Icelander said:

I think the fact that men get higher pay for the same work as women makes them second class.  We have a ways to go also in the fair treatment of women.  Not to compare with the nonsense that can go on in other cultures  but we've been there ourselves in some ways in our not too distant past.

---

qman said:

Come on now, you're trying to rationalize the obvious, the people in the West are far more tolerant of homosexuality, women rights, different cultures, different races, and different religions than all of the cultures that you love so much. 

You're the one that is constantly rationalizing and defending the actions of sexist bigots as long as they aren't white. 

---

Tipote said:

qman said:

Come on now, you're trying to rationalize the obvious, the people in the West are far more tolerant of homosexuality, women rights, different cultures, different races, and different religions than all of the cultures that you love so much. 

You're the one that is constantly rationalizing and defending the actions of sexist bigots as long as they aren't white. 

---

I didnt disagree that the west is more tolerant of homosexuality, womens rights, etc etc. I have even said that many people coming into Europe have very outdated attitudes towards women and gays and that is a serious issue for integration. I have met many christians in the west also with very homophobic views. I think many muslims are very open to westernisation. Look at Palestine. Look at the Arab Israelis who function superbly within a "first world" environment (except for the ethnocratic occupation). Other cultures seem generally to care more about education than white europeans. At least it is like that in the UK.

my point is that you cant judge our own culture or other cultures with such wide reaching generalisations.

I have not once defended actions of sexist bigots. You care about sexism but not about racism? except if its against white people, right?

---

Tipote said:

the West has come a long way in 50 years. i wouldnt call that a light year, but still.

---

The Ecstatic said:

agreed. there are women alive today who couldn't vote at one point in this country.

---

Icelander said:

I must have missed that "regardless of their actions"  part. Can you link me to where he said that?

---

Enlil said:

The Ecstatic said:

agreed. there are women alive today who couldn't vote at one point in this country.

---

Everyone in this country couldn't vote at one point.  There is no woman alive who was denied the right to vote in America based on her sex.

---

Enlil said:

Letting people get married isn't progress.  It's regress.  Progress would be getting rid of marriage as a legal status.

---

Agreed. But if we're going to keep it around, it should be available for all. The dismantling of an antiquated institution is brilliant, but equal opportunity to that institution isnot a bad consolation prize.

Tipote said:

As viktor says, pick up a history book sometime!

The involvement of the West in the third world is significant to say the least. It has been going on for well over 700 years.

No this isnt the argument to say that we should take in more people. The fact that these people are fleeing conflict is reason enough to offer them protection.

---

Tipote said:

qman said:

You can't blame global economic inequality as a justification for people trying to flood into the EU, the world is never going to be perfect, it's never going to meet your standards.

---

so the worlds never going to be perfect so why bother improving it? is that what you are saying? perhaps i missed your point.

I only said that this is a significant reason and its not going away. In fact, its only getting worse as global inequality increases.
If people die in their own countries from not being able to earn any money, they are going to go to somewhere they can. This is just a fact of life.

---

qman said:

Tipote said:

qman said:

"was your dad a racist pig"

Why would you compare men from Western culture with men from Middle Eastern or African culture? Do you not recognize there's a big difference in the treatment of women and different ethnicity's?

I would rather have a child raised in the West as opposed to a underdeveloped/primitive culture, but maybe you have no issue with cultures that raise their sons to view females as second class citizens.

---

I'm simply suggesting that maybe you got your racist views from your father.

some people within some cultures view females like that. It is not non-existant in the West either. people and cultures are not monolithic.

---

Come on now, you're trying to rationalize the obvious, the people in the West are far more tolerant of homosexuality, women rights, different cultures, different races, and different religions than all of the cultures that you love so much. 

You're the one that is constantly rationalizing and defending the actions of sexist bigots as long as they aren't white. 

---

no, you're the one rationalizing. he just explained to you, it's not the "entirety of culture's" that are the way you see them; because it is only the sum few who do not believe in those thing's you abhor, you simply do not seem them, hence you condemn THEM along with the rest of their countrymen; all the while blatantly ignoring the facets in the USA (and the rest of the "cultured world --according to Qman") which employ the same kind of people you say belong only to the "primative groups", you condemn those abroad, wholly, for having these types of people; (whilst ignoring the proponent's over yonder that do not believe what you say they believe); and then the people in the US's own rank & file that do the SAME THING'S,... YOU SAY, "they don't do that", which is bullshit.

so you're not only completely and entirely rationalizing your dislike for another group of people; but you're missing Tipote's point entirely as well. and now that i've said this, you're just going to miss it again, so i don't even know why i'm bothering.

Tipote said:

I have even said that many people coming into Europe have very outdated attitudes towards women and gays

---

qman said:

"I have not once defended actions of sexist bigots"

But haven't you when you defend Muslims in the EU regardless of their actions?

---

Tipote said:

I've said repeatedly that criminals should and will be deported.

---

WAN said:

Europe is not morally obligated to take in refugees.  If the heads of these European countries signed some sort of treaties obligating them to do so, then maybe the people of Europe should look to nullifying these treaties or electing leaders who will do so.

---

WAN said:

Tipote said:

qman said:

You can't blame global economic inequality as a justification for people trying to flood into the EU, the world is never going to be perfect, it's never going to meet your standards.

---

so the worlds never going to be perfect so why bother improving it? is that what you are saying? perhaps i missed your point.

I only said that this is a significant reason and its not going away. In fact, its only getting worse as global inequality increases.
If people die in their own countries from not being able to earn any money, they are going to go to somewhere they can. This is just a fact of life.

---

You seem to be saying that just because some people face hardship in their own countries, this justifies their flooding into Europe.  You just shrug, call this "a fact of life", then turn a blind eye as they come into EU.

This is kind of like saying a person might turn to stealing or pimping out girls if he cannot make a decent living, so We should just call this "a fact of life" and allow it to happen.  Let's just completely ignore the fact he broke laws.

---