Alright Aura, so according to you, a logical fallacy is wanting the rules to be followed. Good. You BRAKE all the records of idiotism. Congratulations!

Red herring with a side of ad hominem. good for you.

They are not rules, Bayern. They are a widely accepted procedure of proper writing that has been used for 1000s of years. You will doom yourself to failure of any secondary composition class if you don't learn and abide by them. Which is apparently what you want.

Don't criticize what you don't know. There are hundreds of millions of acclaimed individuals who are acclaimed just because they abide by this. This is the epitome of all comprehensive literature that was ever made and regarded as valid.

But if you want to ignore the fallacies, then you will forever doom yourself to a life being viewed as a bogus fool. And the only people who will ever listen to you are fools. You will be doomed to being ridiculed by professors, and you doom yourself to never getting into an acclaimed university. Maybe some two year institution, or a lesser four year, but you are dooming yourself.

Unless you want to become a politician...

Edited 10/13/2016 16:46:12

Bayern, you made 5 posts on this page alone, and still haven't said anything other than,

"It is the rule. They should not break the rules."

Answer these questions without arbitrarily resorting to "it is the rules".

1) How does someone wearing a burqa impact you?
2) Why does this give you the right to legislate what people can and cannot wear?
3) In what way are you harmed by someone wearing a burqa?
4) In what way does banning burqas benefit Bulgarian society?
5) Are more people being alienated in a country that permits burqas, or bans burqas?
6) Should Bulgaria try to be more accepting?
7) If not, then why?

Ox:
1) I don't like seeing people without faces.
2) Is it a problem for them to not wear something no one in the country they are wants?
3) Same as 1.
4) It won't make Bulgaria Syria.
5) alienated?
6) Yeah, but only for LEGIT people (possibly you get you'd need an ID to pass a border outside Shengen

only for LEGIT people

You are not LEGIT, Bulgaria throws you out, it will.

1) I don't like seeing people without faces.

Okay, so the impact that burqas have is that they make Kalin feel sad. Clearly this is a first world problem trapped in a second world country. Because the worst impact he could think of is "I DON'T LIKE IT. SHUT IT DOWN" I can conclude that there is not a big impact with burqas.

2) Is it a problem for them to not wear something no one in the country they are wants?

Yes, it is a problem. People who wear burqas are faithful to their religion. I don't believe that their religion is right, but they can choose to believe what they want to. There isn't so much of a problem with removing burqas, as there is with *only* removing burqas. If you want to remove them: remove all religious symbols, like France has. It's inherently discriminatory to ban 1 religious item but not all.

To summarise: The problem? It can make Islamic women feel bad. There are more Islamic women than there are Kalins, and as such, from a comparative standpoint, Kalin's side only benefits him, and my side benefits all Islamic women living in Bulgaria.

3) Same as 1.

Ah, so not only are burqas an impact to you, but a *harm* as well. Because of this, Kalin is clearly being harmed because of burqas, because THEY IMPACT HIS LIFE. When he sees a burqa, he doesn't want to look away. He doesn't want to look at all the women who don't wear burqas. He wants to concentrate on the ones that do, and make those women central to his existence because they matter to him.

You are not harmed by looking at a burqa. Get over yourself.

4) It won't make Bulgaria Syria.

If your goal is to make sure that Bulgaria is less Islamic, there are a couple of ways I can respond.

a) You are a fucking racist pig and I'm glad you have no position of power in the real world
b) *EVEN IF* making Bulgaria less Islamic has benefits: How does banning burqas cause this?

(From point to point)

1. If Bulgaria bans burqas,
2. Then Islamic women will feel like they have their rights being taken away
3. This will grow resentment in the Islamic community in Bulgaria
4. And Muslims typically breed faster than non-Muslims
5. As a result, you'll have a quickly growing population of angry Muslims who have their rights taken away
6. And when Muslims get angry, things explode rather quickly.
7. So terrorists will intervene
8. And this will harm Bulgaria as a whole, because it is not going to "remove kebab"; instead it is just making the Islamic community more resentful, which leads to greater harm for Bulgaria

5) alienated?

You don't have a fucking dictionary? Oh well. Alienated means "disenfranchised". Respond to this question now.

"5) Are more people being disenfranchised in a country that permits burqas, or bans burqas?"

6) Yeah, but only for LEGIT people (possibly you get you'd need an ID to pass a border outside Shengen

Refugees may not be "LEGIT" People by your definition. They are not "LEGIT", because they don't have a passport.

But why? Well, when your country is being torn into a civil war, and there are frequent Russian and American bomb raids on your city, the first thing on your mind isn't usually "Get the passports, honey!" Instead, it's "GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE ASAP!"

The people are escaping a war, and by the UN definition of refugee, these people are legitimate asylum seekers.

A refugee is someone who has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war, or violence.

So yes, they are legitimate refugees according to the UN: Which Bulgaria happens to be a part of.

To use your own logic against you, Kalin.

