There should be a public vote for issues like refugees?
We the public who have to actually live with these people in the real world never get to have a say on these issues. I'm sick of politicians allowing anyone in and making decisions without consulting the British public first.
There should be a public vote such as an referendum regarding any new groups of immigrants.
There should be a public vote such as an referendum regarding any new groups of immigrants.
Scroll to see replies
Imagine back just before mass immigration in the West started
That there was a vote, just like we voted a few days and and the EU referendum...
What do you think people would say?
NO
Today it's a different story with the democide of our population but I have no doubt we could still vote no.
That there was a vote, just like we voted a few days and and the EU referendum...
What do you think people would say?
NO
Today it's a different story with the democide of our population but I have no doubt we could still vote no.
Refugees are people who are seeking shelter from DANGER. It would be completely inhumane to turn them away when they are at risk of getting killed. Yes, there may be cultural differences between us and refugees but at the end of the day, we're human just like them.
Original post by Sarahsez
We the public who have to actually live with these people in the real world never get to have a say on these issues. I'm sick of politicians allowing anyone in and making decisions without consulting the British public first.
There should be a public vote such as an referendum regarding any new groups of immigrants.
There should be a public vote such as an referendum regarding any new groups of immigrants.
I think The electorate, Brenda from Bristol and myself are all fed up with voting!
-- and when do you think your desired outcome will stop? hmm... votes for this, votes for that! accountability will fly out the window and we WILL be saddled with polls, marketeers, confusion and Votes on the legitimacy of votes
yes voting has its place, but it doesn't benefit every decision.
No. The public will vote for anything as long as you put enough money into propaganda.
Yes, there should be
Original post by Plagioclase
No. The public will vote for anything as long as you put enough money into propaganda.
Then why should we have general elections? Should we scrap the GE, seeing as it's basically always what Murdoch wants anyway?
Original post by HotDetermination
Refugees are people who are seeking shelter from DANGER. It would be completely inhumane to turn them away when they are at risk of getting killed. Yes, there may be cultural differences between us and refugees but at the end of the day, we're human just like them.
Dude I live in an area where many refugees have moved into. Some are very nice and want to make a good life but many of the men look at women differently and are freaking perverts and proud of it!
Original post by Zargabaath
Should we scrap the GE, seeing as it's basically always what Murdoch wants anyway?
Whilst I find the idea of a technocracy appealing, I don't think I could advocate overthrowing democracy yet. But the public has clearly demonstrated over the past few years that it is incapable of making informed decisions on single-issue, policy-based referenda so they must go. We live in a representative democracy rather than a direct democracy for a reason.
Original post by Sarahsez
Dude I live in an area where many refugees have moved into. Some are very nice and want to make a good life but many of the men look at women differently and are freaking perverts and proud of it!
Regardless, that's much a small price to pay for the many people whose lives won't be endangered anymore.
Original post by HotDetermination
Refugees are people who are seeking shelter from DANGER. It would be completely inhumane to turn them away when they are at risk of getting killed. Yes, there may be cultural differences between us and refugees but at the end of the day, we're human just like them.
Well if you support taking in refugees you should house one in your home. Are you actually gonna do that? No. So stfu.
Original post by HotDetermination
Refugees are people who are seeking shelter from DANGER. It would be completely inhumane to turn them away when they are at risk of getting killed. Yes, there may be cultural differences between us and refugees but at the end of the day, we're human just like them.
Thank you, +1
Original post by HotDetermination
Regardless, that's much a small price to pay for the many people whose lives won't be endangered anymore.
So rapists are fine to come into our society as long as we've saved them?
What about our protection? E.g. Cologne, rape rise in Sweden etc
bleeding heart liberal let them stay over at your house since you care somuch and see how you like them then. See how they view your female relatives.
Oh no I forgot you're a hypocrite just like most leftie luvvies. Just throw them into some village as long you're away from them yourself.
(edited 6 years ago)
How come all the (((refugees))) are middle aged men, not fighting in Syria?
Original post by Sarahsez
So rapists are fine to come into our society as long as we've saved them?
What about our protection? E.g. Cologne, rape rise in Sweden etc
bleeding heart liberal let them stay over at your house since you care somuch and see how you like them then. See how they view your female relatives.
Oh no I forgot you're a hypocrite just like most leftie luvvies. Just throw them into some village as long you're away from them yourself.
What about our protection? E.g. Cologne, rape rise in Sweden etc
bleeding heart liberal let them stay over at your house since you care somuch and see how you like them then. See how they view your female relatives.
Oh no I forgot you're a hypocrite just like most leftie luvvies. Just throw them into some village as long you're away from them yourself.
https://debunkingdenialism.com/2015/12/12/how-anti-immigration-activists-misuse-rape-statistics/
you can claim they're rapists, the stats don't bear that out. What they are though is people fleeing oppressive regimes where they face genuine danger if they stay, and have right to be sheltered from that in international law.
Should we let the public vote on overriding international law? Not unless we want to be pariahs, no.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Stiff Little Fingers
https://debunkingdenialism.com/2015/12/12/how-anti-immigration-activists-misuse-rape-statistics/
you can claim they're rapists, the stats don't bear that out. What they are though is people fleeing oppressive regimes where they face genuine danger if they stay, and have right to be sheltered from that in international law.
Should we let the public vote on overriding international law? Not unless we want to be pariahs, no.
Posted from TSR Mobile
you can claim they're rapists, the stats don't bear that out. What they are though is people fleeing oppressive regimes where they face genuine danger if they stay, and have right to be sheltered from that in international law.
Should we let the public vote on overriding international law? Not unless we want to be pariahs, no.
Posted from TSR Mobile
So cologne didn't happen???
Original post by Sarahsez
So cologne didn't happen???
Yes. That's definitely what that post said
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Stiff Little Fingers
https://debunkingdenialism.com/2015/12/12/how-anti-immigration-activists-misuse-rape-statistics/
you can claim they're rapists, the stats don't bear that out. What they are though is people fleeing oppressive regimes where they face genuine danger if they stay, and have right to be sheltered from that in international law.
Should we let the public vote on overriding international law? Not unless we want to be pariahs, no.
Posted from TSR Mobile
you can claim they're rapists, the stats don't bear that out. What they are though is people fleeing oppressive regimes where they face genuine danger if they stay, and have right to be sheltered from that in international law.
Should we let the public vote on overriding international law? Not unless we want to be pariahs, no.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I have nothing against refugees. But I am against mass immigration from a culture completely alien to Western values and culture. They view on women is completely different.
Also 90 percent of these so called refugees appear to be young fit sexually frustrated males which can lead to many problems.
In my opinion, you should allow any refugees that are made up of a man a woman and children, basically a family with meaningful documents and forms of identification into the country, anything else outside of that is a no from me.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Rishi Sunak relaunches plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda
- UK politics AUA (Ask Us Anything) – no question too simple!
- Participation crisis essay
- Rochdale By-election: George Galloway elected as new MP
- Can immigration actually been controlled?
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- TSR Community Awards 2023 - VOTING NOW CLOSED!
- "The best thing about the course is the placements." - Emily, Public Health
- 2023–24 by-elections thread
- Asylum seeker dies on bibby Stockholm barge
- Jeremy Hunt to deliver budget on March 6 as election looms
- Rethinking the nation state - what a Labour Government could do
- Why are you concerned about migration?
- Lse or Kcl for refugee studies?
- TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?
- Kallisto's Sunday Question: Era
- essay question - sociology
- GCSE Citizenship Revision
- Is Israel winning
- Can someone please give me feedback on my A-Level Politics essay?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
