http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/812608.html The number of incidents involving Germany's extreme right has increased sharply in the past year, a banner year for the neo-Nazi and xenophobic movements, according to figures from the German Ministry of the Interior. The German government announced a series of measures to combat the phenomenon this week, including funding for dozens of diversity-promotion projects and expansion of its "Youth for Tolerance and Democracy" program. Zypries' plans include legislating jail terms for racial incitement, prohibitions on Nazi symbols, and jail terms for Holocaust denial. In addition, the Justice Ministry is initiating pan-European cooperation in investigating right-wing activists. "We are worried by cross-border cooperation among Europe's extreme right," Zypries added in an interview with the daily Bild.
Will the numbers of imigrants coming to Europe in the last few years this kind of thing is inevitable.
Jail for the use of symbols and holocaust denial are not going to work. they just add to the audience. Education is the way to make things get smoother. The big problem is that europe is becoming a destination for too many muslims from third world nations. They are not assimulating into the societies and are becoming little Palestines in every country. It is going to be difficult for many nations. The poor and lower intelligence people of any race, have a tendency to reproduce at a higher rate than the well-to-do. This is a result of the availability of birth control. Add the pressures of providing health care and other aide to the poor, and you have the potential to get around 'natural selection'. I am not talking any particular political agenda here, just an observation of basic realities. It does not matter what approach is taken, it will have major political and ethical repercussions on our society.
The UK government has no idea how to handle the situation and as for our Home Office that's never out the news what a joke. I'm not surprised people here are voting for the BNP which is a sad reflection on the way things are going. As for the rest of Europe well may be there governments are not doing a very good job on this sad issue.
Seadog is correct as you can see the problem with the Mexican population in this country. The Catholic church tells them not to use birth control and they crank out babies like it is the end of the world. They don't put alot of value in education, in general, so the cycle goes on. The rich just sees them as a source of cheap labor. They could care less about the social problems coming in the future.
Seadog this is'nt the site to say that following a religion .Its cheap labour costs thats causing the problem .ie CHINA
Ta: I'm afraid to disappoint you... but the Catholic Church's doctrine on birth controll is far more complex than that. In correct Christian ethics, a human life can never, in any circumstance, be considered a problem on itself. Overpopulation isn't the problem, it is what we do with it. The problem in Mexico would be, not that there are 105.000.000 million people (India, China and the US are not Catholic countries and are the most populated countries on Earth, by the way), rather that 40% of those live in poverty and it makes almost impossible to properly provide even 1 child of his basical needs, let alone 9... However, the same doctrine applies for Europe, where the life standards wouldn't make that difficult to support large families... nonetheless, European birth rates are not only unethical, but biologically disgraceful... And, of course, the Cathecism isn't dogma: it's not forced on anyone. It's proved (and this is my main point) that the overwhelming majority of baptised Catholics don't follow the Church's doctrines about sexuality, not even in traditional, '3rd world' countries, like Mexico. Education is the problem, I agree.
OK General I will go along with what you say on the Catholic Church. I will refine it to saying too many people with little education are having more children that makes them even more poorer than ever. They move to other countries to find a better way of life but don't assimulate to the new culture and they turn into second class outcasts that are exploited by the rich to get richer. Jewish, Muslem, Gypsies, or what ever else you want to put in the box, who just stay in their own groups and don't mix in are distrusted by the citizens of their new country and they recieve the brunt of the hate crimes. It is not right but it seems to be true through out history. Perhaps it is human nature to distrust something new. I am glad you are posting again. How is the book going ????
Perhaps the reason so many Catholics do not adhere to Catholic rules? is due to the fact that for the majority, especially in the U.S.A., the religion is nothing more than a tradition. Mi cunado es Mexicanos. He and my hermana asked that I be my sobrina's godfather, I agreed. Cunado's sister was the godmother. I really believe that infant baptism and child catecism are rediculous. Do you think they really understand (even the teen) what they are doing. I'm not even Catholic nor have I seen any of the movies. In my opinion the entire thing was rediculous, but I did it anyway because my sister asked. Brother-in-laws sister, on the other hand, was very eager, had all kinds of trinkets and stuff like rosary beeds, some kind of cloth with a crucifix on it, ceremonial candel, etc. Mexicans are very "traditionally" Catholic.
I do not subscibe to any religion as being the problem with over population. There are some religions which have a theology problem with birth control, but the usual event is that the individuals follow their own dictates despite what their church says. A look at Italy a few decades ago would show that this happens. In most species, over population is controlled by the availability of food and water. We by-pass the natural selection process. That is not a bad thing per se, but it does mean that we have increasing numbers of people that cannot survive without assistance. In their efforts to find a better life, they move to those nations that hold hope for them. Often that means the United States or Europe. The folly of this is that lack of jobs, poor cultural assimulation, and other factors make it mainly a source of problems in once secure nations. In addition, it means that they are more receptive to rebellion and violence within their home countries. It means it is easier to promote hate. Especially against those who are better off. The poor education means that they are more willing to go to religion as a solution. Every religion offers hope. Even extremism, it offers them something that they can look forward to. The bad is that every religion states that they are the one and only true religion. In most cases, other religions are tolerated, but the lack of education, well being, is much more likely to forment hatred of 'unbelievers'.
Not true, Buddhism does not claim to be the one true religion (at least not in most of it's forms), simply to offer one way to a better life. It's an interesting debate, sad thing is that I don't see a way to deal with it. The unfortunate fact is that most people are far far too stupid to deal with 'differences' in a sensible manner.
I actually believe that Buddhism derived from Hinduism. Islam doesnt claim its the one true religion either. Not to go into current matters deeply, but Islam tolerates the other 'people of the book' (Jews, Christians) but its take on religion is that the other books are 'tainted' and arent what God said unto man. Islam saw itself as superior to the other religions, but only persecuted pagans and people who werent 'people of the book'.
Yes? Then find me one Christian (any flavour, Catholic ot Protestant) in Saudi Arabia, or try and wear a crucifix on your neck.
Saudi Arabia, the birth place of Islam, was a largely unihabited place in biblical times. It was mostly pagan (in the sense that people did not follow a monotheistic god, or if they did, it was through Zoroatanism [sp is wrong on that]) and desolute. The Arabs made a hard living in the desert there, and there were actually tribes of Jews in the area (as one would know from learning about the life of Muhammed). So Muhammed converted the tribes, then united them under the first Caliph (his father in law) which set in motion the spread of Islam. When the Muslims would conquer a city, they would leave the local people intact for the most part. Pagans were persecuted, but 'people of the book' were 'protected people' though had laws imposed on them. They didnt force people to convert. This was because they could only tax non-muslims. Christians and the like could be found along the rim of the Med. Sea, which is why there arent any in Saudi Arabia. Muslim exists there due to the fact that that is where it originated, and the 'pagan' Arabs could accept it more easily then Christianity, which they had little contact with. I believe that answers why there are not any Christians (etc) in Saudi Arabia.
Sorry Musso, it must be age creeping in, I meant to write "find me one Christian church, etc, etc.". It doesn't change much, though.
Not quite true, the original Buddha was called Siddhārtha Gautama and was originally a Hindu but eventually attained enlightenment and passed his teachings on to others. Since his teachings outline a way to live that may help you achve a particular state of mind or body, it can run alongside other religions perfectly well (hell, I know a Buddhist Catholic).