"Bulgaria should accept these people because it's the [United Nations] RULES. FOLLOW THE RULES AND DONT BRAKE THEM"

However, if you disagree with the concept of refugees entirely then I really hope you never gain any real influence, and just continue to be a lonely twat in a developing country that has psychological issues, and because of those issues, takes his anger out on some of the most vulnerable people in the world; perhaps because they're the only ones below him in the social hierarchy.

Good day.

Can you define LEGIT people for me? Because as far as I know, anyone who is a homo sapien is a legit person...

Also, tell me the difference between a "legit" and "non-legit" person. Please also tell me "why".

Logical Fallacies Used:

1) I don't like seeing people without faces.

Personal Justification (anecdotal)

2) Is it a problem for them to not wear something no one in the country they are wants?

Bandwagon, Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Tradition.

4) It won't make Bulgaria Syria.

Slippery Slope

(Well, this isn't even an argument. Its just an opinion.)

6) Yeah, but only for LEGIT people (possibly you get you'd need an ID to pass a border outside Shengen

(Not an argument.)

Edited 10/13/2016 21:31:30

How do burqas benefit Muslim women? They are chained by their families and by banning the burqa we are removing their chains.

That isn't true. Muslims feel that the burqa is a representation of modesty and politeness in an otherwise highly sexualized society.

After ISIS has been removed from certain places women happily burned their burqas.

This is an outlying case that is not an accurate representation of the majority of the Muslim population. You are using the logical fallacy of "stacking the deck" here.

Edited 10/13/2016 21:30:07

I should also mention Bayern, your refusal to recognize the validity of logical fallacies is a logical fallacy: Personal Incredulity

Edited 10/13/2016 21:33:36

^All people deserve to be respected but not all beliefs. A person can not demand women's rights in the West for example without demanding the same in Saudi Arabia without being inconsistent.

Could you deliberate?

Edited 10/13/2016 21:35:29

Tabby you're an arrogant arse who's broken beyond all repair. Bayern's just a 12 year old trying to satisfy his meaningless life by making up bullshit about refugees; his opinion can change. You, on the other hand think you're right all the time and frankly are just damaged.

That's why I won't argue with you. I'm not helping anyone by doing so.

^Sure! For example there are some people who believe in wife-beating and they literally practice that. There are some people who believe in honor killings and they literally practice that. Shall these ideas be respected? No! What happens is that bad ideas (no matter whether they are in the Nazi form or in the Islamist form) must be removed or they will lead to bad actions.

Your examples are not valid. Each example you posit here is not example of all beliefs being respected. Rather, you are giving me examples of where one person uses their belief to violate another belief. If there is one time where beliefs should not be respected, it is where that belief violates another belief. However, when a Muslim woman wears a burqa, whose belief is she violating? You can't say another person who believes he/she herself should not wear a burqa, all they need to do is not wear a burqa. Nor can you say a person who believes that no one should wear a burqa, because that violates the belief of the burqa wearer.

^Well I'm sometimes more conservative than most and sometimes more progressive than most. For example in terms of the burqa and Islamism there should be a global ban. The Wahhabi entity in particular should be declared to be a terrorist and criminal organization and banned. The UN should take over Arabian Peninsula.

I supposed you liked red herring. you are a cat, after all.

^^If burqas are indeed voluntary they should be tolerated. However nobody should be allowed to force his/her female relative to wear them.

Bingo! Spot on. There are only two countries which have a required dress code: Saudi Arabia and Iran. I completely disagree with their sentiments. However, the vast majority of Muslims have their choice of whether or not to wear a burqa, which is any not in the two aforementioned countries.

^Sure if husbands, parents and brothers of women have no say in whether they wear the burqa. Otherwise no. Ultimately I believe in individual religious freedom while oppose collective religious power. My version of Utopia is a bunch of individuals free from any family-related identities pursue their own interests and those of others.

As long as the state does not protect the individual from his/her families and tribes he/she is not actually free. Countries such as Japan and regions such as the American South are not free because of the existence of family power which violates individual freedom.

The problem with males compelling females to wear a burqa is that it is not a legal input. This is a result of the international epidemic of sexism that plagues our world. The feminist movement is hard at work to change that. It may be a while, but we will get there.

I have never heard about your utopia idea. I will have to think on that for a while. Utopia, however, is inherently an ideal that is largely impossible to reach, and usually results in a dystopia if it is ever actually implemented. So I am not favorable that it could work.

Edited 10/14/2016 00:31:18

Bayern's just a 12 year old trying to satisfy his meaningless life by making up bullshit about refugees; his opinion can change.

You overestimate him.

Legit people are people who pass the border with an ID, and not like 60% of the immigrants, without.

Is Bulgaria the Mississippi of Europe?

However Europe is the homeland of Europeans. If you want to emigrate it is much better for everyone to only enter nations of immigrants instead, be it countries in Americas or Oceania. Why not try South America for example?

No one asked for this paragraph

Europe is the homeland of Europeans

oh have they healed your cognitive dissonance? Not a month ago you were saying

A conservative Jew is not conservative.