Germany Mall Shootings

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

megatherium

el rey del mambo
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
10,349
13,122
I think it should be fine to judge a person based on their religion, at least it shouldn't be taboo.. ofcourse don't just restrict muslims or jews or christians or whatever, what I'm saying is if someone's religion is so important to them they are absolutely defined by and abide by it so much that their religious ideology trumps law, they should be expected to be judged on it, no?
It's a social engineering project; our oligarchs are navigating uncharted waters to the best of their ability. Improvising, making it shit up as they move along, much of it contradictory. They're like astronauts in a way,. I'm actually hopefully they get hung up on Uranus and we never hear from them again. We can go back to monarchy or something.
 

Lord Vutulaki

Banned
Jan 16, 2015
16,651
5,934
I'm taking Chinamen and Koreans if it's my call. Hard working, high achieving, hygienic. Thrifty, law abiding. Compact hairless, fiercely intelligent. what's not to like!

Japs too of course, but they seem happy where they are.

"fiercely intelligent"

lol all those national IQ stats EY finger fucks himself over are self reported, Korea had 200 Professors caught out for plagiarizing their doctorate FFS

NE Asians arent any smarter than Australian aboriginals, anyone who has dealt with both will know this, values are different though hence the nicer stuff the rice eaters have
 

Leigh

Engineer
Pro Fighter
Jan 26, 2015
10,925
21,023
I think it should be fine to judge a person based on their religion, at least it shouldn't be taboo.. ofcourse don't just restrict muslims or jews or christians or whatever, what I'm saying is if someone's religion is so important to them they are absolutely defined by and abide by it so much that their religious ideology trumps law, they should be expected to be judged on it, no?
That's not really consistent. Judging someone by the strength of their religious fanaticism isn't the same as judging them by their religion.

In any case, it would be difficult to enforce, as people could just lie. The idea being put forward is that we ban people from countries that have high numbers of people identifying under a certain religion. My additional point is that for consistency, the argument should be religious countries in general.
 

Disciplined Galt

Disciplina et Frugalis
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
26,030
30,790
"fiercely intelligent"

lol all those national IQ stats EY finger fucks himself over are self reported, Korea had 200 Professors caught out for plagiarizing their doctorate FFS

NE Asians arent any smarter than Australian aboriginals, anyone who has dealt with both will know this, values are different though hence the nicer stuff the rice eaters have
Thank you loyal Dalit, seriously Scandinavians are best.
 

megatherium

el rey del mambo
First 100
Jan 15, 2015
10,349
13,122
We have a bunch of Persian Shias here on the shore. Really nice folks, cultivated. you can't tell em they're not white either, even though they're kinda brown. And they're Muslims. There are millions of Shias worldwide. The extent of there involvement in this jihad is that they're the only ones with boots on the ground in Syria fighting it. So it's no good describing this scourge as Islamic terrorism, you need a narrower definition lest the American people get hoodwinked again into bombing the shit out of another innocent country (Iran).

It's in the pipeline, the think tanks in Washington have been hectoring Obama to do it for eight years. Hilary act quickly if she gets the chance.
 

Ghost Bro

Wololo ~Leave no turn unstoned
Nov 13, 2015
8,511
10,799
That's not really consistent. Judging someone by the strength of their religious fanaticism isn't the same as judging them by their religion.

In any case, it would be difficult to enforce, as people could just lie. The idea being put forward is that we ban people from countries that have high numbers of people identifying under a certain religion. My additional point is that for consistency, the argument should be religious countries in general.
Then you define a person by his country, is that not intrinsically the same if not worse than judging him by his or her religion (which they have some control over to some extent).
 

Leigh

Engineer
Pro Fighter
Jan 26, 2015
10,925
21,023
Then you define a person by his country, is that not intrinsically the same if not worse than judging him by his or her religion (which they have some control over to some extent).
Yes, it's terrible. I certainly don't support it but that is the common argument. Don't allow people from Muslim based countries.
 

