Assyrian Nationalist
New member
From a /pol/ archive
Statistics - Atheism in decline?
- Thread starter Assyrian Nationalist
- Start date
mrzurnaci
Active member
because usually, Atheists don't have many kids.
At most, they have usually 1-2 or none.
with 1 to 0 kids, you have decline obviously.
with 2, no change since you have kids that will replace you and your wife.
obviously, an atheist family requires 3+ kids if they want growth.
At most, they have usually 1-2 or none.
with 1 to 0 kids, you have decline obviously.
with 2, no change since you have kids that will replace you and your wife.
obviously, an atheist family requires 3+ kids if they want growth.
Assyrian Nationalist
New member
mrzurnaci said:
It's also religious strictness and how 3rd world countries have more children.
mrzurnaci
Active member
Assyrian Nationalist said:
they have more kids because they don't have wide availability of birth control, also improvements to medicine has ballooned their population. The same thing happened to Europe.
Europeans used to have 6-10 kids but alot of them died early, improvements in medicine made it so alot of these kids didn't early so the population ballooned because people were still having the same amount of kids but the kids weren't dying.
naturally, everybody started noticing this and the new generation had less kids, especially when life became more free to experience.
in another explanation, most atheists are highly educated and educated people don't have many kids because their outlook on life is that they want to experience life and focus on their careers or life projects instead of having families.
Realistically, you can still focus on a career/life project with a family but, in their minds, a family would just get in a way.
From this kind of thinking, atheists choose not to have kids.
Assyrian Nationalist
New member
mrzurnaci said:
This is why Muslims in the west will takeover Europe because they have the 3rd world mentality and fertility, in Australia all Muslim women in the city have double prams and are pregnant at the same time.
mrzurnaci
Active member
Assyrian Nationalist said:
Depends what generation and how assimilated they are. Most assimilated Muslims have less kids, are less religious, and even throw away the religion all together. New arrivals to a country will still have their old mentality but the new generation won't keep it unless you stop the Muslim community from separating itself.
the way the USA is designed is that if you don't assimilate, you will struggle in life. the Black community in the USA has already proven this.
If Muslims see that they don't have to assimilate to have it good, then they won't.
Best case example is the Orthodox Jews (the ones with the cowboy hats, black clothing, and braided sideburns) whom separate themselves from most of the society and simply setup their own businesses with each other.
Assyrian Nationalist
New member
mrzurnaci said:
In a way yes for some but not the majority, but does this look like '2nd integration' to you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMwwvDcR-VE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95GxhqjHZ3E&t=25s
mrzurnaci
Active member
Assyrian Nationalist said:
UK barely assimilates their (Pakistani) Muslims and, even if they're assimilated, those Muslims are living off welfare which proves my point that they won't assimilate if there's no drive to do it.
I should probably explicitly state in my book for future Assyrians to never apply or do welfare at all.
Assyrian Nationalist
New member
mrzurnaci said:
What about sickness or disability?
mrzurnaci
Active member
Assyrian Nationalist said:
sickness and disability would be handled by family... our culture is family based.
Hell, why not save welfare money to use it on helping cure/treat diseases such as cancer?
If welfare money went to cancer patients instead, it wouldn't be an issue but Leftists LOVE disasters and crises so they can use them to forward an agenda...
Mr. Tambourine Man
New member
It's better the Assyrians collect welfare than nuxraye.
mrzurnaci
Active member
Mr. Tambourine Man said:
no, that'll ruin us. Welfare doesn't help, it ruins societies.
Just look at the current USA. Welfare keeps poor people poor because the poor realized that they don't have to get jobs or skills when welfare can take care of them. Especially in the case with single moms; they don't need to be married because Welfare has replaced the husband/father getting a check to feed his family.
Even CNN's Don Lemon says more than 72 percent of African-American births are out of wedlock. 72% of the newest generation of Black-Americans are BASTARDS...
http://www.businessinsider.com/children-of-parents-on-welfare-are-more-likely-to-be-on-welfare-2013-11
Kids of these welfare leeches then learn about this and become leeches themselves. Leeches breeding leeches.
Welfare will be a major drain on our government resources which could be used for BETTER things.
I refuse to let my nation of 6,000 years become leeches...
Mr. Tambourine Man
New member
Oh, I don't know about you but Australia's welfare systems seem to be working.
mrzurnaci
Active member
Neon said:
America's welfare system wasn't planned well at all. You can use welfare if you're unemployed or have kids. Welfare in USA also gives cheap housing called Section 8 Housing.
Secondly, what will be the point of welfare in a state of our own when our churches will likely handle charities for the poor?
Thirdly, explain Australia's welfare system and tell me how it cannot be abused?
Cascade
Well-known member
The church wouldn't be its own government. They will also rely on the government when it comes to money and charity. Therefore, a welfare system will be necessary.mrzurnaci said:
Abused how? What do you mean here? Yes, we have a good welfare system. Mothers are paid by the government fortnightly. If the youngest kid reaches 15, then she has to find work, or else she will not be paid. Unfortunately, so many lazy parents have a lot of kids just so they get paid and so they don't have to work. Lol. Even unemployed job seekers are paid (well, if they abide to job seeking rules by attending job networks in their vicinity). That doesn't sound like a bad welfare system.
If you have high blood pressure, diabetes and other medical conditions, you don't have to work and the government will pay you. Additionally, even your carer is paid for that and they also don't have to look for jobs. Oh, some wacky things people do in here is faking accidents (or at least over-exaggerating the intensity of their injury), so they get a lifelong pensioner support. This is really slack, because many of these "victims" are such phonies, and are easily capable of doing strenuous work.
Cascade
Well-known member
Could you have written them in Latin at least?mrzurnaci said:
"La dalela" - Don't coddle her
"Qamoodeet daloolo?" - Why are you coddling her?
Is that how you wrote them grammatically?
*Coddle and pamper are synonyms. Spoil is more "ruining" than positively pampering someone.
mrzurnaci
Active member
Neon said:
Because in the Assyrian sense, coddling/pampering someone weakens them.
also, in terms of the topic at hand. Atheism isn't really declining, it's just that religious people (muslims) are having more kids on a yearly basis, thus it SEEMS like Atheism is declining but it's actually climbing but, taking the ratio of birth rates, Atheists will be more outnumbered unless these future religious adults become atheists themselves.