<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Jun 15 2008, 05:54 AM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Jun 15 2008, 05:54 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The point is to make new territories Hindu majority as a backup, what do you think Muslims are doing in Europe?
[right][snapback]82851[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Bharatavarsha, there's one important thing that Hindus overlook.
Any religio-ethnic community that has no homeland to represent them while permanently resettled in a foreign christowestern land <b>will be</b> murdered out by the west.
It takes a few centuries at the most.
Look at history of Jews, Gypsies. It does not matter what century this is. Christowest is fickle. It will swing from being leftist to rightist like a pendulum. Period of fascism, swing back to ultra liberalism. Renewed fascism because of growing, festering resentment. Penitence of recent crimes makes them ashamed and overcompensate again. And once more it repeats....
Only reliable thing about christowest is that this truth holds: they gang up and massacre a population living amongst them that has no nation. Hindus other Natural Traditionalists will do well NEVER to forget that. No moment or year or decade of feeling one fits in should ever make one lull themselves into a false sense of security and convince themselves that it can be permanent. It cannot be. It is the nature - historically verified by innumerable repeats - of the christowest.
People should not imagine that christowest is like India. India took in Parsees and Tibetans and Jews, and has never reproached them for the permanent or temporary duration that they lost their parent homeland. Even when it looked like Jews would never get Israel back, no Dharmic in India had a problem with their community. And their adoptive homeland was theirs as long as they liked. Who knows when Parsees and Tibetans will get their parent homelands back (and even whether they would want to return at that stage). Meanwhile Hindu Bharatam has no problem accepting them as her children.
But this has <i>never</i> been the mentality of the christowest. Do not let flowery words like liberalism, tolerance, democracy and multiculturalism fool you. <- These are ideas the christowest likes to imagine as describe itself - but they don't. They may be predominant for a few decades, perhaps a century or even longer, but eventually the other side returns and they always start by taking it out on those who have no homeland. Jews for centuries realised why they absolutely needed their homeland. Hindus should learn from them not only about how they revived Hebrew, but how (and why) they got their land back and have kept it.
Hindus need to make sure Bharatam and Nepal are Hindu (which will ensure it as a homeland for all Dharmics). They should help any other historically Dharmic lands return to the Dharmics, like Tibet for the Tibetans. And we need to do more than that. Bharatam can't keep getting smaller.
Christoislamis have false claims on other religio-ethnic people's lands, and they parade around like these terrorist claims are valid.
Compare that to us: Indian Dharmics have historically (factually) inhabited all of the Indian subcontinent. Ideally, we have to stop being on the retreat in our own block, start entrenching ourselves firmly in our place again. And then all our population exports can cease and moreover people can return.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In my opinion a marital couple is actually unstable and it is the infusion of "new blood" that renders the mix stable. God's way of doing things.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I've heard that said by a televangelist too!
'Tis very bad marriage counselling, though. Professionals suggest that people never have kids unless their relationship is stable. Would have thought that was a complete no-brainer.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Women should have the final say in the reproductive process.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Always entertaining to hear men say that and then continue to dialogue.
For straightforward reasons, the matter of the number of kids is one of those things that should be discussed before a couple gets married. For some people these things can be dealbreakers. (As also the inability to have kids, or any unwillingness on either person's part.)
If the marriage goes through, they'll need to stick to the agreed number (unless they both agree on a new one, of course). If unforeseen events happen, hopefully by then both people will be mature enough to deal with it together.
Women's age: IIRC from a local health program, research and doctors here said that women from 28 onwards will have greater chance of troubled pregnancy/delivery and the phoetus will have higher chance of developing certain disabilities. For everyone involved, it's best to have kids at an earlier time.
[right][snapback]82851[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Bharatavarsha, there's one important thing that Hindus overlook.
Any religio-ethnic community that has no homeland to represent them while permanently resettled in a foreign christowestern land <b>will be</b> murdered out by the west.
It takes a few centuries at the most.
Look at history of Jews, Gypsies. It does not matter what century this is. Christowest is fickle. It will swing from being leftist to rightist like a pendulum. Period of fascism, swing back to ultra liberalism. Renewed fascism because of growing, festering resentment. Penitence of recent crimes makes them ashamed and overcompensate again. And once more it repeats....
Only reliable thing about christowest is that this truth holds: they gang up and massacre a population living amongst them that has no nation. Hindus other Natural Traditionalists will do well NEVER to forget that. No moment or year or decade of feeling one fits in should ever make one lull themselves into a false sense of security and convince themselves that it can be permanent. It cannot be. It is the nature - historically verified by innumerable repeats - of the christowest.
People should not imagine that christowest is like India. India took in Parsees and Tibetans and Jews, and has never reproached them for the permanent or temporary duration that they lost their parent homeland. Even when it looked like Jews would never get Israel back, no Dharmic in India had a problem with their community. And their adoptive homeland was theirs as long as they liked. Who knows when Parsees and Tibetans will get their parent homelands back (and even whether they would want to return at that stage). Meanwhile Hindu Bharatam has no problem accepting them as her children.
But this has <i>never</i> been the mentality of the christowest. Do not let flowery words like liberalism, tolerance, democracy and multiculturalism fool you. <- These are ideas the christowest likes to imagine as describe itself - but they don't. They may be predominant for a few decades, perhaps a century or even longer, but eventually the other side returns and they always start by taking it out on those who have no homeland. Jews for centuries realised why they absolutely needed their homeland. Hindus should learn from them not only about how they revived Hebrew, but how (and why) they got their land back and have kept it.
Hindus need to make sure Bharatam and Nepal are Hindu (which will ensure it as a homeland for all Dharmics). They should help any other historically Dharmic lands return to the Dharmics, like Tibet for the Tibetans. And we need to do more than that. Bharatam can't keep getting smaller.
Christoislamis have false claims on other religio-ethnic people's lands, and they parade around like these terrorist claims are valid.
Compare that to us: Indian Dharmics have historically (factually) inhabited all of the Indian subcontinent. Ideally, we have to stop being on the retreat in our own block, start entrenching ourselves firmly in our place again. And then all our population exports can cease and moreover people can return.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In my opinion a marital couple is actually unstable and it is the infusion of "new blood" that renders the mix stable. God's way of doing things.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->I've heard that said by a televangelist too!
'Tis very bad marriage counselling, though. Professionals suggest that people never have kids unless their relationship is stable. Would have thought that was a complete no-brainer.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Women should have the final say in the reproductive process.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Always entertaining to hear men say that and then continue to dialogue.
For straightforward reasons, the matter of the number of kids is one of those things that should be discussed before a couple gets married. For some people these things can be dealbreakers. (As also the inability to have kids, or any unwillingness on either person's part.)
If the marriage goes through, they'll need to stick to the agreed number (unless they both agree on a new one, of course). If unforeseen events happen, hopefully by then both people will be mature enough to deal with it together.
Women's age: IIRC from a local health program, research and doctors here said that women from 28 onwards will have greater chance of troubled pregnancy/delivery and the phoetus will have higher chance of developing certain disabilities. For everyone involved, it's best to have kids at an earlier time.