I'm gonna introduce you all to a friend of mine and ....

[brycejones]

Where were you when the religious minorities of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan were suffering?

In fact, they are still being persecuted to this day and all I can see is P&N making excuses for it.

I will tell you as I told fskimospy.

Blow it out of your hole.

LOL, come on man, just answer the simple question:

So you agree that India discriminates based on religious affiliation, you just think that’s good - correct?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Your country has already enabled and supported it.

Don't think we will forget. The CAA is one of the steps to ensure something like this will never happen again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_genocide

Sure it will, lol

 

[fskimospy]

But you call all Russians as degenerate? And you think that is a good thing?

Accurately describing things is good, yes.

Regardless, this is more flailing by you to avoid saying you support religious discrimination.

 

[Braznor]

Accurately describing things is good, yes.

Regardless, this is more flailing by you to avoid saying you support religious discrimination.

So Russians are fair game for you to slander because of one war? The US has performed ten times worse in Bangladesh.

And the CAA is only as discriminatory as the Lautenberg agreement:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson–Vanik_amendment#Lautenberg_Amendment_(1990)

Lautenberg Amendment (1990)[edit]​

Enacted on November 21, 1989, the Lautenberg Amendment, Public Law 101–167, took effect in 1990 which provided refugee status in the United States for nationals from the Soviet Union and later the former Soviet Union, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania who are Jews, Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Catholics or Ukrainian Orthodox; as well as nationals of Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia; and Jews, Christians, Baha’is and other religious minorities from Iran.[31] The Lautenberg measure allowed refugee status to people from historically persecuted groups without requiring them to show that they had been singled out.[31][32] Under the Lautenberg Amendment, 350,000 to 400,000 Jews from the former Soviet Union which had not presented any form of evidence of persecution gained entry to the United States by October 2002 according to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.[citation needed] Beginning in 2002, a special "Refugee Corps" in the Department of Homeland Security handled issues involving the Lautenberg Amendment.[33]

SO fskimospy, in case you feel the need to ask me the question again. I will refer to you what I said before and blow it out of your own hole.

 

[brycejones]

So Russians are fair game for you to slander because of one war? The US has performed ten times worse in Bangladesh.

And the CAA is only as discriminatory as the Lautenberg agreement:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson–Vanik_amendment#Lautenberg_Amendment_(1990)

Lautenberg Amendment (1990)[edit]​

Enacted on November 21, 1989, the Lautenberg Amendment, Public Law 101–167, took effect in 1990 which provided refugee status in the United States for nationals from the Soviet Union and later the former Soviet Union, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania who are Jews, Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Catholics or Ukrainian Orthodox; as well as nationals of Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia; and Jews, Christians, Baha’is and other religious minorities from Iran.[31] The Lautenberg measure allowed refugee status to people from historically persecuted groups without requiring them to show that they had been singled out.[31][32] Under the Lautenberg Amendment, 350,000 to 400,000 Jews from the former Soviet Union which had not presented any form of evidence of persecution gained entry to the United States by October 2002 according to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.[citation needed] Beginning in 2002, a special "Refugee Corps" in the Department of Homeland Security handled issues involving the Lautenberg Amendment.[33]

SO fskimospy, in case you feel the need to ask me the question again. I will refer to you what I said before and blow it out of your own hole.

So you aren't bothered by this right? You're totally cool with religious discrimination right?

 

[Braznor]

So you aren't bothered by this right? You're totally cool with religious discrimination right?

In fact I'm very happy that persecuted minorities from neighboring nations are finally finding a new home in India.

They are celebrating, I'm about to join them and so should you:

This is just one such celebration

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...lieved-and-free-now/articleshow/108438721.cms

 

[Jaskalas]

Great, so you agree that India is discriminating against people for their religious affiliation now?

If a bunch of Russians moved into the USA, and decided we needed to be more like Russia. Would opposing them be labeled discrimination of a minority group, religious discrimination against their Orthodox Church? Cause if they were "deeply" religious all their actions and their identities were be under that label. Yet their goals would be to create a very discriminatory theocracy - just mirrored back into the opposite direction. Against other people.

