The impact of democracy on the nuclear family

[godelian]

I have pointed out that most people on the planet believe that you cannot demand any benefits from anyone at all for whoring around.

Look at the OP. And then review your own posts. You were trying to tell us about how "the nuclear family" should be run. Look at the words you used above and there.

So I ask again: what gives Islamists any right to tell anybody what to do with "the nuclear family"? Their own behaviour in regard to their own women and children, and to a great many other men as well, is manifestly morally reprehensible and appalling. How would we ever look to the engineers of Oct. 7, or the Bataclan massacre, or 9-11, or Rotherham grooming gangs for moral clarity on anything, let alone "the nuclear family"? They've disgraced themselves, their religion and their people, in front of the entire world.

So, you make 35 claims in 5 sentences. This inevitably means that you do not provide justification for any single claim in particular. So, what you write, is necessarily unsubstantiated. It is useless to do that. Instead, focus on one claim and then substantiate it extensively.

[Immanuel Can]

I have pointed out that most people on the planet believe that you cannot demand any benefits from anyone at all for whoring around.

Look at the OP. And then review your own posts. You were trying to tell us about how "the nuclear family" should be run. Look at the words you used above and there.

So I ask again: what gives Islamists any right to tell anybody what to do with "the nuclear family"? Their own behaviour in regard to their own women and children, and to a great many other men as well, is manifestly morally reprehensible and appalling. How would we ever look to the engineers of Oct. 7, or the Bataclan massacre, or 9-11, or Rotherham grooming gangs for moral clarity on anything, let alone "the nuclear family"? They've disgraced themselves, their religion and their people, in front of the entire world.

So, you make 35 claims in 5 sentences.

No, I don't. You're having trouble counting? There were four, and all verifiable by masses of evidence in the press and on the ground. Where are the twin towers? What happened at the Bataclan? What's the controversy in Rotherham today? What happened on Oct. 7th? All are documented, all out-in-public.

They aren't even hard to substantiate: they're impossible for even a moderately-informed person not to know about.

I'll ask again: what makes Muslims so allegedly morally superior in relation to "family" dynamics that they can lecture anybody else, when their own record is so wretched?

And you know the answer.

[godelian]

Where are the twin towers? What happened at the Bataclan? What's the controversy in Rotherham today? What happened on Oct. 7th? All are documented, all out-in-public.

Yes, possibly, but in what sense are they even related to the OP?
So, what does any of that have to do with the price of eggs in China?

[Immanuel Can]

Where are the twin towers? What happened at the Bataclan? What's the controversy in Rotherham today? What happened on Oct. 7th? All are documented, all out-in-public.

Yes, possibly, but in what sense are they even related to the OP?

"Possibly"? "Possibly"? Rubbish! It's definitely. And you know it. And the substantiation is abundant.

So don't talk about Islam's right to speak about "family values." They don't value life at all, even their own wives and children's, and certainly not the lives of anybody non-Islamic. So why do they get to speak to us about their wonderful "family values"?

They have no high ground to stand on.

[Gary Childress]

If a male and female cannot keep their genitals to themselves, why should the child and mother be penalized for it, but not the male?

The main idea is that nobody is going to do anything about it. Both adulterers get nothing.

Just think of it. A woman decides to whore around and ends up getting pregnant. Why would anyone else spend effort on trying to figure out who exactly impregnated her? Why would anyone else spend effort on trying to extract money from that man? As far as I am concerned, the whore is on her own. Let her figure it out!

Furthermore, the man may not even be interested. It's not because he blew her back out that he gives a flying fart about that woman. If it was just a one-night stand, he may not even remember!

So, if he doesn't want to deal with it, then it is simply her problem.

The adulterous female gets stuck supporting the child at her expense but the equally adulterous male does not. How is that fair? The child gets shafted having to live an impoverished life compared to most of the other children. The child didn't do anything to deserve it. In the end, it's the irresponsible parents who are to blame, of which the female assumes responsibility for the incident and the male walks away clean. How is that ethical?

[godelian]

Where are the twin towers? What happened at the Bataclan? What's the controversy in Rotherham today? What happened on Oct. 7th? All are documented, all out-in-public.