Ghost Bro

Wololo ~Leave no turn unstoned
Nov 13, 2015
8,511
10,799
Yes, it's terrible. I certainly don't support it but that is the common argument. Don't allow people from Muslim based countries.
ah right, that just means keep brown people out really.
 

Lord Vutulaki

Banned
Jan 16, 2015
16,651
5,934
I think it should be fine to judge a person based on their religion, at least it shouldn't be taboo.. ofcourse don't just restrict muslims or jews or christians or whatever, what I'm saying is if someone's religion is so important to them they are absolutely defined by and abide by it so much that their religious ideology trumps law, they should be expected to be judged on it, no?
Yes that is very true but only in proportion with the wider pro freedom debate.
 
1

1031

Guest
Judging someone by the strength of their religious fanaticism isn't the same as judging them by their religion.
I don't think that's what he was saying. What I received is that if someone defines themselves by their religion, then, based on what you know about that religion, it would be impossible not to take that into consideration when assessing that person.

It's what people do and there's nothing right or wrong about it.
 

Leigh

Engineer
Pro Fighter
Jan 26, 2015
10,925
21,023
I don't think that's what he was saying. What I received is that if someone defines themselves by their religion, then, based on what you know about that religion, it would be impossible not to take that into consideration when assessing that person.

It's what people do and there's nothing right or wrong about it.
I can understand that but the reality is that even those who identify and define themselves by their religion are diverse. Some strong Muslims, for example, are scholars and educators whereas others blow people up. Some Christians are great people, some are racist thugs. Many (most?) religious people compartmentalise their faith from their every day personality.

I know he stated that it's more than just Christian or Muslim etc but how do you realistically determine and police that?
 
1

1031

Guest
I can understand that but the reality is that even those who identify and define themselves by their religion are diverse. Some strong Muslims, for example, are scholars and educators whereas others blow people up. Some Christians are great people, some are racist thugs. Many (most?) religious people compartmentalise their faith from their every day personality.

I know he stated that it's more than just Christian or Muslim etc but how do you realistically determine and police that?
You don't. You let people think how they want to think. Sometimes we're right and sometimes we're wrong and it's been like that as long as our history shows. As long as we ask people to express and articulate why they feel or think this way or that then we'll get somewhere, albeit slowly. What kills any progress is censoring discussion.
 

SAJ

Posting Machine
Aug 2, 2015
1,754
2,794
Number 2 has me puzzled, care to expand? I have studied Islam extensively and have family from Libya. I think you might say people who declare takfir are guilty of shirk per definition.
So basically the saudi rulers have practices that go against islam. Off the top of my head they have interest banks, they have a monarchy and as my jihadi friends would say "they ally with the kuffar init" regarding their relations with the US. So they make Takfir on them and tell everyone other muslim who doesn't do the same that they are also not a muslim.

While the first two are not permissable in Islam. The third one isn't that much of a issue in certain circumstances but again this does not make someone a non muslim because they commit what we would call sins.

There are many more examples just can't think of any at the moment.
 

Leigh

Engineer
Pro Fighter
Jan 26, 2015
10,925
21,023
You don't. You let people think how they want to think. Sometimes we're right and sometimes we're wrong and it's been like that as long as our history shows. As long as we ask people to express and articulate why they feel or think this way or that then we'll get somewhere, albeit slowly. What kills any progress is censoring discussion.
So when you talk about someone's religion influencing your assessment of them, you are not suggesting you should act on it?
 
1

1031

Guest
So when you talk about someone's religion influencing your assessment of them, you are not suggesting you should act on it?
No.
Not acting can mean a lot of things as can acting. It depends on the situation and the people involved.
 

diet butcher

Purple Member
Jan 19, 2015
524
699
NE Asians arent any smarter than Australian aboriginals, anyone who has dealt with both will know this, values are different though hence the nicer stuff the rice eaters have
Didn't you once automatically assume that I had hacking skills just because I'm a rice eater, huh? Ya curry munchin' abo ;)

Shit, maybe I was the one who broke the myth, lol