Nations and neighborhoods throughout the world regularly filter themselves out to become more homogeneous. Is this not India's idea of achieving security through a similar process? It is not always pretty and can become downright ugly in how it is achieved. But if the alternative is rising sectarian violence.... is avoiding a societal schism not a worthy goal?

If the Republican MAGA could have been snuffed out before it got so terrible, is there any price we would not pay?

 

[fskimospy]

So Russians are fair game for you to slander because of one war? The US has performed ten times worse in Bangladesh.

And the CAA is only as discriminatory as the Lautenberg agreement:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson–Vanik_amendment#Lautenberg_Amendment_(1990)

Lautenberg Amendment (1990)[edit]​

Enacted on November 21, 1989, the Lautenberg Amendment, Public Law 101–167, took effect in 1990 which provided refugee status in the United States for nationals from the Soviet Union and later the former Soviet Union, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia or Lithuania who are Jews, Evangelical Christians, Ukrainian Catholics or Ukrainian Orthodox; as well as nationals of Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia; and Jews, Christians, Baha’is and other religious minorities from Iran.[31] The Lautenberg measure allowed refugee status to people from historically persecuted groups without requiring them to show that they had been singled out.[31][32] Under the Lautenberg Amendment, 350,000 to 400,000 Jews from the former Soviet Union which had not presented any form of evidence of persecution gained entry to the United States by October 2002 according to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.[citation needed] Beginning in 2002, a special "Refugee Corps" in the Department of Homeland Security handled issues involving the Lautenberg Amendment.[33]

SO fskimospy, in case you feel the need to ask me the question again. I will refer to you what I said before and blow it out of your own hole.

Russian culture has been degenerate for a long time before this war, lol.

Anyways I’m glad that you have confirmed you support religious discrimination. Thanks!

 

[Braznor]

Russian culture has been degenerate for a long time before this war, lol.

Anyways I’m glad that you have confirmed you support religious discrimination. Thanks!

Spread all the disinformation you want. Thats what you thrive on.

EDIT: I'm glad that we cleared up that the CAA is not discriminatory, just like the Launtenberg amendment.

 

[brycejones]

Spread all the disinformation you want. Thats what you thrive on.

EDIT: I'm glad that we cleared up that the CAA is not discriminatory, just like the Launtenberg amendment.

You really should stop lying. The CAA is explicitly discriminatory.

 

[fskimospy]

Spread all the disinformation you want. Thats what you thrive on.

EDIT: I'm glad that we cleared up that the CAA is not discriminatory, just like the Launtenberg amendment.

Since you have repeatedly put forth arguments that say this religious discrimination is good I don’t see what the problem is.

It’s ok - you can criticize Dear Leader when he does stuff like this. After his attacks on the free press it’s probably going to be up to regular citizens to do it.

 

[BoomerD]

I’m not gonna wade into the cesspool of Indian discrimination…coming in a nation where caste discrimination seems to be the norm…so, I’ll just ask the OP about his…

I'm gonna introduce you all to a friend of mine and ....​

Why do you consider what appears to be an Indian alt-news site to be your “friend?”
Maybe that word means something different to you than it does me.

 

[Braznor]

You really should stop lying. The CAA is explicitly discriminatory.

The CAA is as discriminatory as the Lautenberg Amendment.

 

[Braznor]

Since you have repeatedly put forth arguments that say this religious discrimination is good I don’t see what the problem is.

It’s ok - you can criticize Dear Leader when he does stuff like this. After his attacks on the free press it’s probably going to be up to regular citizens to do it.

I get that slandering is your game, but its not gonna work here. I been called many things on this site and you are just one of those rabid dogs which just can't stop barking.


Oh and as I said, blow it out of your hole.

 

[Braznor]

I’m not gonna wade into the cesspool of Indian discrimination…coming in a nation where caste discrimination seems to be the norm…so, I’ll just ask the OP about his…


Why do you consider what appears to be an Indian alt-news site to be your “friend?”
Maybe that word means something different to you than it does me.

