Social There are more dogs than people under 18 in San Francisco

Big cities aren't a good place to raise kids. I think they'll be fine as long as young adults continue to move in from the burbs.
 
Dogs are cheaper than kids. This pandemic is already showing how irresponsible Americans are with their money. I don't think people should be bringing in unwanted children that they can't afford into this world.
 
Most Muslims continue to hold the view that immigrants strengthen the U.S. because of their hard work and talents.

Of course they say that. But if they truly believed that, Muslims would welcome non-Muslim immigrants into Muslim countries, for their "hard work and talents". That would never happen, of course, because Muslims aren't prepared to hand their countries over to non-Muslims.
 
Yeah, and ? Kids are the worst.

Personal responsibility, how awful. Truly a thing conservatives can't stand. Better have 8 kids right?
 
Yeah, and ? Kids are the worst.

Personal responsibility, how awful. Truly a thing conservatives can't stand. Better have 8 kids right?
 
here in AZ we have more dogs over the age of 18 than minors of the same age.
 
here in AZ

Screenshot-20200525-161854-Chrome.jpg


<{you!}>
 
Dogs in the entire USA: 89 million
Children under 18 in the entire USA: 74 million
 
Dogs in the entire USA: 89 million
Children under 18 in the entire USA: 74 million
I'd heard the ludicrous number that it costs to have a kid delivered here before, but I didn't realize that the cost to have a newborn cared for at a hospital can easily hit 30k. So paying for a kid is as high as 30k just at the start. Then if you consider the cost of raising one and sending him to college (assuming in-state tuition it's like a prospective parent is paying to have a kid delivered twice), it should be obvious why Americans are having fewer children.

And the irony of course is that the same people who are complaining about our low birth rate are the same people who are against lowering healthcare costs and free education.
 
Far-left freaks don't tend to breed as much, so never forget that the way they "reproduce" is through indoctrinating YOUR children. Hence Drag Queen Story Time and some of the other perverted mind-fucks that kids are subjected to these days.
 
Because I don't want Europe to be taken over by Muslims. What a silly question.

The 'political platform' is practically identical though? That beloved desert barbarian ideology will bring about the necessary cultural corrections and eradicate historically iconic works of visual art, empiricism, computer science, macroeconomics and the celebration of men.

And the irony of course is that the same people who are complaining about our low birth rate are the same people who are against lowering healthcare costs and free education.

There's also supreme logic in banning abortion while simultaneously wanting to gut all socioeconomic welfare programs many of those children would otherwise be dependent on. Those human lives can just go die in a gutter somewhere.

{<BJPeen}

Also BIG lolz @ any goof opposed to secularism who also considers themselves any variant of a constitutionalist, patriot or nationalist.

James Madison Jr. (March 16, 1751 – June 28, 1836) was an American statesman, diplomat, philosopher and Founding Fatherwho served as the fourth President of the United States from 1809 to 1817. He is hailed as the "Father of the Constitution" for his pivotal role in drafting and promoting the Constitution of the United States and the United States Bill of Rights. He co-wrote The Federalist Papers, co-founded the Democratic-Republican Party, and served as the fifth United States Secretary of State from 1801 to 1809 under Thomas Jefferson.

https://aeon.co/amp/essays/why-did-the-secular-ambitions-of-the-early-united-states-fail

Both Jefferson and Madison were deeply opposed to a state church, or to any state recognition of religion. They also knew that their views against religion were unpopular and had no chance of prevailing on principle. Instead, Madison set out to terrify Virginia’s Presbyterians, Baptists and other rival sects into fearing that the state church would be an oppressive Anglican one.

To this end, he wrote a broadside: the Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments (1785). The Memorialsucceeded, since most Virginia Christians wanted their own church to be the state church, and if not theirs then nobody else’s.

