Page 3 of 4

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:28 pm
by Pragmatist
Sten wrote:
Pragmatist wrote:
Sten wrote:Multiculturalism makes a country stronger and brings people together. Culture is about food, architecture, music, art, and philosophy, there's nothing more interesting or fulfilling than experiencing what another culture has to offer in terms of those things.

Multireligionism tears a country apart and creates violence and inequality. It makes me sad when people get the two confused, and begin thinking that many cultures cannot live together in one country. Culture is not the problem here. Monotheistic religion most certainly is.


How naive you are to make the assumption that you can have Multi Culturism without Multi Religionism.


I never said it was achievable. Only that culture and religion are seperate. It's possible to be an atheist but also very traditional in the culture of your chosen country. Religion likes to think that it is the cradle of culture, but in reality it's only hanging on by the indoctrination of the children. If everyone stopped drilling their children's heads with religious nonsense the culture would still be left intact and the world would be many times more safe and harmonious.


Unfortunately for YOU they are not separate at all and different Cultures have different religions for many different reasons so back to your drawing board for ANOTHER excuse. Atheism is not a panacea for ANYTHING most problems and cultural disputes have no religious connotations at all.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:33 pm
by Coshida
Unfortunately for YOU they are not separate at all and different Cultures have different religions for many different reasons so back to your drawing board for ANOTHER excuse. Atheism is not a panacea for ANYTHING most problems and cultural disputes have no religious connotations at all.


If religion is not the problem, then why are you always ranting on about Muhammedans , like some mad old guy on the bus?

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:55 pm
by Sten
Pragmatist wrote:Unfortunately for YOU they are not separate at all and different Cultures have different religions for many different reasons so back to your drawing board for ANOTHER excuse. Atheism is not a panacea for ANYTHING most problems and cultural disputes have no religious connotations at all.


Sure, so the trouble between Israel and Palestine has no "religious connotations"? The violence in Northern Ireland didn't have "religious connotations"? The killing of innocent East Timoreans by Indonesian Muslim Militia didn't have "religious connotations"? Suicide bombings don't have "religious connotations"? 9/11 didn't have "religious connotations"? The Bali Bombings didn't have "religious connotations"?

Atheism isn't a "panacea" because it is a lack, a zero, a negative. However, what would you suggest to someone who had become obese largely from eating too much ice cream? Would you insist that the ice cream was a part of this person's lifestyle and does not have anything to do with their weight gain? Or would you be more sensible and advise that the person stop eating ice cream altogether? Not eating ice cream is not a "panacea" because it is a negative, however the benefits from the cessation of the ice cream eating cannot be denied. In the same way a culture without religion will be able to trim off some of the "fat" of intolerance and violence. Religion brings nothing good to a society, it just makes people feel puffed up and superior to those who are different.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:06 pm
by Pragmatist
Sten wrote:
Pragmatist wrote:Unfortunately for YOU they are not separate at all and different Cultures have different religions for many different reasons so back to your drawing board for ANOTHER excuse. Atheism is not a panacea for ANYTHING most problems and cultural disputes have no religious connotations at all.


Sure, so the trouble between Israel and Palestine has no "religious connotations"? The violence in Northern Ireland didn't have "religious connotations"? The killing of innocent East Timoreans by Indonesian Muslim Militia didn't have "religious connotations"? Suicide bombings don't have "religious connotations"? 9/11 didn't have "religious connotations"? The Bali Bombings didn't have "religious connotations"?

Atheism isn't a "panacea" because it is a lack, a zero, a negative. However, what would you suggest to someone who had become obese largely from eating too much ice cream? Would you insist that the ice cream was a part of this person's lifestyle and does not have anything to do with their weight gain? Or would you be more sensible and advise that the person stop eating ice cream altogether? Not eating ice cream is not a "panacea" because it is a negative, however the benefits from the cessation of the ice cream eating cannot be denied. In the same way a culture without religion will be able to trim off some of the "fat" of intolerance and violence. Religion brings nothing good to a society, it just makes people feel puffed up and superior to those who are different.


