You never try to help, Nico. Your purpose is just to troll.
i always try to help, just not in the way most prefer
remember this? was i trying to only heckle you then as well?
I thought I was clear. Western Europe and Canada were built by Christians and on Christian values. They called themselves Christian countries until recently. I prefer these places to most countries that were built by atheists. South America was also built by Christians and is mostly Catholic, and I prefer it to most atheistic places, too.
I thought that was clear, too.
conscience: an inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one’s behavior. (Oxford)
conscious is not a noun, it is an adjective. It means: aware of and responding to one’s surroundings; awake. (Oxford)
1 Like
I give cash cheques to my family you poverty case. No wonder no one will employee you as you are almost bald a chronic daily liar and mentally ill. I have a RV so homeless is not going to happen even in a nuclear war. No idea why a minority of criminals insist on lying about my shelter arrangements. There was a tall White guy attending the HA meetings at the Fraser River here in Hope would see him with 6 girls saw him at the Silver Chalice Pub with 3 and mutttering into the ground I lived in my RV. The Silver Chalice Pub in Kelowna has a transvestite running it and the one here employs Francine the tall black haired HA waitress.
I would say you are very clear on those two topics and I agree with you.
I was just wondering what your criterias for „the most beautiful societies“ are.
This is a reasonable question. Here are some things I look for (in no order).
- Cleanliness. Lack of litter and graffiti and cigarette butts and chewing gum and other waste in public.
- Lack of pollution. Clean air and rivers and streams and so on. A general lack of filth.
- Safety. Can you walk anywhere without fear of personal harm?
- High-quality infrastructure. Good roads, buildings, bridges, airports, ports, bicycle lanes, power grids, waste management, telecommunications, fire stations, disaster management, etc.
- Public transit. Can people get from A to B without a car at reasonable cost?
- Uncensored and fear-free communications. Can you criticize your leader (or anyone else) without going to prison?
- Health care. Is high-quality, universal health care available to everyone?
- Freedom of movement. Are people allowed to go almost anywhere without permission?
- Walkability. Can people walk everywhere?
- Education. Is high quality education (at least high school) available to everyone for free?
- Parks/Green-spaces. Is a significant percentage of land set aside for parks and green spaces?
- Culture. Is there a thriving arts/music/dance ecosystem?
- Sustainability. I find places beautiful that are not consuming so much that they will inevitably die without drastic redesigns (like many Indian cities).
- Access to technology. Good internet and telephone systems.
- Economic opportunities. I like places where a normal person can make a decent living.
- EDIT: Low smoking rates. I almost forgot this one.
- Civic engagement. Can people engage government with a reasonable chance of success?
- Natural beauty. This is the only item on the list that isn’t completely in human control. Some places are just ugly. Most places can be made beautiful, however.
I realize my list may not align with yours or anyone else’s, but this is how I assess if a place is beautiful. By these standards, Christian countries fare best in my opinion.
It appears to me that it‘s less a question of Christianity or rather religion/non-religion, but the fruits of the Era of Enlightenment and industrialization. Cause before that time, where Christianity had it‘s firmest grip on the Western World incl. Russia with it‘s Orthodoxy, those countries barely fulfill any of your criterias.
Results are everything. Christian countries have this. Others do not. I do not care why.
Here we disagree. Results are not everything. I can achieve the same result with different tools or even better results by denying rights to certain groups.
I doubt you could, but we will never know.
I am surprised, as you were the one who blamed feminism and thus equal rights to women for example for the main reason for too low birth rates. Your approach regarding drugs also seem to be quite rigid regarding the rights of drug dealers and even drug addicts (I even agree to some extend to that approach), while I would be more rigid towards admittedly especially Islam (as I consider it’s extreme as well it’s conservative form not compatible with modern Western values) but all organized religions and cults. I on the other hand would tighten the law and sentences for certain crimes.
Yes, but I wouldn’t change anything. Feminism and the sexual revolution caused western society to stop breeding. Pandora’s box has been opened. It can’t be closed again. We can never go back to the way things were, nor do most want to. I don’t even think I want to.
Quite rigid? I want to kill the dealers and force mental health treatment on the addicts. If your word for that is “rigid”, I have no quarrel with that.
I would probably ban Islam if I were king of the world. It is a violent, backward religion. Anyone who calls it the peaceful religion of Islam has not read the Qu’ran. I have.
I would not ban most other religions. Some, perhaps, if they show themselves to be as violent as Muslims.
Results are everything, and the results show consistently that harsh sentences simply do not work to prevent similar crimes. It “works” if your goal is justice, which I don’t care much about, but if your goal is to reduce crime, it does nothing and may even be a negative.
I only have a short time as I am heading to the cafe. But I wonder why you still don‘t mention men in that equation? I know many men who either don‘t want children at all (dated an awful lot of them), mainly on the left to center regarding the political party spectrum, from rather poor to even rich. I know couples, where it‘s the man who doesn‘t want kids or more than one, despite having not to worry about the money.
I as a Feminist for example always wanted children. I as a feminist believe that more women (and maybe even also men) would want to have more children if motherhood/fatherhood would be way more respected than a career and money or at least equally. That‘s why I don‘t think it‘s correct to label feminism for too low birthrates. Now it‘s not even a realistic choice between children and income hence fulltime job, at least not for most people.
I don’t mention men because, if we could go back in time to when men could only get sex if they married, and porn wasn’t available everywhere, then men would marry.
I don’t think you’ve clued in yet that porn is a direct result of feminism. Pre-feminist women wouldn’t dream of making porn. They would’ve been imprisoned. And they never, ever would’ve been let back into polite society. Now women f*k 10 guys on video before lunch and we call it “sex work” and wag our fingers at people who disapprove for “slut shaming”. At least they got the slut part right.
Feminism first brought us the working wife, then divorce, then abortion, then the happily unmarried woman, then free sex without consequences, all of which result in a society that doesn’t breed.
I am not trying to go back in time. But we are where we are largely because of women’s rights.
perhaps you should read both the bible and the quran again, the bible is way more violent and christianity is responsible for way more death in their so called holy book and also in our history…
I so disagree to everything you claim feminism is guilty of. The only half point I give you is for your first sentence regarding marrying and porn. Half point only, because you left out women this time, lol.
Anyone who would type those words has obviously never read either.
Do you think pre-feminist women made porn, Gunda? Do you deny they would’ve been imprisoned? Do you deny that feminism legitimizes female promiscuity? Do you deny that feminists were (and still are) the ones fighting for equal pay, abortion, easy divorce, and free sex without consequences such as “slut shaming”? These are obvious facts.
Do you deny those things have led to lower birth rates?
It is nonsense. Feminism was inevitable. Women are generally as intelligent as men and wanted equal rights, just as slaves did. Once they got those rights, the old model we had for procreation no longer worked.