Denies = Does not allow

Inhabitants=the people living within the territory in question

You do see that the debate "Title" and "Description" are meant to be combined as one statement right?

I was purposefully not specific about the government I had in mind, the basic right I had in mind and the type of parasitism I had in mind because I want to see if someone can refute the general principle

I give it by default. Someone has to do something to lose my respect before I will stop giving it.

I support the abolition of all religion. You however, only support the abolition of religions other than your own

IF

You think only "non-religious" systems should be tolerated.

THEN

You are denouncing others for openly doing what you inadvertantly do.

You seem to fancy your brand of intolerance somehow better because you take issue with even more groups (except yours). Wise up

I'm flattered that you spent time investigating me and sharing your suspicions. Here's a hot tip: If you really want to get someones perspective, ask questions without including personal attacks.

I am interested in the fiscal/monetary policies implemented by his regime.

Had I thougbt your question was asked in good faith I might have had more to say. (Smirks)

You seem seduced by the very sort of rhetoric that inspires people to designate overly large groups of people as "the enemy". You have seemingly at least, become part of the problem.

So you think white people should embrace race based tribalism and stop feeling responsible concerning the well being of those who aren't "us"?

BTW I have a controversial opinion about certain ethnic groups being considered rightful owners of certain portions of our earth. Might be interesting to debate.

So you think your culture, (by virtue of the superiority you suppose it has) should enjoy rights that others do not?

Must tribalism involve considering other groups generally inferior?

A more reasonable description of knowledge is:

The information (however erroneous or useful) accessible to one or more agents.

Viewing knowledge as "justified true belief" sets us up to view portions of the information we manage as errorless and our thinking becomes more rigid and dogmatically absolutist. Instead of saying "I have justified true beliefs" its better to say "I think I have adequate information".

No. I believe those strories were what some people found inspiring and chose to canonize. My religion is syncretic and has been influenced by various faiths. I think yours is too, but you are so committed to anti-religion rhetoric it would be difficult to get you to admit it.