Europe submits voluntarily

[KeepTalking]

Par for the course for xenophobes. Your posts are another great example of what it means to be terribly afraid of otherness.

It's Ms Greening that seems "to be terribly afraid of the otherness".

Well, of course. Since I noted that your posts are another example of that, it only stands to reason that her comments are as well. It seems you are capable of reason after all, which leads one to wonder why you seem so loathe to actually put that capability to use.

 

[Warpoet]

He's not trying to decide whose holy books--he's saying they all belong in the dustbin of history.

Why do you butt into other peoples' exchanges if you don't read or comprehend the context?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

He's not trying to decide whose holy books--he's saying they all belong in the dustbin of history.

Why do you butt into other peoples' exchanges if you don't read or comprehend the context?

I understood it, you jumped on the Islamic part of it and missed the rest of it. He doesn't like any holy books, not just the Koran.

 

[whichphilosophy]

If you are talking about post-Brexit immigration from Europe, you are just making stuff up. Nobody has any idea of what the rules might be in that case. Brexiters go on and on about a 'points based system' without ever giving any details or specifics (which is very characteristic for just about everything in their campaign).

To illustrate the extent and depth of the issues, and the reality of current lack of ideas, just a couple of days ago the cross-parliamentary House of Lords European Union Committee said:

“It is estimated that 2 million Brits live in other EU countries … Take elderly people who have lived for 10 years in Spain. After five years, they acquired a right of permanent residence as citizens of the union and that includes access to the Spanish healthcare system.

“If we leave, what do we do about vested rights? Do we recognise rights to permanent residents that have arisen? What transitional rights do we give somebody who has been working for four years in the UK and has children at school and so forth?

Let us not forget that for every example in the UK there is an example of a UK citizen elsewhere. We would want to tidy that up. My guess is that the inclination of government and parliament would be to be generous as regards those who had already made their lives in the UK, knowing that it would be likely to be reciprocated.”

The difficulties of negotiating a separation should not be underestimated. Addressing the committee, Edward concluded: “The long-term ghastliness of the legal complications is almost unimaginable.”

“The rights of some 2 million UK citizens living abroad would need to be determined, as would the rights of a similar number of EU citizens living in the UK. This is complex stuff – you are talking about rights to residence, to healthcare and to schooling, about maintenance payments and access to children, about research projects and contracts that cross borders …Sorting all this out would be a daunting task.”

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/04/brexit-britons-abroad-rights-european-union-referendum

Bottom line: nobody knows what rules would come into effect post-Brexit, and Brexiters do nothing to expel the appearance that they are clueless in this respect. The most likely outcome in my view is that most if not all of the free movement rules will remain in effect, just as is the case for non-EU countries Norway and Switzerland. To avoid that, Britain would have to cut loose its ties with the EU to a shockingly expensive extent. I don't think the country can afford that.

There are a lot of uncertainties and a negotiated withdrawal could take a number of years. However, the likelihood of extensive travel restrictions beyond what I said is remote. Also I doubt if there will be sudden laws deporting those Europeans already allowed to be in the UK. They may even be given residency and allowed to apply for UK Citizenship after a number of years. What you mentioned about free movement rules would be just about right. Of course there are a lot of conflicting estimates as to the outcome. I tend to think this will be overall favourable.

 

[Warpoet]

I understood it, you jumped on the Islamic part of it and missed the rest of it. He doesn't like any holy books, not just the Koran.

You didn't understand shit. Go back two posts and you'll see he was defending a man who explicitly singles out the Koran for censorship.

If you can't be bothered to read first, butt out.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Why do you butt into other peoples' exchanges if you don't read or comprehend the context?

I understood it, you jumped on the Islamic part of it and missed the rest of it. He doesn't like any holy books, not just the Koran.

paraphrasing

Angelo: We should ban Islam/the Quran

Warpoet: Free speech, free society and such.

Angelo: I think we should ban all religion/holy texts

Warpoet: Free speech, free society and such

Loren Pechtel: Confusing wanting things generally and trying to ban stuff.