Just quoting incidents which were religiously motivated does not mean ALL such incidents are this is a very simplistic view of the world that you seem to hold. The violence in Northern Ireland most CERTAINLY did eventually have religious connotations but this was NOT how it started it was a CIVIL RIGHTS movement and although the majority of the IRA were Catholics by no means were they all Catholics and the ones that fought them were NOT ALL Protestants. The aim of the fight in Northern Ireland was to re unite Ireland as one country but NOT to establish domination of one Religion or another. There have been protestant Presidents of Ireland (Eire) and many protestants were leading lights in the Home Rule movement.

Similarly in Israel there are Muslims and Jews who serve together in the Military so your whole preconception is full of holes. So unfortunately your attempted demonisation of religion falls again.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:38 pm
by Sten
Pragmatist wrote:Just quoting incidents which were religiously motivated does not mean ALL such incidents are this is a very simplistic view of the world that you seem to hold.

Please direct me to where I said that ALL incidents are caused by religion, or drop your stupid straw man. I said that the world would be many times more safe and harmonious without religion, which is true on account of the fact that almost all of the scenarios I mentioned would have never existed or at least been easier to find a solution for. Nowhere did I say that ALL violent incidents are caused by religion. You were the one who said that MOST (meaning the majority of) cultural disputes did not have religious connotations, which contradicts your earlier statement that culture and religion are inseparable. Make up your damn mind, will you?

Pragmatist wrote:The violence in Northern Ireland most CERTAINLY did eventually have religious connotations but this was NOT how it started it was a CIVIL RIGHTS movement and although the majority of the IRA were Catholics by no means were they all Catholics and the ones that fought them were NOT ALL Protestants. The aim of the fight in Northern Ireland was to re unite Ireland as one country but NOT to establish domination of one Religion or another. There have been protestant Presidents of Ireland (Eire) and many protestants were leading lights in the Home Rule movement.

Without religion, there would have been less religiously motivated violence and intolerance. Without religion, the hatred that existed between Catholics and Protestants would not have existed. I did not say anywhere that the aim was to establish one religion as dominant. Your consistent usage of the strawman fallacy in order to respond to my arguments is becoming tiresome and repetitive.

Pragmatist wrote:Similarly in Israel there are Muslims and Jews who serve together in the Military so your whole preconception is full of holes. So unfortunately your attempted demonisation of religion falls again.

There are Muslims and Jews who serve together because they put aside their religious differences and unite under a common CULTURE. The religious Jews and Muslims continue to hate and murder each other. The preconception that is so "full of holes" as you put it is YET ANOTHER STRAW MAN FALLACY THAT YOU HAVE CONSTRUCTED. I know you find it easier to argue against your own embellished and fabricated version of my argument, but this is not an honest or an intelligent debate tactic and I will call you on it every single time.

Of course, when you discover that your fallacies are not working, you will fall back on good old fashioned ad hominems and insults, won't you Praggy? You're so freaking predictable debating with you is like taking candy from an ugly little baby. I almost feel sorry for you sometimes, but then I realise what a cantankerous troll you are. :*)

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 9:53 pm
by Pragmatist
Sten wrote:
Pragmatist wrote:Just quoting incidents which were religiously motivated does not mean ALL such incidents are this is a very simplistic view of the world that you seem to hold.

Please direct me to where I said that ALL incidents are caused by religion, or drop your stupid straw man. I said that the world would be many times more safe and harmonious without religion, which is true on account of the fact that almost all of the scenarios I mentioned would have never existed or at least been easier to find a solution for. Nowhere did I say that ALL violent incidents are caused by religion. You were the one who said that MOST (meaning the majority of) cultural disputes did not have religious connotations, which contradicts your earlier statement that culture and religion are inseparable. Make up your damn mind, will you?

