Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"a bunch of scum who come over here and make demands that we change how things are done or they will sue."
Sometimes I can't help myself even when I know I'm dealing with the absurd, but I have to admit I am curious to know who is threatening to sue over what. Any specifics to be had here? Or did you not understand why the GERMANS were requesting their young girls not wear revealing clothes next to the young boys in the next door refugee camp? Who threatened to sue?
I'll be patient for the facts while also waiting for the where this claim comes from that "In Europe where they've been taking in Sharia believers for a time now there has been great increases in rape, abuse, deaths and they've had their stabbings and beheadings with Sharia followers."
The best so far I got in response to that request is an article about Chinese sex traffickers going back to the late 90's.
Good laughs though! A little scary, but funny. Spooky and funny...
I would just like to know whatever happened to the concept of respecting minorities, but the majority rules?
I am NOT in favor of persecution and/or hatred in any form, and I am in favor of accommodating the disabled as well as any group which makes up at least 10% or so of a community. (This means that, for example, I have no problem with parking spaces for the handicapped only or with PA announcements in a language other than English if a large percentage of people listening speak that language.) However, I do object to special accommodations being made for transgendered people, for example, or to any other group who make up less than 1% of the population, if that means that the remaining 99% might be uncomfortable and/or inconvenienced. It angers me when I see multilingual voter information pamphlets (because of the added expense to taxpayers) or when I am forced to waste my time listening to a recorded message in Spanish and English before being able to push the button to the department I need. However, just because I feel that way does NOT mean that I dislike most Spanish-speaking people because I definitely do not.
Also, why is it that so many communities are now, according to what I have read, making it illegal (in some cases) to show symbols of Christianity, which is still the majority religion in the U.S.? I am agnostic, but I think freedom of religious expression should apply to everyone.
Yes, almost everyone should be respected -- I would make an exception for people like child molesters or repeat felons -- and I don't think anyone should be denied any rights based on race, religion, nationality or culture. However, I am far from alone in thinking that the majority should have the right to live their lives the way they want (as long as they do not literally and directly harm anyone else) -- and more and more often lately, I think that is not the case.
Last edited by katharsis; 10-01-2015 at 04:01 PM..
Thanks for getting us back to an adult discussion...
Quote:
Originally Posted by whocares811
I would just like to know whatever happened to the concept of respecting minorities, but the majority rules?
I am NOT in favor of persecution and/or hatred in any form, and I am in favor of accommodating the disabled as well as any group which makes up at least 10% or so of a community. (This means that, for example, I have no problem with parking spaces for the handicapped only or with PA announcements in a language other than English if a large percentage of people listening speak that language.) However, I do object to special accommodations being made for transgendered people, for example, or to any other group who make up less than 1% of the population, if that means that the remaining 99% might be uncomfortable and/or inconvenienced. It angers me when I see multilingual voter information pamphlets (because of the added expense to taxpayers) or when I am forced to waste my time listening to a recorded message in Spanish and English before being able to push the button to the department I need. However, just because I feel that way does NOT mean that I dislike most Spanish-speaking people because I definitely do not.
Also, why is it that so many communities are now, according to what I have read, making it illegal (in some cases) to show symbols of Christianity, which is still the majority religion in the U.S.? I am agnostic, but I think freedom of religious expression should apply to everyone.
Yes, almost everyone should be respected -- I would make an exception for people like child molesters or repeat felons -- and I don't think anyone should be denied any rights based on race, religion, nationality or culture. However, I am far from alone in thinking that the majority should have the right to live their lives the way they want (as long as they do not literally and directly harm anyone else) -- and more and more often lately, I think that is not the case.
Seems to me that people all too often object to the minor stuff rather than the important stuff...
For example, we should respect minorities, yes, but we should really respect everyone regardless, in keeping with the teaching to do onto others as you would have them do onto you, right? Our democracy attempts to broker the interests of all, and of course a majority matters, but many times the majority is wrong about much. Again, doesn't take too much a read of history to know the truth of this sad fact.
The majority once believed in slavery, women to be second class citizens, witches...
Even accommodating super minorities, like transgendered people, for example, I always ask myself, what is the big harm in being accommodating? My wife is a vegetarian. Sometimes when we are invited over to dinner or go to restaurants, her vegetarian preferences are accommodated, sometimes not. No big deal either way, but there is always something kind of nice when people try to be accommodating.
Reminds me of the big deal when the ADA was getting pushed through. Sure, there were some significant costs involved, businesses put out, rules that seemed silly or a bit much, but now looking back, those same ramps are what women (and men) use to push their babies in strollers. There were the contractors and laborers who got work installing all those ADA additions. Disabled people are no longer left helpless at the door. Good public policy prevailed despite all the fuss to the contrary that essentially proved misguided.
As for public display of religious symbols, why would we not agree that when it comes to public use of money and/or government action, we not pick any one religion over another? Regardless what your particular belief may be, worship your God however you may want, but can't we agree that's for you to decide in your own home, not for OUR government to pick and choose?
