Something I want answered once and for all

Originally posted by Rajk999
I have to say here, as I did in your 'Immigration' thread in Debates that I totally agree with your point 2. The resources of the world are collectively owned by ALL of the worlds peoples and they should rightly be shared equally.

In the current selfish thinking, people [including Christians] cannot see how that makes sense. Nationalism should be the en ...[text shortened]... ly dont care about the 'have nots'.

In the world to come Christ will take care of that.

This is the first thing you've said in a while that I fully agree with. Well done.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I also think that you are deliberately deflecting because you know perfectly well that I am correct.

I can tell you that I think you are totally and utterly wrong. I hope that helps, and please feel free to bring it up in future.

Originally posted by Suzianne
This is the first thing you've said in a while that I fully agree with.

Which part?

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, nor do I think it is in any way relevant. I also think that you are deliberately deflecting because you know perfectly well that I am correct.

Not relevant? Deflecting? I'm asking you if you are living the high ideals that you proclaim? Isn't that what you question theists about here at rhp week in, week out?

Originally posted by divegeester
Which part?

Did I specify? No?

Then obviously I meant his entire post.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Did I specify? No?

Then obviously I meant his entire post.

How do you think twhitehead's and rajk999's point of "The resources of the world are collectively owned by ALL of the worlds peoples and they should rightly be shared equally" should be managed strategically and politically?

But leave that for debates...

As I asked twhithead (who avoided the question); if you feel so strongly about such a principle, perhaps you could share with us how you live that yourself in your world, or do you feel that only "rich" people (whoever they are) should set the example?

Originally posted by divegeester
How do you think twhitehead's and rajk999's point of "The resources of the world are collectively owned by ALL of the worlds peoples and they should rightly be shared equally" should be managed strategically and politically?

But leave that for debates...

As I asked twhithead (who avoided the question); if you feel so strongly about such a ...[text shortened]... r world, or do you feel that only "rich" people (whoever they are) should set the example?

The fact that a certain desirable outcome cannot be easily or immediately achieved does not change it to undesirable, neither does it mean its pointless to move in that direction.

Originally posted by divegeester
I can tell you that I think you are totally and utterly wrong. I hope that helps, and please feel free to bring it up in future.

Yet you have no supporting arguments for your stance, hence the attempts at deflecting.

Originally posted by divegeester
Not relevant? Deflecting? I'm asking you if you are living the high ideals that you proclaim? Isn't that what you question theists about here at rhp week in, week out?

In what way is letting thieves into my house a sign of high ideals? Do I really question theists about their high ideals? Can you quote me? Are you sure I am not questioning your concept of Gods high ideals?

Originally posted by twhitehead
In what way is letting thieves into my house a sign of high ideals? Do I really question theists about their high ideals? Can you quote me? Are you sure I am not questioning your concept of Gods high ideals?

I didn't mention "thieves" did I.

You are stating in this thread that democratic border control, ('immigration'😉 is a "violaton of human rights" and that counties should share their wealth.

I'm asking you if you do this personally, i.e. do you control your personal border. Do you share your home and your possessions with those less well off than yourself?

If not then aren't your domestic decisions a violation of the human rights of your less well off neighbors?

Originally posted by divegeester
I didn't mention "thieves" did I.

My mistake. I misread 'vagrant'.

You are stating in this thread that democratic border control, ('immigration'😉 is a "violaton of human rights" and that counties should share their wealth.
No, I said nothing about countries sharing their wealth.

I'm asking you if you do this personally, i.e. do you control your personal border. Do you share your home and your possessions with those less well off than yourself?
Yes, I do this personally.

If not then aren't your domestic decisions a violation of the human rights of your less well off neighbors?
No, not at all. It is in no way equivalent. I do however believe that a situation where a few landlords own all the land and rent it out to everyone else would be a violation of human rights.

Originally posted by twhitehead
My mistake. I misread 'vagrant'.

[b]You are stating in this thread that democratic border control, ('immigration'😉 is a "violaton of human rights" and that counties should share their wealth.
No, I said nothing about countries sharing their wealth.

I'm asking you if you do this personally, i.e. do you control your personal border. Do you sh ...[text shortened]... n all the land and rent it out to everyone else would be a violation of human rights.[/b]

You didn't say anything about countries sharing their wealth, apologies my mistake.

However you talked about democratic control of immigration being a violation of human rights and that the richer countries maintaining the status quo of that immigration is also a violation of rights. Which is my main question back to you about sharing your own personal border i.e. sharing your home with the less well off e.g. vagrants (not criminals).

Apparently you do this; I stand in respect of your generosity and commitment to your values.

Originally posted by divegeester
How do you think twhitehead's and rajk999's point of "The resources of the world are collectively owned by ALL of the worlds peoples and they should rightly be shared equally" should be managed strategically and politically?

But leave that for debates...

As I asked twhithead (who avoided the question); if you feel so strongly about such a ...[text shortened]... r world, or do you feel that only "rich" people (whoever they are) should set the example?

I am not going to go and blow my own horn here and turn this into a discussion about works like others might.

Let's just say that I regularly interact with homeless persons in downtown Phoenix through a couple of relief organizations as well as personally. Not enough people are getting as involved with this effort, but I've seen slightly more help getting out to the people as the economy slowly improves.

Not that I'm seeking your approval, but does this answer your question?

I'm not sure I'm entirely qualified to answer your first question.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I am not going to go and blow my own horn here and turn this into a discussion about works like others might.

Let's just say that I regularly interact with homeless persons in downtown Phoenix through a couple of relief organizations as well as personally. Not enough people are getting as involved with this effort, but I've seen slightly more help getti ...[text shortened]... answer your question?

I'm not sure I'm entirely qualified to answer your first question.

I'm not looking for your works. I'm exploring the link (often posted by rwingett) between "socialist" political values of sharing wealth through open immigration on a country level, with that of actually doing it every day with personal borders i.e. sharing your home. It is one thing to hold to the former, but completely another to live it yourself by exercising the latter.

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm not looking for your works. I'm exploring the link (often posted by rwingett) between "socialist" political values of sharing wealth through open immigration on a country level, with that of actually doing it every day with personal borders i.e. sharing your home. It is one thing to hold to the former, but completely another to live it yourself by exercising the latter.

Sharing my home? My home? No. This doesn't keep me from sharing a good portion of my other resources (including my time) with those less fortunate than me.

Look, I'm a single female living alone. I don't think anyone would disagree that running a halfway house in my neighborhood out of my own home would be a dangerous proposition for me.