The site calls out on the truth in certain situations where the truth might be inconvenient or impolite. That holds a certain appeal for me.

 

[fskimospy]

I get that slandering is your game, but its not gonna work here. I been called many things on this site and you are just one of those rabid dogs which just can't stop barking.


Oh and as I said, blow it out of your hole.

Look those are your words, not mine. You’re the one justifying religious discrimination.

 

[brycejones]

The CAA is as discriminatory as the Lautenberg Amendment.

So you agree the CAA is discriminatory against Muslims? Yes or No?

This is a direct question that should get a direct response.

 

[Moonbeam]

So you agree the CAA is discriminatory against Muslims? Yes or No?

This is a direct question that should get a direct response.

Bigotry depends on discrimination, in this case their definition of Muslim, so the problem isn't in that they discriminate but that those who are discriminated against are discriminated against for good reason because they were made to deserve that punishment because of how they were defined. I would not personally attack bigotry for reasons that it discriminates. Discrimination is a capacity that evolved due to its survival value. It is proper and natural. What happened to bigots is that they were made to hate themselves if they showed any compassion for people their guardians and peers defined as evil. The cure for bigotry is human compassion, the thing that was destroyed in us as children by exposure to the hatred of others.

The reason we strive to create equality in society is to reduce the exposure of people with minor differences from others to hatred and contempt. Hate says differences are major and a threat. Yup, they are a threat all right. They threaten the bigot with the realization of his own self hate as the source of his or her bigotry.

 

[amenx]

I'll introduce you to a friend of ours....

 

[BoomerD]

 

[Braznor]

Look those are your words, not mine. You’re the one justifying religious discrimination.

You cannot undo the Partition. How thick you have to be not to realize this?

 

[Braznor]

So you agree the CAA is discriminatory against Muslims? Yes or No?

This is a direct question that should get a direct response.

The CAA does not discriminate against Muslims. The CAA only fasttracks persecuted minority groups for citizenship. If tomorrow, Myanmar is bought under the preview of the CAA, then Rohingyas will be fasttracked for citizenship under CAA too.

Nothing prevents the Muslims of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan from applying for citizenship the normal way.

So for the last time, No, the CAA is not discriminatory. Other laws exist with the very same intention of the CAA like the American Lautenberg Amendment. The CAA provides a home to desperate people fleeing horrendous persecution. That's all. Nothing in it prohibits Muslims from seeking Indian citizenship in any form or manner.

If this answer still does not satisfy you, blow it out of your hole.

 

[Braznor]

I'll introduce you to a friend of ours....

And mind if I ask you which of his teachings you exactly followed?

 

[Braznor]

If more Pakistani Muslims were like this chap. I would fully support them for getting Indian citizenships:

https://www.hindustantimes.com/ente...ever-take-it-for-granted-101628970546263.html

 

[ch33zw1z]

The CAA does not discriminate against Muslims. The CAA only fasttracks persecuted minority groups for citizenship. If tomorrow, Myanmar is bought under the preview of the CAA, then Rohingyas will be fasttracked for citizenship under CAA too.

Nothing prevents the Muslims of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan from applying for citizenship the normal way.

So for the last time, No, the CAA is not discriminatory. Other laws exist with the very same intention of the CAA like the American Lautenberg Amendment. The CAA provides a home to desperate people fleeing horrendous persecution. That's all. Nothing in it prohibits Muslims from seeking Indian citizenship in any form or manner.

If this answer still does not satisfy you, blow it out of your hole.

You should be honest with yourself and call discrimination what it is. You can call America’s own discrimination what it is, discrimination. One does not cancel out the other. The difference here is that you’re justifying it. The USA has and does exercise discriminatory practices, but since im not an apologetic nationalist, im not going to justify. Since im a patriot, I’d rather call it what it is and express my desire to change it.

I will provide this link for you, again, and hope that you read it, again

https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-fallacies/