|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 27, 2023 19:55:58 GMT
Its a very nice house with tables laden with food and they are starving. What do you expect. I'm just laying out what happened. What do I expect? I expect a house to be invaded if such an invasion is not prevented. We are trying to prevent it. While still trying to remain human. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 27, 2023 20:01:04 GMT
I'm just laying out what happened. What do I expect? I expect a house to be invaded if such an invasion is not prevented. We are trying to prevent it. While still trying to remain human. I have a bright idea. If we turn all the farmland into flats, we won't be able to feed ourselves either. I find it a bit odd that uniquely among all peoples, our claim to 'humanity' depends upon us giving our territory away to others. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 27, 2023 20:16:47 GMT
We are trying to prevent it. While still trying to remain human. I have a bright idea. If we turn all the farmland into flats, we won't be able to feed ourselves either. I find it a bit odd that uniquely among all peoples, our claim to 'humanity' depends upon us giving our territory away to others. I'm not saying that. I'm simply saying I'm sick of being asked to justify my right to live in my own country. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 27, 2023 20:20:11 GMT
I have a bright idea. If we turn all the farmland into flats, we won't be able to feed ourselves either. I find it a bit odd that uniquely among all peoples, our claim to 'humanity' depends upon us giving our territory away to others. I'm simply saying I'm sick of being asked to justify my right to live in my own country In which case, i take it you would have no objection in principle to immigration into the uk being cut to a tenth tomorrow? |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 27, 2023 20:21:16 GMT
We are trying to prevent it. While still trying to remain human. I have a bright idea. If we turn all the farmland into flats, we won't be able to feed ourselves either. I find it a bit odd that uniquely among all peoples, our claim to 'humanity' depends upon us giving our territory away to others. No just helping others. Giving sanctuary is just a small part of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 27, 2023 20:28:02 GMT
I have a bright idea. If we turn all the farmland into flats, we won't be able to feed ourselves either. I find it a bit odd that uniquely among all peoples, our claim to 'humanity' depends upon us giving our territory away to others. No just helping others. Giving sanctuary is just a small part of it. Sanctuary limited by what principle? Before you answer, consider there are about a billion people who could desperately do with sanctuary and (according to you) we are no longer human if we refuse to offer it. The real problem here is high-handedness. You offer things that don't (solely) belong to you and mistake your gesture for charity rather than thievery. When your victims complain, you claim they aren't human and refuse to listen. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 27, 2023 20:30:50 GMT
I'm simply saying I'm sick of being asked to justify my right to live in my own country In which case, i take it you would have no objection in principle to immigration into the uk being cut to a tenth tomorrow? I'd need to see the working out before I signed off on that. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 27, 2023 20:40:44 GMT
In which case, i take it you would have no objection in principle to immigration into the uk being cut to a tenth tomorrow? I'd need to see the working out before I signed off on that. Sure. But in principle - There is nothing morally wrong with such a course. It's just a matter of interests. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 27, 2023 21:12:31 GMT
No you cannot but if parental choices result in a hard time for the offspring that may be unfair but not unusual. I cannot help my parents being white but apparently that fact impacts upon my ability to not be racist and as such I should be judged for them passing whiteness on to me. But it's not my parents decisions that are resulting in a hard time for me, it is the decisions of people like you choosing to practice the politics of exclusion and alienation. I ask again, what's the moral difference to singling out people who happened to borne of immigrants and people who happened to be born disabled for special treatment? Just as it is not my parents fault that I am singled out for special attention because I am white. We do single out disabled people for special treatment, they are not treated equally they are given special consideration. Interesting that morality creeps in here which of course is a very subjective issue. In a moral world we, and I mean the law, should treat all people equally irrespective of past and alleged injustices. If parents and forebears are morally excluded from any form of culpability passing on to the following generations then each person is judged and treated as he is. That is not what happens however, monies accrued, property inherited, injustices perpetrated are thrown into the mix and reparations demanded and justice sought all in the name of the name of morals |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 27, 2023 21:15:38 GMT
I would have said that they are not mad globalists but their attendance at various WEF does and the appearance of the WEF at do's that are basically nothing to do with them does, they raise the spectre of some form of joint action to bring countries under joint leadership and control. The thing is that the WEF tell us that is what they are trying to do, perhaps we should take them at their word. Don't sign up to it myself. The World Economic Forum are not that powerful. Possibly not but the good and the great that represent us are always seeking out their company and involved in discussions as to the direction of travel. If they had no power to influence they would not have a full house at Davos. |
|
|
|
Post by zanygame on Nov 27, 2023 21:30:20 GMT
No just helping others. Giving sanctuary is just a small part of it. Sanctuary limited by what principle? Before you answer, consider there are about a billion people who could desperately do with sanctuary and (according to you) we are no longer human if we refuse to offer it. The real problem here is high-handedness. You offer things that don't (solely) belong to you and mistake your gesture for charity rather than thievery. When your victims complain, you claim they aren't human and refuse to listen. No one said we could help everyone. But the opposite to everyone is not no one The problem with your view is it relies on me being high handed I.E making it my decision alone. But that is not the truth. I do not stand alone in my desire to help people. The reason we have the human rights act is not a bunch of lefty lawyers it is what the people wanted. But for the grace of god there go I. |