"It angers me when I see multilingual voter information pamphlets (because of the added expense to taxpayers) or when I am forced to waste my time listening to a recorded message in Spanish and English before being able to push the button to the department I need."
If you bothered to look into the "added expense," you might find that this too is a rather unsubstantiated concern. For the most part, all those ballots and materials are going out anyway. Whether there are a few more pages added is really of no consequence when you consider the goal of getting the voter to vote on matters of public policy.
For example, would you rather have the voter not be able to read the ballot and not vote or is it better to allow the voter to choose on important matters of public policy like; abortion, raising sales tax, the bond for a new school, your local representative? The cost of the extra paper hardly matters in light of what results can come of these votes!
So too the message in Spanish. I mean really? Usually that is the quick choice of "1" for English or "2" for Spanish. I guess maybe I'm not so busy that needing to press "1" has ever really bothered me much...
My bigger concern is that the phone company or the cable company or the insurance company will keep me holding forever regardless what language they speak!
You know what? We don't live in Europe. I want everyone in this country to be multi-lingual, but our education system doesn't manage to do that by requiring two or three years of a foreign language. What I object to is not seeing one clerical job in the want ads in my area being available to non-Spanish speakers. Last I checked, we still lived in the United States, and English is the dominant language.
Agreed.
Spanish ain't important except in LatAm or Spain. French ain't important except of France of some of their old colonies like Quebec. Chinese ain't important outside of China.
OTOH: English IS important round the world. I saw a pic of some Arab looking people at the Croatia/Hungary border and the language on the signs was English ONLY, which def surprised me a LOT since neither country has English as an official language. NOT Croatian, Hungarian, Spanish, French or Chinese: "English".
In answer to the OP's poor title for this thread ("Wanting to Preserve Your Way of Life Does Not Make You Racist or Fascist"), no, not necessarily...it depends on the framework in which you are working. And really, in this particular context, there are 2.
1. The United States has citizens and people who are here legally for various purposes and time frames. Citizens and many of those here legally have rights and responsibilities, and if you are trying to preserve your personal way of life, and are doing so by inhibiting the rights of others, then yes, in my view, you are a racist or fascist or some other "ist". Just because you don't like or endorse someone else's lifestyle, touch tooties. Mind you business. Live and let live. Now that doesn't mean anything goes (for example the Jeff's case in Utah).
2. And then there's the broader world. Just anyone doesn't have the right to come to America. And we have a system that is supposed to allow in restricted amounts of people from around the world. And how we adjust those levels is our business, not the U.N.'s or any other world group. If we're talking about Muslims coming to America in any significant numbers, we have a right to say no. It's our country, not theirs. And, frankly, we should be able to put conditions on emigration, and then the "outsiders" (for wont of a better term) can take it, or leave it. I lived in Thailand for a couple of years...and it was under their granting me that privilege and me living within certain restrictions; I could take it or leave it. Moving into a country that is not your own is a privilege.
Read your history. The Nazis had it in for lots of "different" folks, not just Jews.
Did I say they didn't? Nope.
But nice try at deflecting from my point -- that you were wrong when you said that the Nazis demanded "assimilation."
They weren't interested in assimilating non-Aryans. They were only interested in expelling or killing them.
You lecture others on supposedly not knowing history.
Which is ironic, considering your own well-demonstrated lack of knowledge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotkarl
Maybe it's high time we start going to other countries and start some good old fashioned terrorism on them for a change. (Cue liberals in 5...4...3...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by And D
"I'm not afraid of a foreign language, but I am afraid of having to learn one to be employed in my own frickin country."
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1
What is racist is progressives continuously working to tear down and destroy white culture and white nations and replace whites with nonwhites and replace harmony with disharmony. Actually it is beyond racist. It's nothing but anti-white biological/genetic warfare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtl1
Whites should reject non-whites on the simple principle of reciprocity. White Christians for the most part can't live peacefully and prosperously in the middle east or Africa. Wherever whites are a minority they are severely oppressed. We are already being oppressed in our own nation in America where we still hold a majority for now. It's past time to resist progressives' racism against whites. If nonwhites don't open their homelands and provide to whites then our nations should be closed to them too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by And D
As we consider the issue of whites living peacefully in the Middle East or Africa, and vice versa, I wonder if it ever occurs to some white folk that we were the ones that went to those places and began imposing our ways and wants, not the other way around.
Christians, Jews and pagans lived in the Middle East long, long before Islam even existed.
Then Islam invaded and spread by brutal conquest throughout the Middle East, North Africa, India, and into parts of Europe. Christians and Jews were forced to convert to Islam, pay a tax, leave, or die.
Coptic Christians were recently beheaded by ISIS in Libya for not renouncing their Christian faith. The video of the mass beheading was all over the internet and could be seen in all of its gory detail all over the world. Christians are being ethnically cleansed throughout the Middle East, but Obama's State Department will only accept a handful of Christians as refugees while proposing to accept 200,000 Muslims or more.
For somebody who supposedly isn't a Muslim, Obama sure acts like one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by And D
the [American] majority is wrong about much. Again, doesn't take too much a read of history to know the truth of this sad fact.
