With a dying white race, why are we not encouraging more white births?

BUT THEY DON'T GET BEHEADED FOR ASSOCIATING WITH THE GOYIM and neither do the goyim.Oh good, you go on to show you don't think much of Islam, but your politics about it are dangerously nave. This is nonsensical lying propaganda. Waging my own jihad? That's nuts! I'm trying to get the TRUTH on the table here and nothing more. Their plan is to conquer the world for Allah and they use all means that happen to be available to them at any given time, and they've SAID SO, and right now the strategy is to build up their population in nonMuslim countries and conquer THAT way. They've SAID SO. Now they even have the victims on their side, unbelievable but true. They must really be thanking Allah. I've known all this about Islam since back before 9/11. It's those who are tolerant of Islam who are dangerously deluded.

Which whitewashed expose might that be?The fact that Islam considers itself to be "at war" with all nonMuslim nations means there is no ground for mutual trust ever. Where's the lie? There is no lie. Why should there be? If Islam were not a dangerous ideology why would anyone need to say it is? There's plenty of room in western societies for religions that don't threaten anybody. The problem with Islam is that it does. Why would anyone make this up? This is ad hominem slander. Why would I have any particular wish to believe either side of the argument? If I did have such a wish it would certainly be the wish that Islam were a benign religion that threatens nobody. Unfortunately that's not true. What reason would I have for siding with the "hatemongers?" I'm an honest person who believes what I'm persuaded is the truth.Unbelievers can't get the plain text of the Bible right, OR the Koran. You have to know how the believers read it, how the theologians teach it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Behavior can lie, too. What if it turns out to be lying?Besides, "polite, friendly, good citizens" probably describes most of your fellow Canadians, no? There's nothing "Christ-like" about such ordinary expected behavior.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

For one thing the terrorists are not raving maniacs, they are people who are persuaded that Allah wants them to kill "infidels." For another, don't we hear all the time about this or that killer that nobody would ever have guessed it of such a nice quiet polite thoughtful person?In my experience people tend to be very nice in general so I don't know what you are talking about.As for the Sermon on the Mount, how that applies to this is so beyond me I'm speechless.

I think you've confused the Sermon on the Mount with some other part of scripture.And yes your peaceful Muslim friends COULD suddenly stab you in the back if things reach a point where they feel it's time to obey Allah on that point.There's nothing more to say about this, is there? I hope you're right but I suspect you may find out you're not.

That's the Beatitudes, and what you'd quoted before didn't even sound like the Beatitudes. What you were referring to before was Paul's list of the fruits of the Spirit, not the same thing. Whatever, it doesn't really matter because you are really only concerned to say you like Muslims better than Christians so we can leave it at that. Obviously. As I said, I hope you are right to trust them, but even a slight knowledge of what Islam teaches should give you pause.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

OK, though I never think of it as part of the Sermon on the Mount myself. In any case ringo was still wrong: he was not referring to the Sermon on the Mount at any point, including the Beatitudes. The only part of it he could muster was the line about meekness, but that isn't what he was talking about before.ABE: From his Message 145: That list is from Paul's list of the fruits of the Spirit in Galatians 5:22-23: Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Obviously the OP is using the common idea that we encounter all the time on official forms to identify our "race" and on those forms "white" is usually designated "Caucasian." That's how we all understand it and there's no need for all this sciencey pedantry, it just confuses things.

Using the casual idea of the white race there really has been a serious reduction in the "white" population just through the emphasis on reducing family size that we all encountered decades ago. It was some sort of offense to have more than two children, to replace each parent and no more, and this thinking came out of the idea of a population explosion put forth by Malthusians. Perhaps the "government" didn't push this idea, I don't know, but it was a very effective influence. The only people who took this truly seriously were the "white" race (the Protestants anyway since Catholics were always encouraged to have many children), and the result has been the serious reduction in the white population as compared with others who don't accept those principles.

Yeah yeah yeah, but all that pedantic information is just a way of distracting from the simple use of the term in the OP that we are ALL familiar with.

I'm sure all that is true but as far as this thread goes it just adds to the confusion. GIA started the confusion by making the "white race" into a genetic group, attributing the cultural achievements of Europeans (which is what I suppose he means) to genetics when it's got nothing to do with racial genetics anyway.You can talk about the achievements of western civilization but that isn't about race. And of course I attribute those achievements to the Christian religion, at least the Christian religion since the Reformation. But GIA hates Christianity so he's got his head tied in a knot about the whole subject in my opinion.But if you stick to the simple common meaning of "white race" as we casually -- and officially -- use the term, he's right that "whites" are declining in numbers and as I said in another post I think that's due to the big scare about overpopulation that got the more highly educated and non-Catholic "whites" to be good citizens and cut down on their own population.Which does happen to mean reducing the cultural influences that built western civilization too because it just so happens they are linked. So Reformation Christianity is dying out however you look at it, and other "races" or cultures are growing in influence. Not for the good of anything in my opinion of course.Not that you'll accept my interpretation of any of this either but oh well.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I thought I was just adding my view to the mix, not "worrying" about anything. I happen to remember the push about overpopulation and I know it influenced people in my immediate circle, and I remember an attitude of moral indignation that anyone would have more than two children, so I extrapolate from that. Abortion of course contributed to the reduction, but that also affected the black population, perhaps even more, I'm not sure. And no doubt other factors you mention. Doesn't change what I said though, about the attitude among "whites."

My origins were working class too, but I moved up in the world I suppose, which is where I encountered the attitude I'm talking about. I guess we could argue about what had the biggest influence but I think GIA is right that there's a general decline in the population of the "white race" somehow or other, and it seems to me the overpopulation theory has other sources, not just my memory. But whatever, I don't suppose we could prove anything about it one way or the other.

I read somewhere recently that the decline in Europe's white population is an argument in favor of importing lots of Muslims to replace them.

People say that but the culture of Greece disappeared completely in Europe until the Renaissance, had no part at all in the formation of European culture to that point. Roman Catholicism DID bring about the Dark Ages, by usurping power over the various nations, suppressing the Bible and substituting its ridiculous pagan superstitions. It was the influence of the Bible after the Reformation that built up Western Civilization. The Renaissance had some influence as the ancient pagan writings were made available, but the Bible is what encouraged the orderly society that made for prosperity, and certainly the prosperity of America. That too is a bit of politically correct revisionist history. The Arab science was limited to Spain and really didn't have anything to do with the development of empirical observational experimental science that was based on the Reformation view of the God of the Bible. Yes the Renaissance had some influence but this too is mostly revisionist history to put the real influence of the Reformation in the shade. Aristotle for instance was elevated in Roman Catholicism to the point that priests were deprived of the Bible and read nothing but that pagan philosopher. It wasn't Catholicism with its pagan philosophy and superstitions that made the west the great success it became, it was Protestantism. Certainly the case in America. Why are so many trying to escape the Catholic countries South of us? Because the Catholic influence does not develop prosperous orderly societies like the U.S. All that probably plays a part I'm sure. But yes it is a matter of culture. The main difference in the west that improved our culture was Protestantism. It's dying out now so we should be seeing a major decline in all areas, which I think we are. Economic crash coming up they say. And some absolutely refuse to assimilate, and that's because we allow it because we're poisoned by the philosophy of multiculturalism which is major Political Correctness designed to undermine the west. I'm sure there are lots of influences but I think the main thing is that the west grew great on the basis of Biblical Christianity and now that anti-Christian influences are taking over (including tons of revisionist history foisted on our education system for almost a century now) we're headed for major destruction. We could argue over which of us that describes of course.And I hope you had a Merry Christmas too!