I never defined it as that, you are the one who wants to be able to force your will upon others via brutality and extreme violence. I'm not a big fan of Nazis and fascism.
I simply think people should be free to do whatever they want, so long as they do not harm others.
You realise how many religion's you would have to violently break for that to happen right?
I have a feeling you have never lived anywhere but a upper middle class suburb. I have seen children and families used as traps... they set them on the road next to landmines and will either shot them if they move or if anyone gets out to move them.
The convoys dont stop for anything...
People are more cruel then your beliefs allow. What you suggest while sounding noble is nothing but at best ignorance and at worst cowardice. Violence is sadly a necessity of survival people won't be talked down from doing what they feel is right.
You don't have to break them, simply prevent them from breaking you and others.
Sorry, I grew up in a poor, rural town, joined the military, and have been in some of the worst places on the planet.
Once again, that does not justify your support of authoritarian national socialism. You are no different than those people threatening to show innocent civilians if they do not go along with their brutal agenda. I understand just how terrible people can be, I've seen the worst of humanity. I also see that you are no different than them.
No thanks, I'll go ahead and side with freedom on this one, thanks.
3...2...1... Feminists Fighting with the burka ban calling it Islamophobia and other patriarchy BS... Welcome to the twilight zone!
Since when is respecting one's customs synonymous with adhering to them?
Didn't they call themselves "technically a Nazi" to begin with? I think it's in someone's sig.
Funny how you first rail at @Ahovv for his portrayal of people like O'Reily, then write this horseshit. Mind you, my point is not pointing out that you write horseshit, because all of your previous posts here have been just that as well. Just focusing on your hypocrisy combined with some completely nonexistent moral high ground you believe yourself to stand on.
A world operating on other morals than those you have does not equal a world with no morals. Laws don't magically pop out of thin air. Good job showcasing why your earlier argument is built on nothing but crappy preconceptions and a ton of bias.
Ehh, isn't that still getting your cake while denying others their own, just in different scope? Some religions have symbols that cannot exactly be hidden from view completely. Sikhs for example (unless you expect them to cover their religious headwear with even more headwear). Those religions would be affected differently than, for example, Christians whose primarily worn symbol is a necklace with a cross.
Yes danes and sweds are friends.. Even if we historically have had a lot of wars, we have also been a single nation and what not, you are simply absurdly wrong in that statement.
You also lied again earlier stating that we had 100K immigrants in total - the number is around 10.4% of the population which is closer to 600K.
Its easy to push agendas if all you can do is lie.
Beyond the matter Burqas being prohibited in places where you are not allowed to have your face covered up like banks, stores, gas stations etc. And that their faces need to be revealed when going through customs, boarding public transport in the case where they have a travelling pass with a picture attached. I really couldn't give two shits about what other people are wearing.
I don't think that was him with the signature, that was a German guy. Primalmatter has stated his authoritarian national socialistic stance, and has mostly danced around the actual Nazi aspect of it. Of course, he's not shy about his disdain for any culture other than the one he wants to force onto others.
@Mehrunes
First of all kindly fuck off with the ad hominem.Funny how you first rail at @Ahovv for his portrayal of people like O'Reily, then write this horseshit. Mind you, my point is not pointing out that you write horseshit, because all of your previous posts here have been just that as well. Just focusing on your hypocrisy combined with some completely nonexistent moral high ground you believe yourself to stand on.
Where exactly is my hypocrisy and what's my high ground? This is the third time I state I am not religious. Learn to read or get blocked, I don't have the time neither the will to state the same thing 100 times for people that are so simple they immediately assume that if you praise a group you must be part of it.
I still recall in 9th grade when I told people that people should not be mocked for being gay and I immediately got called gay ( it was the f-word but whatever ). I'd expect more than 9th grader material from a forum, then again...
Could that be appeal to law?A world operating on other morals than those you have does not equal a world with no morals. Laws don't magically pop out of thin air. Good job showcasing why your earlier argument is built on nothing but crappy preconceptions and a ton of bias.
Law also allows you to cut part of a baby boy's dick. Law allows a cheating wife to take half of a man's money after she cheated on him with Jamal. Law allows a lot of shit that it should not.
So appealing to it is rather stupid.
We were talking morals. Law allows you to abort, which is immoral. End of argument.
We're talking about morals. That's 100% bias and preconceptions.crappy preconceptions and a ton of bias.
- - - Updated - - -
It's really simple, if you kill 6 million people you aren't Christian, because any Christian would realise his soul is sentenced to damnation.
I mean it doesn't take a genius.
But yes, he has quotes where he calls religion stupid, the death of ration.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Denmark
Maybe it's not technically ''murder'', but I'm not one for debating technicalities and convenient definitions.