you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]happysmash27 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

This comparison seems a bit… dramatic :P .

Planned Parenthood doesn't necessarily focus on abortions as many people seem to think; from what I remember, they focus more on early preventative measures, like condoms. Regardless, to me they seem to support depopulation by definition, given that their primary focus (from what I am reading) is birth control.

Please correct me if I'm wrong about anything here; I don't know a great about Planned Parenthood, so this is based on a few articles I have read in the past and quick reading of their Wikipedia article.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

I don't disagree with their claimed reason-for-being, but the organisation itself is pretty shady. (It's the evolution of a rather different organisation.) I'm glad that my country has much less shady, biased and interest-conflicted analogous organisations.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

The difference in your country has greater ethnic homogeneity. Eugenics is a race war that is rebranded, so it can't easily be discussed or criticised..

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

No, it doesn't, actually. It's got greater ethnic diversity; at least double, by a back-of-the-envelope census calculation.

We have decent sex education; maybe it's that?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Let's confirm.

I'm in the US. What country are you claiming to be in/from?

Edit: wizzwizz4 loves the forum slide. Here's the TLDR: She's from GB.
87.1% white in the 2011 census..

It's a functionally homogenous society.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

The UK.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Are you going to stick to your claim that the UK has twice the ethnic diversity as the US?

Are you also claiming that Scottish, Irish, and English should be considered distinct ethnic groups?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I know it's not the most reliable source, but it has a pie chart. Using religion as a rough indicator of culture (because more can agree on the metric than on ethnicity):

US religion (scroll down) (note that "Christian" is separated into three groups, and is massive. UK religion, however, provides a still-large "Christian" but about twice the number of other religions. Note that there are enough that it can actually name several and still have them visible on the pie chart.

But, to answer your facetious question, "Irish" is usually considered a different ethnic group to "English". And, more relevantly, the distribution of these groups is (anecdotally) a lot[vague] less polarised than in the US.

But, anyway, I think we've ruled out ethnic diversity as the reason for the discrepancy. Any other possible factors?

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Nothing has been ruled out.

Your attempt to defend your argument is an absurdity.

Ethnicity has absolutely nothing at all to do with religion.

People can change their religion.

Ethnicity cannot be changed.

For example:

Jesus was Jewish.

Modern Israelis are typically Jewish from eastern european origins.

Jesus was not eastern european.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Sorry, Tom, I can't deal with this today. I could pick any statistic and you'd argue against it in this manner.

How am I supposed to show ethnic and cultural diversity – something that you can't really quantify – using the data from sources that we'd both consider unbiased (e.g. the census)?