Pragmatist wrote:The violence in Northern Ireland most CERTAINLY did eventually have religious connotations but this was NOT how it started it was a CIVIL RIGHTS movement and although the majority of the IRA were Catholics by no means were they all Catholics and the ones that fought them were NOT ALL Protestants. The aim of the fight in Northern Ireland was to re unite Ireland as one country but NOT to establish domination of one Religion or another. There have been protestant Presidents of Ireland (Eire) and many protestants were leading lights in the Home Rule movement.

Without religion, there would have been less religiously motivated violence and intolerance. Without religion, the hatred that existed between Catholics and Protestants would not have existed. I did not say anywhere that the aim was to establish one religion as dominant. Your consistent usage of the strawman fallacy in order to respond to my arguments is becoming tiresome and repetitive.

Pragmatist wrote:Similarly in Israel there are Muslims and Jews who serve together in the Military so your whole preconception is full of holes. So unfortunately your attempted demonisation of religion falls again.

There are Muslims and Jews who serve together because they put aside their religious differences and unite under a common CULTURE. The religious Jews and Muslims continue to hate and murder each other. The preconception that is so "full of holes" as you put it is YET ANOTHER STRAW MAN FALLACY THAT YOU HAVE CONSTRUCTED. I know you find it easier to argue against your own embellished and fabricated version of my argument, but this is not an honest or an intelligent debate tactic and I will call you on it every single time.

Of course, when you discover that your fallacies are not working, you will fall back on good old fashioned ad hominems and insults, won't you Praggy? You're so freaking predictable debating with you is like taking candy from an ugly little baby. I almost feel sorry for you sometimes, but then I realise what a cantankerous troll you are. :*)


I never do insults Sten I leave them to lesser mortals such as yourself and I am not trolling just answering posts do you REALLY know what a Troll is I have my doubts. Clue its not just someone who disagrees with YOU. You don't know it but YOU have just proved your Multi Culture, Multi Religion argument is wrong yourself in your own post are you intelligent enough to see where I very much doubt it. How sad it must be to be you. No strawmen and no ad hominem at all in my response these lie all in your head. Do you want the URL to logical fallacies I think you need it?

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:05 pm
by Sten
Pragmatist wrote:I never do insults Sten I leave them to lesser mortals such as yourself and I am not trolling just answering posts do you REALLY know what a Troll is I have my doubts.

You don't do insults? Oh, well I guess I'll take your implication that I belong in the sewer, along with being called a defect, a fool and a lesser mortal as compliments then. In turn, you can take as a compliment my statement that you are a poop tossing scum vending anal milking douche farmer. Really, I mean that in the nicest way possible, honest. I don't do insults. :*)

Pragmatist wrote:Clue its not just someone who disagrees with YOU. You don't know it but YOU have just proved your Multi Culture, Multi Religion argument is wrong yourself in your own post are you intelligent enough to see where I very much doubt it. How sad it must be to be you.

No please, stop, my butt cheeks can't tolerate being laughed off yet another time!! Are you seriously trying the old "you proved yourself wrong but I'm not going to tell you where neener neener neener" ploy with me? I suppose I can take this as the threshold to another slew of ad hominems on your part since it's pretty clear that if I really had proved myself wrong you would be the first to jump at the chance to point it out, with much chest beating and bravado. God DAMN it's fun making you look stupid. I think I just got myself a new hobby here at FFI. :roflmao:

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:14 pm
by Sten
Pragmatist wrote:Do you want the URL to logical fallacies I think you need it?

No need, I got it. Here you are, happy reading.


Wikipedia wrote:A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position.[1] While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.[2]

Praggy wrote:Just quoting incidents which were religiously motivated does not mean ALL such incidents are this is a very simplistic view of the world that you seem to hold.

Praggy wrote:Similarly in Israel there are Muslims and Jews who serve together in the Military so your whole preconception is full of holes. So unfortunately your attempted demonisation of religion falls again.



Wikipedia wrote:An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the source making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.


Pragmatist wrote:Look above fool. You should revert to your previous 'Nick' 'RAT bites' suits you down to the ground or should I say the sewer.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:17 pm
by Pragmatist
Sten wrote:
Pragmatist wrote:Do you want the URL to logical fallacies I think you need it?

