Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug McClasky
Because you don't, you just care about goofy right wing Evangelical nonsense.
|
^ This looks to me like an off-the-scale irrelevant and unjustified personal attack on Neapolitan. Frankly, I think you should delete it or apologise, if not I'll be trying out that
"Report" button in half an hour or so - not to get you banned but to restore some dispassionate fairness to this debate.
Neapolitan makes an unarguable point that nobody here knows how much others care on the topic of European migration, so trying to score points about who cares more is futile.
__________________________________________________ _____
Quote:
Originally Posted by grindy
Most people just want Immigration to be somewhat controlled and limited, not to isolate themselves completely.
There's nothing wrong with that sentiment and calling everyone a Nazi is dumb, uncalled for and only strengthens the political right.
|
^ Thanks for your perspective from inside Europe, grindy. I agree completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan
But what I am getting at is that you immediately dismiss what Lins cause you deemed it as "naltionalist." Instead taking what he said and pondering the effects of over-population on an island with finite space and resources (which one would thing would be a humanity issues since it effects everyone regardless of politics) and you deemed it a political argument. Instead talking about fixing the problem where it starts so they don't have to flee, you rather thought-police people into having no opinion on the matter. You don't see it but you are playing favorites. That is not being equal.
|
Thank you for coming to my defense Neapolitan.
As you say, my argument was about pop density and I also don't quite get elph's logic whereby he dismisses that as "political".
Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
it is a political argument or some kind of opinion at the least to say that X population density is too high
the point of humanism is that it considers human lives equally regardless of nationality
|
^ This is a principle that I would subscribe to.
Quote:
|
so then we're talking about entire refugee families dying horrible deaths vs. Lisnaholic waiting in a longer line at the grocery
|
^ Of course in an argument everyone chooses examples that bolster their case. An equally valid alternative to your
vs. is this one:-
Quote:
|
refugees settle in England and flourish in a country that does, btw, permit immigration and provides many state benefits for people at subsistance level vs. Lisna's entire family struggle to get a job, a house or a heart operation because of saturation of the infrastructure.
|
__________________________________________________ ____________
And here´s a question that I hope is relevant: How many people on MB have a lock on their front door or a wall to their garden? That right there is your own personal immigration policy: the notion that what you have is yours and you want some control over who wanders in and shares it with you. That, afaik, is the point me, grindy and Neapolitan are making. How can such a universal human instinct be considered right-wing or nationalistic?