Yes, possibly, but in what sense are they even related to the OP?

"Possibly"? "Possibly"? Rubbish! It's definitely. And you know it. And the substantiation is abundant.

So don't talk about Islam's right to speak about "family values." They don't value life at all, even their own wives and children's, and certainly not the lives of anybody non-Islamic. So why do they get to speak to us about their wonderful "family values"?

They have no high ground to stand on.

The OP wasn't about Islam. You want to make the conversation about Islam, but that is truly silly, because you perfectly well know that I don't give a flying fart about your opinion on Islam.

[godelian]

The adulterous female gets stuck supporting the child at her expense but the equally adulterous male does not. How is that fair?

After sex, it is the female who gets pregnant. The male does not. How is that "fair"?

Seriously, why does a sexual act lead to pregnant females and not to pregnant males? Isn't that outrageously "unequal"? Aren't we all supposed to be "equal"? Why are there even males and females? That is the root cause of inequality!

[Immanuel Can]

Yes, possibly, but in what sense are they even related to the OP?

"Possibly"? "Possibly"? Rubbish! It's definitely. And you know it. And the substantiation is abundant.

So don't talk about Islam's right to speak about "family values." They don't value life at all, even their own wives and children's, and certainly not the lives of anybody non-Islamic. So why do they get to speak to us about their wonderful "family values"?

They have no high ground to stand on.

The OP wasn't about Islam.

No, but you made it that.

If you don't think that it's Islam that has the superior view of "the nuclear family," just say so now.

[godelian]

If you don't think that it's Islam that has the superior view of "the nuclear family," just say so now.

The OP does not even mention Islam.

[Immanuel Can]

If you don't think that it's Islam that has the superior view of "the nuclear family," just say so now.

The OP does not even mention Islam.

But you did. And I'm talking to you, to find out if you have some moral resource that addressed the OP.

Islam isn't it.

[godelian]

If you don't think that it's Islam that has the superior view of "the nuclear family," just say so now.

The OP does not even mention Islam.

But you did. And I'm talking to you, to find out if you have some moral resource that addressed the OP.

Islam isn't it.

It does not matter to me that Islam is not a moral resource to you. You fail to comprehend that we have different benchmarks for right and wrong. That is why we are fundamentally incompatible. There are multiple different religions here in SE Asia, but we pretty much always come to the same conclusion, regardless of religion. So, we are fundamentally compatible. These people here clearly agree with me that a woman who got pregnant by whoring around cannot claim anything from anybody. Furthermore, I do not want to be compatible with people in the West, because I am convinced that the West is unsustainable and will soon crash and burn.

[Immanuel Can]

The OP does not even mention Islam.

But you did. And I'm talking to you, to find out if you have some moral resource that addressed the OP.

Islam isn't it.

It does not matter to me that Islam is not a moral resource to you.

It's not for anybody. It has conducted itself so shamefully, thoroughout its entire history, but especially lately, that it has no right to lecture anybody. Even Islamists themselves should know better.

[godelian]

It's not for anybody.

There are 2 billion Muslims, whether you like it or not. Seriously, you are delusional. You keep screaming in the wind while nobody is listening to you. When are you finally going to understand that your opinion on Islam is completely irrelevant?

[Immanuel Can]

It's not for anybody.

There are 2 billion Muslims, whether you like it or not.

Islam's an ideology, not a people. Ideologies can change, and the people will still live. So you're being irrelevant.

Muslims need to look at what their religion is doing, and get a moral conscience. Because clearly, something is very badly missing from Islam's moral conscience. And while they're becoming self-aware, they should stop lecturing anybody else about "family." They have no expertise to offer.

[godelian]

It's not for anybody.

There are 2 billion Muslims, whether you like it or not.

Islam's an ideology, not a people. Ideologies can change, and the people will still live. So you're being irrelevant.

Muslims need to look at what their religion is doing, and get a moral conscience. Because clearly, something is very badly missing from Islam's moral conscience. And while they're becoming self-aware, they should stop lecturing anybody else about "family." They have no expertise to offer.

Keep screaming in the wind while nobody can hear you.