No need, I got it. Here you are, happy reading.


Wikipedia wrote:A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Then, one attributes that position to the opponent. For example, someone might deliberately overstate the opponent's position.[1] While a straw man argument may work as a rhetorical technique—and succeed in persuading people—it carries little or no real evidential weight, since the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted.[2]

Praggy wrote:Just quoting incidents which were religiously motivated does not mean ALL such incidents are this is a very simplistic view of the world that you seem to hold.

Praggy wrote:Similarly in Israel there are Muslims and Jews who serve together in the Military so your whole preconception is full of holes. So unfortunately your attempted demonisation of religion falls again.



Wikipedia wrote:An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the source making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.


Pragmatist wrote:Look above fool. You should revert to your previous 'Nick' 'RAT bites' suits you down to the ground or should I say the sewer.


Nope sorry nothing applicable there try again loser

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 15, 2009 10:37 pm
by Sten
Pragmatist wrote:Nope sorry nothing applicable there try again loser


Wow, I certainly wasn't expecting THAT to happen! Pragmatist makes an empty claim followed by an ad hominem without addressing the points of the previous relevant post in an attempt to cover up his ignorance? Nevah!!! What?? And as I intellectually beat his skull further and further in, his responses get shorter and more trite while consistently ignoring my points that shatter his pathetic argument to pieces? Surely you jest!!! :roflmao:

Meanwhile, my points go unaddressed save for the "you proved yourself wrong but I'm not going to tell you where" jab. Utterly pathetic, and yet side-splittingly hilarious. For your next post, instead of responding to the relevant one, you'll respond to this one with more insults and ad hominems. You're so predictable. Go on, don't respond to the last post I made addressing your argument, respond to this one instead. Prove me right. :tongueout:

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:54 pm
by Janus
We have not submitted to Islam and we never will! Next year have we a general election and Labour will be out. I lived in England for five years after Blair was elected. I came to Sweden but I have seen the differences in the UK. People are rumbling like hungry bears. Labour will not get in again and the other parties have seen, and hopefully learned by, the mistakes these stupid Labour have made. The country right now needs a strong right wing government to begin sending them home. Just one slight mistake and they are gone. Be rid of the criminals then begin on the generations of muslims that are spoiling that beautiful country. The people of England will fight in the street soon if the government not change. This I know.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:20 pm
by Trojan
Janus wrote:We have not submitted to Islam and we never will! Next year have we a general election and Labour will be out. I lived in England for five years after Blair was elected. I came to Sweden but I have seen the differences in the UK. People are rumbling like hungry bears. Labour will not get in again and the other parties have seen, and hopefully learned by, the mistakes these stupid Labour have made. The country right now needs a strong right wing government to begin sending them home. Just one slight mistake and they are gone. Be rid of the criminals then begin on the generations of muslims that are spoiling that beautiful country. The people of England will fight in the street soon if the government not change. This I know.


I hope you are right for the sake of your forefathers who gave up their lives to prevent the Islamic take over of Europe centuries ago.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:28 am
by misswhisp
I was very surprised when upon leaving the UK and boarding my flight home at heathrow airport, to see a man in company of islamics, he also being an islamic, the difference being, he had red hair fair complexion and was obviously british.If the islamics whos company he was in were of a peaceful nature, then it is his business, but, if they were of a warring nature, whos hatred for the west is murderous, then i am afraid this man was a traitor to his own people and to God.I have wittnessed a lot of caucasian women convert to islam for the sake of the man they love,God should be put first, the love of God.And HE is the Same GOD the 3 of us pray to.May he have mercy on us all for our wicked murderous ways.And thats all of us, whether we are islamics, jews or christians or whoever, we all have a lot to appologise, not only to mankind but to God also.Myself being a christian am also ashamed of the way we have behaved over the centuries, butchering people and burning people at the stake etc, So mankind we all have a lot to be ashamed of.So all of us have murdered terribly in the name of God.And personally the way the world is going, climate change etc, i don't think we are too far away from judgement day.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:21 am
by kuffar1
misswhisp wrote:And HE is the Same GOD the 3 of us pray to.


