GenuaBoard

Imperial hydra wrote:

And, once you conform a society to become whay you know is best, (what everyone does) then, if suitable, you can give them more benevolent rule. Freedom, however, is an illusion.

And how is that any diffrent from what the far left is doing now?

Vedan wrote:

And how is that any diffrent from what the far left is doing now?

Again, the Left wants the disruption of what is natural and what is right.

Mikzahdneos wrote:

Again, the Left wants the disruption of what is natural and what is right.

So your solution is the same thing, but a diffrent set of morals?

Terra gloria sanctus wrote:

Athens is a very rare exception, and certainly isn't the majority, unlike what you are claiming, which is that society must allow some rights, which they do not.

Your right that society dosent have to give there people any rights or freedoms. We can live like the Chinese or the Taliban. But do we really want to live like those guys? Do you really want or need somebody to tell you what you can eat, or what clothes you can wear, or job you'll do, who you can marry, or when (or if) you can have children or not? There needs to be order but you must also have a limit of how much order.

Terra gloria sanctus wrote:

Of course, an organized society is wonderful (except not being allowed to have children), though I needs to be Christian.

Alright, well what if the society is Hindu, or Muslim, or atheist? Or what if it just decides one day it just dosent like you for whatever reason and you get labeled a "undesirable". What then? Your advocating giving the government untold powers to force your enemy's to live life the way you want them to, but have you considered what will happen if that same government goes against you and what you belive?

Imperial hydra wrote:

It can't and won't if in the right leadership. We're not Mary Antionette saying "let them have cake" but quite the opposite.

I bet Vladimir Lemin was thinking the same kind of thing right before he died and stalin took over. When your planning the future of as country you have to accept that it will eventually die off or morph into something completly diffrent from what you are initially going for. If you give somebody or some group all the power then they will eventually abuse it.

Terra gloria sanctus wrote:

Ah, then they are infidels and arms are necessary regardless of their level of tolerance. Only under a government of the truth faith do my statements matter, the rest are simply unbelievers

That sounds like Jihadism with a diffrent religion.

Terra gloria sanctus wrote:

Jihadism is simply Islamic Crusade, but the what makes Jihadism evil (at least for me) is that it is of an infidel heretical faith, in complete denial of the truth Christian faith.

So yes. What's wrong with letting people pick whatever religon they want to follow? If god gave humans free will and the ability to follow his rules or not, then it's clear he was expecting some people to not follow his laws. If everybody has the choice to worship there god whatever way they want (or not) then that just lets god judge people the best he can. If somebody follows all his rules, but they do so because they are forced to, then they are not sincere believers.

That's also not counting the fact that we have no guarantee what our afterlife will be like or what the "one true faith" even is. Personally I'm if the belife that if there is one true abrahamic god, then he will accept Christians and muslims both if they follow the rules of there respective religion correctly.

Don't mean to interrupt, but this conversation seems quite interesting. You mentioned women earlier; in my opinion, our goal shouldn't be the restriction of women, but the encouragement of the natural roles. Both men and women can do something that their opposite gender can't. And in the end, each man's and woman's goal should be to make a family based on honesty - not those fake modern relationships we witness nowadays that have zero true emotions and motives -, and to pass on the care, morals and wisdom to the next generation, their children. What the left seeks to enforce is the ideal that anyone can be a man, and anyone can be a woman, which is definitely wrong.

Moving on to governmental matters and authoritarianism: for an authoritarian state to work, the leadership of the state must be worthy of such responsibility; it must care for its nation, its sovereignty, its people and their welfare. It must not act only in favour of their close circle, or themselves. As for who gets to decide the leadership of such state, the cases of an elected worthy leadership are sadly not many; sometimes it has to be through temporary dictatorships, coup d'etats, juntas, etc.

Last, as in for religion, Christianity is a strong part of the culture of Europe, it must not be simply erased or corrupted by foreign ideals. Although, as our Christian teachings themselves say, we should not force the rest into our religion, but instead spread the word of the truth, the word of Christ and God. Those who prosecute us Christians and disrespect the truth shall be left to God's judgement.