The majority once believed in slavery, women to be second class citizens, witches...
This is rich.
People in America no longer believe in those things, but Islam does.
Saudi Arabia has the death penalty for "sorcery" and treats women as second-class citizens. Sharia law punishments under Islam include stoning, beheading, whippings of up to 3,000 lashes, crucifixion....The death penalty is given for apostasy (leaving the Muslim faith), blasphemy, idolatry, and preaching non-Muslim religions...It is illegal to have a Bible in Saudi Arabia. Women can be legally killed for "dishonoring" the family. If a woman is raped, she has to produce four male eyewitnesses, and her testimony only counts for half of a man's testimony. Gays are executed by hanging, being thrown off of high buildings, or having walls collapsed on them. Torture is routine. There is no due process. Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran are run as theocracies.
All of these things are anathema to liberals -- and yet they are eager to welcome practitioners of the religion that to this day carries out these practices.
When called out on it, they say, "Oh, but Christians have done bad things."
Yeah -- about 500 years ago!
Quote:
As for public display of religious symbols, why would we not agree that when it comes to public use of money and/or government action, we not pick any one religion over another? Regardless what your particular belief may be, worship your God however you may want, but can't we agree that's for you to decide in your own home, not for OUR government to pick and choose?
Our government "picked and chose" Christianity when the nation was founded. Not as an official state religion that everyone had to practice, but as a religion that we have honored above others throughout our history. Why? Because when the U.S. was founded, the great majority of Americans were Christians. Erase those traditions -- such as the Ten Commandments at the Supreme Court, being sworn on the Bible, etc., and you are erasing American history and tradition for no good reason.
So the answer to your question....
Quote:
Can I get an amen?
....is "no."
Quote:
Originally Posted by And D
For example, would you rather have the voter not be able to read the ballot and not vote or is it better to allow the voter to choose on important matters of public policy like; abortion, raising sales tax, the bond for a new school, your local representative?
It has always been my understanding that you have to be a naturalized citizen in order to vote, and that you have to understand English in order to pass the test to become a U.S. citizen.
So voting ballots and voter information should only be in English.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
....Just anyone doesn't have the right to come to America. And we have a system that is supposed to allow in restricted amounts of people from around the world. And how we adjust those levels is our business, not the U.N.'s or any other world group. If we're talking about Muslims coming to America in any significant numbers, we have a right to say no. It's our country, not theirs. And, frankly, we should be able to put conditions on immigration, and then the "outsiders" (for wont of a better term) can take it, or leave it. I lived in Thailand for a couple of years...and it was under their granting me that privilege and me living within certain restrictions; I could take it or leave it. Moving into a country that is not your own is a privilege.
Well said.
Incidentally, I understand that refugees are given permanent U.S. residence. Why is that? They should only be here until the war that made them refugees is over.
The State Department -- for decades -- has been abusing the American people by turning legal immigration, asylum and refugee acceptance into a bald-faced attempt to change the demographics of America and make whites a minority.
Last edited by dechatelet; 10-02-2015 at 01:11 AM..
"It angers me when I see multilingual voter information pamphlets (because of the added expense to taxpayers) or when I am forced to waste my time listening to a recorded message in Spanish and English before being able to push the button to the department I need."
If you bothered to look into the "added expense," you might find that this too is a rather unsubstantiated concern. For the most part, all those ballots and materials are going out anyway. Whether there are a few more pages added is really of no consequence when you consider the goal of getting the voter to vote on matters of public policy.
For example, would you rather have the voter not be able to read the ballot and not vote or is it better to allow the voter to choose on important matters of public policy like; abortion, raising sales tax, the bond for a new school, your local representative? The cost of the extra paper hardly matters in light of what results can come of these votes!
So too the message in Spanish. I mean really? Usually that is the quick choice of "1" for English or "2" for Spanish. I guess maybe I'm not so busy that needing to press "1" has ever really bothered me much...
My bigger concern is that the phone company or the cable company or the insurance company will keep me holding forever regardless what language they speak!
Thank you for your polite, thoughtful, and reasonable rebuttals. I do understand all your viewpoints, although I do not share them -- except that, yes, it IS nice when people are accommodating. I just dislike it when I am forced to do something I don't want to do -- which is the same for everyone, I realize! And, yes, I do realize that these dislikes can be very petty.
However, you are mistaken about the costs for multilingualism being insignificant. For you and whoever else cares to take the time to read it -- it IS very lengthy -- you might find the following link revealing, Also, I think that if people want to have the rights and privileges of living in the U.S., they should put forth the effort to learn the language that most people here speak.
Btw, most of the statistics and examples on the above list are more than ten years old. However, I doubt very much if costs have gone down since this list was compiled -- and, obviously, it is VERY far from a complete list!
Last edited by katharsis; 10-02-2015 at 07:37 AM..
Don't you all worry. You will be the minority soon...
Who's "you" and why do you seem to be salivating over it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks for getting us back to an adult discussion...
