I do not know much about British politics, but I bet that the white Christians are happy to vote for a Moslem, and claim that they should not discriminate. And the Moslem voters all voted for the Moslem to be mayor of London.
White Christians are the least racist people in the world, by far. They will readily accept all races, religions, nationalities, gender preferences, and whatever. No one else thinks that way.
I thought that it was illegal for Catholics to hold high political office in Britain. Didn't a recent Prime Minister wait until he was out of office to convert to Catholicism? Maybe Moslems are now more acceptable than Catholics.
Doesn't Britain still have an official state religion?
I don't know, but my hunch is that we are headed for another world war. The Moslems will attempt to take over Europe, once they think that they are critical mass. The Europeans will eventually get fed up with their leaders betraying them, and find that drastic action is needed to reverse the damage. It will be ugly.
24 comments:
"White Christians are the least racist people in the world, by far. They will readily accept all races, religions, nationalities, gender preferences, and whatever. No one else thinks that way." Could you make a more unsubstantiated generalization ? There is absolutely nothing to back this up, is there ? What study or analysis are you referring to ?
How many millions of people did white Christians enslave, then segregate when they couldn't get away with enslaving them ? How many white Christians want to keep foreigners out of the U.S. ? How many want to prevent Gay marriage and keep tjhem out of the military, etc. ? Who are they readily accepting is the real question. Almost no one as far as I can tell, other than other white Christians.
I don't know if you're a Christian or not but, do you consider yourself accepting of these other religions, races, nationalities and gender preferences ? Isn't the point of you blog to trash these people that you claim the white Christians accept ?
No, white Christians were the ones to abolish slavery. Gays are treated better in white Christian countries than any other. The USA takes more foreigners than any other country in the world.
The point of this blog is not to trash anyone. I do defend white Christians against slander such as yours.
http://www.npr.org/2014/10/29/359963625/dozens-of-countries-take-in-more-immigrants-per-capita-than-the-u-s
Who enslaved the slaves in the U.S. in first place ? White Christians, right ?
It's also worth remembering which country is responsible for the legacy of persecution faced by millions of LGBT people today. There are more than 75 countries where homosexuality is still criminalised: "Forty-two of them are former British colonies so we can see where the legacy comes from," says Cooper.
I'm still convinced the point of the blog is to trash everyone who's not just like you.
No, I'm not talking about bakers and cakes. Did you read the part about it being criminalized ?
Did the slaves enslaves themselves ?
The choice for Mayor was basically Muslim or Jew? What a choice that is. You can have any Mayor you like as long as he is not a native. What are the odds the new Mayor's personal staff will be jammed full of other Pakistanis, and white natives will be under represented if there are any at all? Will council contracts end up awarded to more Pakistani businesses than before because their friends in local government have tipped them off about the bids or altered them?
The anonymous guy above has been cuckolded. I just see his ilk as a lost cause. They do not get it until the very end. Like the British Colonel in Bridge Over The River Kwai. In some way they get misplaced respect for their ideals, but ultimately they are completely at odds with reality and worthy of nothing but disdain, and they do not realize their folly until the end is nigh.
Biblical Underpinning for Slavery
For many centuries slavery was perfectly acceptable to Christians. Christians had no doubt that it was divinely sanctioned, and they used a number of Old and New Testament quotations to prove their case. Looking at the relevant passages it is clear that the Bible does indeed endorse slavery. In the Old Testament God approved the practice and laid down rules for buyers and sellers (Exodus 21:1-11, Leviticus 25:44). Men are at liberty to sell their own daughters (Exodus 21:7). Slaves can be inherited (Leviticus 25:45-6). It is acceptable to beat slaves, since they are property — a master who beats his slave to death is not to be punished as long as the slave stays alive for a day or two, as the loss of the master's property is punishment enough:
And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. Exodus 21:20-211
Slaves were enslaved by people that were Christians...
If a slave is gored by a bull, it is the master, not the slave, who is to be compensated (Exodus 21:32). Time and time again the Old Testament confirms that slaves are property and their lives are of little consequence. To prove the strength of Job's faith, God sends Satan to test him by visiting disasters upon him. Amongst these disasters is the killing of Job's numerous slaves (Job 1). Neither God, nor Satan, nor the story's narrator finds it at all odd that people should be killed just to prove a point: they are only Job's property and their destruction is naturally bracketed with the loss of his livestock and vineyards.
The New Testament also regards slavery as acceptable. It instructs slaves to accept their
position with humility (Ephesians 6:5-8) and to please their masters in everything (Titus 2:9, cf. Colossians 3:22). They are commanded to serve Christian slave owners better than other masters (1 Timothy 6:1-2) "so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed". Even oppressive masters are to be obeyed according to 1 Peter 2:18. Jesus himself mentioned slavery more than once according to the New Testament, but never with the slightest hint of criticism of it. He even glorified the master-slave relationship as a model of the relationship between God and humankind (Matthew 18:23ff and 25:14ff). There are more than 75 countries where homosexuality is still criminalised: "Forty-two of them are former British colonies so we can see where the legacy comes from," Christians naturally interpreted this as not merely acceptance, but approval. If Jesus had opposed slavery he would, they claimed, surely have said so.
Homosexuality is criminalized in moslem countries because of white Christians....
There are more than 75 countries where homosexuality is still criminalised: "Forty-two of them are former British colonies so we can see where the legacy comes from," .