|
|
|
Post by happyhornet on Nov 27, 2023 21:47:57 GMT
But it's not my parents decisions that are resulting in a hard time for me, it is the decisions of people like you choosing to practice the politics of exclusion and alienation. I ask again, what's the moral difference to singling out people who happened to borne of immigrants and people who happened to be born disabled for special treatment? Just as it is not my parents fault that I am singled out for special attention because I am white. We do single out disabled people for special treatment, they are not treated equally they are given special consideration. Interesting that morality creeps in here which of course is a very subjective issue. In a moral world we, and I mean the law, should treat all people equally irrespective of past and alleged injustices. If parents and forebears are morally excluded from any form of culpability passing on to the following generations then each person is judged and treated as he is. That is not what happens however, monies accrued, property inherited, injustices perpetrated are thrown into the mix and reparations demanded and justice sought all in the name of the name of morals I've never singled you or anyone else out for special attention for being white, disabled people are equal before the law and nobody on this thread has asked them to justify their right to be here. "If parents and forebears are morally excluded from any form of culpability passing on to the following generations then each person is judged and treated as he is." You realise that's all I'm asking for? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Nov 27, 2023 21:58:58 GMT
Just as it is not my parents fault that I am singled out for special attention because I am white. We do single out disabled people for special treatment, they are not treated equally they are given special consideration. Interesting that morality creeps in here which of course is a very subjective issue. In a moral world we, and I mean the law, should treat all people equally irrespective of past and alleged injustices. If parents and forebears are morally excluded from any form of culpability passing on to the following generations then each person is judged and treated as he is. That is not what happens however, monies accrued, property inherited, injustices perpetrated are thrown into the mix and reparations demanded and justice sought all in the name of the name of morals I've never singled you or anyone else out for special attention for being white, disabled people are equal before the law and nobody on this thread has asked them to justify their right to be here. "If parents and forebears are morally excluded from any form of culpability passing on to the following generations then each person is judged and treated as he is." You realise that's all I'm asking for? You realise that what you are asking for is all that everyone is asking for and being roundly ignored by many on the left and even worse by the law in some instances. The point about exclusion of the forebears is that that is not how it is currently working and you asking for it on moral grounds is no more than others have been asking on moral grounds and been roundly ignored. Our government apologises in our name, our Monarch apologises in our name and demands are made regularly for reparations to be paid by the British state, to whom is not clear. I am pointing out that unfairness exists in bucketfuls. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Nov 27, 2023 22:20:27 GMT
Sanctuary limited by what principle? Before you answer, consider there are about a billion people who could desperately do with sanctuary and (according to you) we are no longer human if we refuse to offer it. The real problem here is high-handedness. You offer things that don't (solely) belong to you and mistake your gesture for charity rather than thievery. When your victims complain, you claim they aren't human and refuse to listen. No one said we could help everyone. But the opposite to everyone is not no one The problem with your view is it relies on me being high handed I.E making it my decision alone. But that is not the truth. I do not stand alone in my desire to help people. The reason we have the human rights act is not a bunch of lefty lawyers it is what the people wanted. Then answer my question - by what principle do we limit and to who? It's easy for you to rule out taking everyone and remain vague. However, i have seen nothing in your position that could (even theoretically) act as such a limit. The same argument that says that we should suffer what we are already enduring will still apply no matter what destruction is wrought - until the chaos climbs up into your garden and axes down your front door, you will remain unmoved. Under what circumstances precisely would you say 'that's enough' - when the uk is a smoking, third world wreck dominated by warlords? it looks to me very much like you simply do not accept that the people of the UK have any rights - that, if they have to give up anything to make you feel better, that they should be (if reluctant) forced to do so. This is not charity, it is a glass case example of an abusive position. If people like yourself could come up with some limit and conditions around your luxury opinions that you could be held to, perhaps that would take some heat from the discussion. However, we can all see that the very same absolutist, moral imperative type arguments you use to discount any objection, would also forbid such a limit. Of course you aren't the only person. There are a significant minority of seriously confused people. I blame the parents |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Nov 27, 2023 22:24:22 GMT
Well that is about the standard of most of your arguments nowdays. Let me educate you - For more than two decades now the UK has been trapped in a low-skill, low-wage, high immigration cycle. Companies don’t invest in machinery or training because it is always cheaper simply to bring in foreign workers instead. In the mean time our GDP per capita has fallen unlike other industrialised countries who didn't go down the mass immigration route where GDP has risen. Let me tell you I know all that and more. Well you dont show it with the standard of your arguments - nonsense about dogs and rabbits makes you come across as thick as pigshit. |
|
