Cool but a raised eyebrow is not actually an argument

A secular world government sounds like a great advance for humanity to me.

@@Philitron128 Who decides whether or not it's secular? And if it starts off as secular, who keeps it secular? And if it is secular, who says secularity is sufficient for non-tyranny?

@@danidejaneiro8378 Yeah, it's called a subjective statement. If I wanted to make an argument, I would have phrased something in argument form. Do you have learning difficulties?

@@levi5073 - it’s not subjective because you haven’t expressed an opinion, just that you’d lift an eyebrow. That’s basically meaningless

I probably would put the Torah higher than the Bible, but otherwise agree.

Scientology pales in comparison to the other four. It’s a very distant fifth place at best. Just simply the centuries of time the others have had to inflict death, destruction and oppression on the human race puts them far in front of Scientology

nobody understands who or what you are addressing

Reality says otherwise. Europe is being flooded by muslims who have no intention to integrate.

Not really, if there are no national land borders, people will be free to roam anywhere they want, humans have always moved towards other humans, but with the limitations of ethnicity and borders, and land borders, humans can't move anywhere else they choose without repercussions... We are the only species that pay to live on earth.

What are the reasons for mass immigration to countries where people don’t “look like themselves”? Is it the borders we currently have? I’m not sure I’m seeing the validity of your comment. Im not being combative. I’m trying to see it. I just don’t. Can you expand on this please?

@@stewbie5086 Not sure why got a youtube email that this comment was made, I'm not janpetersen etc etc. Anyway, since I'm here anyway, JanPetersen isn't correct, unfortunately. People will settle where they can have the best lives possible. Unfortunately for the West, that is the West. It's certainly not for the weather, but let's face it, it's for the social welfare system. They have many more rights then where they came from, Western society has become so civilized we're considered 'soft' and 'easy to take advantage of'. There is very good statistical proof from Denmark (search "Denmark immigrant taxes") that immigrants from outside the EU generally speaking only take from the welfare system on balance. Our welfare systems were not meant for these streams of immigrants, without even touching upon the obvious friction in difference of culture. They are diametrical opposed to our values, yet are off course happy with our welfare system. It's becoming increasingly hard for the average earners in the Western world to work hard, just to see that the money goes to 'outsiders' who seem to have no intention on participating in our society, other then just to take. Pure financially i cannot understand any financial system where families have never contributed and cent, yet receiving the most. I'm all for supporting the poor and the unfortunate, but going to a country just to be a leach on the system and were your family never has and never will contribute, what's the point. Our morals have become so ridiculous high, that we in the western world cannot see that this is the beginning of the end. And politicians are surprised Europe is voting more and more right. Yes, we have laws and international agreements, so any kind of solution is difficult. But without a welfare system, or with an equal world wide welfare system, yeah, i think people want to have neighbours that 'look' like them, as in, have the same values for the most part.

@@stewbie5086 Was my comment deleted?

Judaism is evil.