The Old Testament is not the best source of Christian beliefs.
It is true that slavery is mentioned in the Bible. What does that have to do with anything I said?
If you want to give an example of a Moslem country that is somehow better than a white Christian country, go ahead.
You said, "The slaves were enslaved by people other than white Christians." The Bible says that Christians had no problems with slavery.
Where in the Bible does it say that Christians enslaved anyone? It refers to slaves, but they could have been enslaved by others.
Jesus himself mentioned slavery more than once according to the New Testament, but never with the slightest hint of criticism of it. He even glorified the master-slave relationship as a model of the relationship between God and humankind (Matthew 18:23ff and 25:14ff).
Yes, the Bible mentions how christians enslaved people.
They are commanded to serve Christian slave owners better than other masters (1 Timothy 6:1-2)
Later, there were hundreds of thousands of Christians fighting and losing their lves in the American civil war to maintain slavery ?
:D When you start to see that the positions of power and influence are ridiculously over populated with tiny minorities in Western countries, perhaps you will see that what is called racism in the present day is actually anti-white. An Islamaphobe is a white man who is hated BY Muslims because he points out the terrorism and the rapes and the oppression. An Anti-Semite is a white man who is hated BY Jews for pointing out the hypocrisy of attitudes towards the West and Israel, and the ethnic nepotism. Basically the name calling all for pointing out the behaviors which emerge from their respective peoples which are harmful to the native European populations. As an aside, can one imagine the Mayor of Shanghai being fought between A Muslim and a Jew? If you had ever lived among Asians you would know how tribal they are.
The UK is 84% white, and whether Secular (read Atheistic Christian) or Christian, it is somewhat odd that members of small minorities like Pakistani Muslims and British Jews should be vying for London Mayor as candidates of the major two parties. Surely a Jew versus a Muslim is something one would more likely expect somewhere in the Middle East rather than South East England?
When you further come to realize that in game theory tribalism will beat individualism every single time, you will realize why what is happening to the West is happening at all. The West has eradicated racial consciousness from its population, and indeed racial pride.
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2016/05/09/a-mind-virus-most-malignant/
In other words, only non-whites and non-heterosexuals are allowed to be proud of who they are and their history and background. Cuckoldry.
People are waking up. You won't stop it with your protests from your slumber.
To the anonymous white Christian hater: I see you quote one Bible parable about forgiveness, and another about making use of gold. Neither condones Christians enslaving anyone. Is this the best you have?
Try comparing this to non-whites and non-Christians.
You are spreading anti-white and anti-Christian misinformation. And yes, that misinformation is good enuf for many people to hold grudges against white Christians.
If you object to my statement, then tell me: What people are less racist than white Christians? You have not even attempted to do that.
I'm not spreading any anti-white misinformation and hold no grudges anainst white Chrisitians.
Maybe your statement is correct. I just asked you to back it up with some facts and you've not even attempted to do that. You made the assertion, right ? What supports it ?
Here's the question that you've been dodging.
"White Christians are the least racist people in the world, by far. They will readily accept all races, religions, nationalities, gender preferences, and whatever. No one else thinks that way." Could you make a more unsubstantiated generalization ? There is absolutely nothing to back this up, is there ? What study or analysis are you referring to ?
I don't need to prove that you're wrong. Maybe you're not, I don't know ? If you're going to say something like this don't you think that it should be based on something other than, "prove that I'm wrong", otherwise what I'm saying must be true ?
Okay, you are not disputing the statement.
I think that it is obvious, and I have made many posts supporting the statement. I will post some more.
Regarding Great Britain, I don't understand how state religions and preventing people other than Christians from holding offices equate to, "They will readily accept all races, religions, nationalities, gender preferences, and whatever. No one else thinks that way." Seems to me that that's the oposite of accepting. It's exclusion, isn't it ?
Great Britain is accepting a Moslem mayor of London.
That's London, which is in Great Britain of course, but it's not Great Britain. The U.S. has sanctuary cities, but they are in opposition U.S. policies.
London is the heart and soul of Great Britain. And now it is occupied and governed by people who hate traditional British values.
I don't know enough about Britain to know if that's true or not. You could say that N.Y. is the heart and soul of the U.S. and governed by a socialist, too. Maybe the people are voting for who and what they want and that's an American and British value.
London is the capital of Britain. New York City is not the capital of America, or even of NY state.
Right, thet's why I said heart and soul and not capital of America or N.Y. Are we really talking about capitals or politics and people's will and values ?
To most Americans, New York city is just the place that wrecked the economy in 2008, and where the towers fell in 2001. Cruz even attacked Trump for being from NY. We have not had a NY President in a long time.
N.Y. wrecked the economy in 2008 ? As if a lot of mortgage brokers accorss the country didn't ? Tons of Americans throughout the entire counrty, lied on their mortgage applications to buy houses that they couldn't afford, didn't they ?
No president from N.Y. in a long time ? We haven't had a president from about 40 different states in a long time, too. I think that there's been 8 presidents from N.Y.. People don't have a problem electing presidents from N.Y., but this is something I hope that I'm wrong about. If people these days don't want a president from N.Y.that would be great. Then we wouldn't have to worry about Trump being elected. Maybe they are happy with presidents being from Illinois, as with the current president and they'll most likely, elect another from Illinois again.
Post a Comment