. Again the problem is that virtually all of the times, Religion advocates for Moral Absolutism. For them there is no other way but their way, their rules, their morality. To give any of them any advantage over another by allowing Religion discussions into the mix is to basically betray neutrality.

I firmly believe in treating others as you'd like to be treated, henceforth we know that Religions just simply cannot peacefully coexist with one another and even among separate congregations and subdivision. To me is simply a matter of fairness to all: For me to be fair to all, I cannot lie down and allow someone who's openly telling us he will not be fair to have an advantage of any kind. This is what institutionalized religions in the west and specially in the middle east achieve by not making a clear and absolute distinction between matters of government and faith, between Dogma and Democracy.

[gcubed]

9 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Seemingly so, however if you pay attention I am not advocating for any adult not to believe whatever they want. I wouldn't dream of restricting Freedom of Speech by restricting Freedom of Religion.

 

The point of secularist government bodies is actually based on Individual Freedom: While a government should represent their citizens elected through a democratic process, it should not actively discriminate against them. As such, favoring any single religion means that you'd un-favor all others in turn. This is simply because of the divise nature of religious believes to begin with. This is not me saying "You guys will fight each other" this is just observation after the fact.

 

The second point is that you seem to think that secularism is incompatible with morality. This is incorrect. As long as there is a fair consensus among citizens, morality is actually acceptable. Again the problem is that virtually all of the times, Religion advocates for Moral Absolutism. For them there is no other way but their way, their rules, their morality. To give any of them any advantage over another by allowing Religion discussions into the mix is to basically betray neutrality.

I firmly believe in treating others as you'd like to be treated, henceforth we know that Religions just simply cannot peacefully coexist with one another and even among separate congregations and subdivision. To me is simply a matter of fairness to all: For me to be fair to all, I cannot lie down and allow someone who's openly telling us he will not be fair to have an advantage of any kind. This is what institutionalized religions in the west and specially in the middle east achieve by not making a clear and absolute distinction between matters of government and faith, between Dogma and Democracy.

You are missing my point. This has absolutely nothing to do with what an adult is free to believe, and everything to do with what indoctrination they want their children to undergo.

 

You don't want you kids to undergo any kind of religious indoctrination. Yet you are insisting that all children undergo a secular indoctrination without even a hint that there are other views. I am telling you, you had better be prepared to kill every religious parent on the planet. Also, even though I am an agnostic (look it up if you don't know what that means), I am likely to side with them just to spite you. Freedom of Speach? After you have taught the kids to parrot the party line? Give me a  break.