 

[angelo]

The world will NEVER be a better place until ALL so called holy books are placed in the mythological history sections of public libraries.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The world will NEVER be a better place until ALL so called holy books are placed in the mythological history sections of public libraries.

But do you think it's up to each person to figure it out for themselves?

 

[bigfield]

The world will NEVER be a better place until ALL so called holy books are placed in the mythological history sections of public libraries.

There are no mythological history sections--that would be stupid.

There is history, which is located in Class 900 in the Dewey system, and then there is religion, including mythology, located in Class 200. Religious works belong in Class 200 and should never make their way into the history stacks. I would say your inane demands are unbelievably ignorant, but having read the rest of your posts in this thread, the ignorance is entirely believable.

But please, feel free to go picket a library somewhere. The news can print your reddened face and poorly-written placard, and then the nation can collective point and say 'what a dickhead'.

ETA:

Besides the apparent fact that you have never actually been in a library (big surprise), your reasoning is piss-poor. Moving religious texts around a library would have fuck-all impact on anything. The idea that failing to re-file the Qu'ran and Bible, in a place that is avoided by the majority of the population, will halt the progress of human civilisation is the kind of bizarre idea that can only be uttered by the mentally-impaired.

 

[angelo]

I stand corrected. They should all be placed in the fiction section then. Or rename the ' religious' section of a library ' ancient mythological fiction.'

If I was the librarian, the koran would be placed among books in the military section.

 

[bilby]

I stand corrected. They should all be placed in the fiction section then. Or rename the ' religious' section of a library ' ancient mythological fiction.'

If I was the librarian, the koran would be placed among books in the military section.

If you were a librarian, the whole of the HR department that hired you would be subjected to disciplinary action.

 

[bigfield]

I stand corrected. They should all be placed in the fiction section then. Or rename the ' religious' section of a library ' ancient mythological fiction.'

You may stand corrected, but you haven't learned anything. Both of those suggestions are also inane.

Works of fiction are found in the literature section--Class 800--and would be made infinitely more difficult to navigate if the contents of the 'religion' Class were moved there. It would make the classification system poorer and less meaningful.

The religious section of the library contains not merely the religious texts themselves, but also anti-religious texts by atheists including Dawkins and Harris are found in this section. You can't just re-label the whole fucking section 'ancient mythological fiction'.

If I was the librarian, the koran would be placed among books in the military section.

Luckily for the rest of us, we have competent librarians whose knuckles are clear of the floor, so your 'help' is not required.

There is no 'military' section. Libraries aren't arranged like a fucking Dymocks. 'Military' is split into many different categories, including military science, military law and military engineering, while military history texts are spread throughout these sections, plus the history sections. In addition, works such as Caesar's Commentarii can be found in the 870's, under Latin Literature. Religious texts don't belong in any of these sections.

 

[DrZoidberg]

 

[angelo]

You may stand corrected, but you haven't learned anything. Both of those suggestions are also inane.

Works of fiction are found in the literature section--Class 800--and would be made infinitely more difficult to navigate if the contents of the 'religion' Class were moved there. It would make the classification system poorer and less meaningful.

The religious section of the library contains not merely the religious texts themselves, but also anti-religious texts by atheists including Dawkins and Harris are found in this section. You can't just re-label the whole fucking section 'ancient mythological fiction'.

If I was the librarian, the koran would be placed among books in the military section.

Luckily for the rest of us, we have competent librarians whose knuckles are clear of the floor, so your 'help' is not required.

There is no 'military' section. Libraries aren't arranged like a fucking Dymocks. 'Military' is split into many different categories, including military science, military law and military engineering, while military history texts are spread throughout these sections, plus the history sections. In addition, works such as Caesar's Commentarii can be found in the 870's, under Latin Literature. Religious texts don't belong in any of these sections.

The libraries that I've been in have works by Dawkins, Hitch, and Harris in the non fiction section. Of course the larger ones have apologists and theology sections. Books critical of religion are generally not in the same section as theologies.