"The mutual hatred of these sects has been much inflamed," Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson in 1785, "and I am far from being sorry for it." Virginia’s disestablishment, or separation of church and state, came to be the model for national separation. But it was made possible only by a combination of parliamentary legerdemain and elite manipulation of sectarian hatred.

https://www.americanprogress.org/is...8/3794/the-founding-fathers-religious-wisdom/

If the founders were dogmatic about anything, it was the belief that a person’s faith should not be intruded upon by government and that religious doctrine should not be written into governance. James Madison, for instance, was vigorously opposed to religious intrusions into civil affairs. In 1785, when the Commonwealth of Virginia was considering passage of a bill “establishing a provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion,” Madison wrote his “Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments,” in which he presented 15 reasons why government should not become involved in the support of any religion.

That's A Bad Motherfucker, @Bald1.
 
The 'political platform' is practically identical though? That beloved desert barbarian ideology will bring about the necessary cultural corrections and eradicate historically iconic works of visual art, empiricism, computer science, macroeconomics and the celebration of men.

Muslim countries are all shit. I don't want to live in one, hence why I'm against Muslim immigration. I'm also not a Muslim, so I'd suffer immensely in a Muslim country. It's not hard to grasp.
 
Dogs are truly wonderful creatures. That's all.
 
Muslim countries are all shit. I don't want to live in one, hence why I'm against Muslim immigration. I'm also not a Muslim, so I'd suffer immensely in a Muslim country. It's not hard to grasp.
https://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5/rankings
Can you spot the first Muslim nation on this list of highest murders per capita?

Hint: It's way down there at #33. Nearly every nation above it is majority Christian. Is anyone on this forum stupid enough to conclude all Christian nations are "shit" because of this?

Life in Morocco, Malaysia or the Maldives is undoubtedly better than anything near the vicinity of whatever shithole you dwell in.

Declining birth rates are inevitable, and that's true across the board. They are falling in India and most of Africa as well, and will continue to do so as education and career opportunities for females expand.
F1.large.jpg

I mention them in particular because it seems to be an obsession with you Great Replacement authoritarians who have nightmares of a blackening planet.
 
San Fran is a temporary city like New York, Gene skewed data. People go to make it big, then move out. Too expensive and not kid friendly.
 
The point is about liberalism being unable to sustain itself. Liberals support the mass migration of the most illiberal people on the planet into the West. I mentioned Birmingham because it perfectly captures the future conflict between the left & Muslims.

The reason birthrates are higher in the UK than in Russia & Poland is because of Muslim immigration to the UK. Muslims boost the UK birthrate. Russia & Poland aren't conservative, unlike some make out. They're not as liberal as countries like Britain, Canada, USA etc etc, but they're still liberal.

There's nothing complex about it at all. Liberalism is the reason for declining birthrates.

You don't know the point I'm making? I made it very clear in the OP: liberalism is unable to sustain itself and liberals themselves understand this, which is why they believe importing immigrants in will help offset the effects of a low birthrate. But these immigrants are the least accepting of liberal 'values'.
There's no doubt that Muslims tend to have higher fertility rates, but UK born women and even White British women still have a higher fertility rate than Russia and Poland. So, it's not accurate to say that the reason the UK has a higher rate is purely because of Muslims and other immigrants. Their fertility has been trending down for the last 10 years also. I already sourced this. This is just one example, I could find many other "liberal" countries where this applies, even with a homogeneous population. Didn't you also find it interesting that the highest percentage of non-UK born mothers in 2017 were from Poland? Seems to me that you wouldn't have a problem with importing immigrants from Eastern European countries.

I'm a little confused here, you are claiming that Poland and Russia are liberal? I thought you defined liberalism as, in part, wanting mass muslim immigration, yet Poland for instance have practically none. What about Hungary then, are they liberal? They have an even lower birth rate (1). I wonder which countries you would consider conservative, Saudi Arabia? You have to clarify this point.

Saying the same thing doesn't make it true just because you say it. You have to show evidence for your claim. There's an argument there, but it requires more work and if you did want to know the underlying mechanisms it would appear to me that you would understand how multifaceted the issue is. Arguing that capitalism is the reason why birth rates are declining would probably be an easier one.
 
Last edited:
"There are more dogs than people under 18 in San Francisco"

Is San Francisco in Bosnia?

Cause they have the excact same situation :D
 
Back
Top