What makes you believe that He is the same God?

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:31 am
by Pragmatist
kuffar1 wrote:
misswhisp wrote:And HE is the Same GOD the 3 of us pray to.


What makes you believe that He is the same God?


How true this is the biggest MYTH that Mohammedans try to foist on the gullible West and one which only PC, left Wing, Multi Culti, 'Yuman Rites' spouting Moonbats swallow. Thus the moral equivalence which is foisted on us all the time by the gullible foolish deluded MSM and Politicians

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:48 am
by Equestrian
Quills wrote: I think Multiculturalism can work, but it can only work with cultures that have the same values about life and freedom.

Quills


Multiculturalism can't work, it's an oxymoron. A culturally diverse society can coexist in harmony under Pluralism. Multiculturalism is the bane of free societies.

This is the product of Multiculturalism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRzpVetiygk

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:08 am
by Quills
Equestrian wrote:
Quills wrote: I think Multiculturalism can work, but it can only work with cultures that have the same values about life and freedom.

Quills


Multiculturalism can't work, it's an oxymoron. A culturally diverse society can coexist in harmony under Pluralism. Multiculturalism is the bane of free societies.

This is the product of Multiculturalism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRzpVetiygk


Well, where I live it's working just fine. We are French, English, Italian, Polish, Greek, just to name a few in my immediate area. Quite a mix of cultures, and we all get along fine because we have the same values, our moral upbringing is similar if not the same.
wikipedia wrote: Cultural pluralism, when small groups within a larger society maintain their unique cultural identities (see Multiculturalism)



Quills

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:00 pm
by THE PHANTOM
Equestrian wrote:
Quills wrote: I think Multiculturalism can work, but it can only work with cultures that have the same values about life and freedom.

Quills


Multiculturalism can't work, it's an oxymoron. A culturally diverse society can coexist in harmony under Pluralism. Multiculturalism is the bane of free societies.

This is the product of Multiculturalism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRzpVetiygk

So you think that culture is only religion. In my opinion, a religion based on dogma, a religion that blocks the natural movement of the mind by erecting a rigid psychic boundary cannot be put under the category of culture.

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:39 pm
by Quills
THE PHANTOM wrote:So you think that culture is only religion. In my opinion, a religion based on dogma, a religion that blocks the natural movement of the mind by erecting a rigid psychic boundary cannot be put under the category of culture.

What are you blathering about? It can be said that atheists have no religion and yet they are fine upstanding citizens as far as I know. I think we are talking about two different things. My point is that most people who come from different countries CAN live together in harmony regardless of their religion, the only exception are Muslims. They seem to not get along with anybody.
THE PHANTOM wrote: ...a religion that blocks the natural movement of the mind by erecting a rigid psychic boundary....

You are obviously talking about Islam, are you not? They are the only religion I know that blocks learning how to distinguish between right and wrong.

"But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their perceptive powers trained to distinguish both right and wrong." Hebrews 5:14

Quills

Re: Can Britain Survive Multiculturalism?

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:23 pm
by THE PHANTOM
I meant this post to Equestrian.
What are you blathering about?
So what are you blathering about?

Quills: It can be said that atheists have no religion and yet they are fine upstanding citizens as far as I know.

THE PHANTOM : Also as far as I know, yes.

Quills: My point is that most people who come from different countries CAN live together in harmony regardless of their religion,
THE PHANTOM: Agreed.
the only exception are Muslims.
That are fanatic and dogmatic.
They seem to not get along with anybody.
Those fanatics cannot go along with anybody.
THE PHANTOM wrote: ...a religion that blocks the natural movement of the mind by erecting a rigid psychic boundary....

You are obviously talking about Islam, are you not?
Obviously.
They are the only religion I know that blocks learning how to distinguish between right and wrong.
You've got it!