 

[Warpoet]

Angelo: I think we should ban all religion/holy texts

That's not what angelo said and not what Geert Wilders believes. Wilders, from everything I've read, only wants to ban the Qur'an and that's what the discussion was about.

Wanting to ban all holy books is an extreme position I don't support but not the same thing because it's at least being consistent, which isn't what Wilders, angelo and the like do. Just like "I don't think people should be allowed to reproduce" is an extreme position I don't support, but "I don't think black people should be allowed to reproduce" is quite different and something only a massive dickhead would say.

 

[KeepTalking]

You may stand corrected, but you haven't learned anything. Both of those suggestions are also inane.

Works of fiction are found in the literature section--Class 800--and would be made infinitely more difficult to navigate if the contents of the 'religion' Class were moved there. It would make the classification system poorer and less meaningful.

The religious section of the library contains not merely the religious texts themselves, but also anti-religious texts by atheists including Dawkins and Harris are found in this section. You can't just re-label the whole fucking section 'ancient mythological fiction'.



Luckily for the rest of us, we have competent librarians whose knuckles are clear of the floor, so your 'help' is not required.

There is no 'military' section. Libraries aren't arranged like a fucking Dymocks. 'Military' is split into many different categories, including military science, military law and military engineering, while military history texts are spread throughout these sections, plus the history sections. In addition, works such as Caesar's Commentarii can be found in the 870's, under Latin Literature. Religious texts don't belong in any of these sections.

The libraries that I've been in have works by Dawkins, Hitch, and Harris in the non fiction section. Of course the larger ones have apologists and theology sections. Books critical of religion are generally not in the same section as theologies.

You seem to be describing a book store, rather than a library.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Angelo: I think we should ban all religion/holy texts

That's not what angelo said and not what Geert Wilders believes. Wilders, from everything I've read, only wants to ban the Qur'an and that's what the discussion was about.

Wanting to ban all holy books is an extreme position I don't support but not the same thing because it's at least being consistent, which isn't what Wilders, angelo and the like do. Just like "I don't think people should be allowed to reproduce" is an extreme position I don't support, but "I don't think black people should be allowed to reproduce" is quite different and something only a massive dickhead would say.

Free speech and free expression is sacred to me. So I'd be willing to go to war and fight for people to practice their religion, no matter how retarded it is. The right to be an idiot is a basic human right as far as I'm concerned. Just as much as I'd be willing and go to war to fight for non-Muslims to be able to express themselves freely criticising Islam.

We won't get rid of Islam by banning it's holy text. Any holy text is the best de-conversion material available. They're all retarded. Just like Mein Kampf is the best material in the world for getting people to turn away from Nazism. A book is just information. It's not a magical virus that penetrates the skull and creates zombies. Islam exists because enough people find it's message convincing. It's as easy as that. Religion is destroyed by arguments and if you want good arguments against Islam... read the Quran. Hard to do if it's banned.

 

[angelo]

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays
on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy,*which is as
dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this
fearful fatalistic apathy.*
The effects are apparent in many countries,*….*The fact that
in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to*some man
as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a
concubine, must delay the final extinction*of slavery until the
faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the
influence of the religion paralyses the social development of
those who follow it.*
No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from
being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant*and
proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout
Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and
were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of
science,*…, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as
fell the civilization of ancient Rome."*
Sir Winston Churchill;
(Source: The River War, first edition, Vol II, pages 248-250
London).
*
Churchill saw it coming.
*

 

[Warpoet]

And Churchill was a fucking notorious racist who allowed millions of Indians to starve to death because he viewed them as savages.

But, we can tally up the people surprised to see you citing such a source (it's zero).

It's really hard to describe how much this forum would improve overnight if they booted you the fuck out of here.

 

[angelo]

Typical blinkered view. Either agree with me or fuck off hey! Attack anyone that has a different view. The behead All those who insults the prophet! But ours is a religion of peace brigade.