By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
KungKras on 15 January 2016
Edit Thread
mornelithe said:
KungKras said:

I don't see what that video is supposed to prove. I've seen those statistics too. Yes, the majority opinions of a lot of muslim demographics is horrific. But what is your solution? Abandoning our humanist values and start to discriminate against refugees?  Keep letting Saudi Arabia spread their filth throughout the world? Take a look at the demography section of this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Sweden  Which is what you should be looking at, since it's sweden we're discussing.

Only 15% of second-generation muslims in Sweden can be considered religious. 15%!!! One or two generations and they're done. This is a place where religion comes to die. I doesn't matter if some lunatics keep saying "We will convert europe" because they just don't get it. This is scandinavia. Religion is our bitch.

This is why I keep saying that as long as we spread out our immigrants, they will interact with our ideals and values, and ours will win, because they are modern. This is my solution, help the people fleeing hell, win the battle of ideas, and create a lot of ex-muslims that are well-equipped to bring modernity to the middle east. Progress can only be slowed not stopped.

EDIT: She didn't use the talking points I was talking about.

Um, no.  The only suggestion I've made in this thread was to support reformers like Maajid Nawaz and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, so jumping straight to the deep end of whatever the hell you're suggesting is a rather odd tactic in a discussion.  Which is why it's so difficult to have this discussion, because individuals like yourself purposefully assume the worst (or even worse, intentionally mischaracterize anothers intentions for the sole purpose of removing their voice from a discussion), and then broadcast it like that's what I was saying.  When I clearly said nothing to suggest that, whatsoever.  The problem is, when it's done in public, you brand someone a racist, or bigot, or a Nazi etc... and all of a sudden they're dogpiled on social media (nevermind that they're neither racist, a bigot or a nazi), but that's not the point of this tactic.  The point of this tactic is to control the discussion, to target intellectuals who actually do want to discuss things, to remove them from the discussion so that it can continue to be controlled by one side (CJ Werlemen, Reza Aslan, Glenn Greenwald and Cenk Uygar have employed this same tactic against Sam Harris, for example).  Please stop doing this.  For someone so interested in progress, the tactics you employ say otherwise.

So, if you actually want to discuss this, maybe consider changing your tactics.  Or at least separating your angst with other individuals, from one who's simply talking normally.

 

 

I thought you jumped in to defend the guy that was saying that Sweden is a rape captial. Noone in sweden except SD sympathisers say that. And for good reason. Sorry if I got that wrong.

I was asking you if those were the points you were making, I wasn't saying those were your positions. If you want to discuss, I made a lot of points in my previous comment. I thought I made a pretty good case for my positions.

 





I LOVE ICELAND!