1 2 3 >  Last ›
 
   
 

The case for a Muslim immigration ban

 
Vociferous Fuckweasel
 
Avatar
 
 
Vociferous Fuckweasel
Total Posts:  57
Joined  21-06-2019
 
 
 
29 January 2020 15:22
 

I’m tempted to answer my own question with a one-word answer - Europe -but that wouldn’t be much fun.

To put it plainly, my opinion is;  the less Islam the better.
And since we’re a sovereign nation, we get to decide who can join us and who can’t.

When Theo van Gogh (yes, he’s related) was butchered in the streets of Amsterdam by a Moroccan Muslim in 2004, Theo’s lasts words were allegedly ” Kunnen we hier niet over praten ?”, which translates to ” Can’t we talk about this ?”.
You can’t fault a man for expressing himself poorly while he’s being filleted, but this utterance is emblematic of the blind spot the West has when facing the old-time religion of Islam.
They’ve forgotten how things used to be, just like those well-educated Marin county parents who refuse to vaccinate their kids.

So now I find myself in the odd position of agreeing with the current president on this issue,
And I have a hunch that his election had quite a bit to do with speaking honestly, albeit idiotically, about the threat Islam poses to us.
Compare that to a current democratic candidate, Bloomberg, who declared a day after 911 that Islam had nothing to do with it.

It’s instructive to see how a dictatorship like China deals with this issue, since they don’t have to worry about PR.

Hopefully this is enough of a start for a illuminating conversation.

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9986
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
29 January 2020 20:47
 

You seem to have a solution looking for a problem.  Before we sharpen our swords on the issue, the burden of proof is yours, that is, what exactly is the problem with Islam being in the US right now?  And what does Islam mean for the future in the US?

 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  3072
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
29 January 2020 22:07
 

There are many aspects of US society where you could make the “the less the better” argument.
Why don’t we put all White Supremacists into Camps?

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  18127
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
29 January 2020 22:32
 

Islam is a vile and insidious ideology and there is nothing so great or wonderful about it’s adherents that they need to be imported, protected and coddled.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  18127
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
29 January 2020 22:39
 
Twissel - 29 January 2020 10:07 PM

There are many aspects of US society where you could make the “the less the better” argument.
Why don’t we put all White Supremacists into Camps?

Is there a mass immigration of White Supremacists trying to get into the US? And if you want to be equal and fair then you must give them the same rights and protections to their vile and insidious ideology as Muslims or any other group. If you don’t then all you are doing here is saying that you think you are better then someone else because you think the groups you like are better then the ones they like. Just pick a sports team and be done with it.

 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  3072
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
30 January 2020 02:43
 

I thought while we are judging people by their thoughts, not their actions, we might as well lock up everyone we don’t agree with.

On a side-note: in the last decade, white extremist violence in the US has far outpaced Muslim extremist violence.

 
 
Vociferous Fuckweasel
 
Avatar
 
 
Vociferous Fuckweasel
Total Posts:  57
Joined  21-06-2019
 
 
 
30 January 2020 09:42
 
Skipshot - 29 January 2020 08:47 PM

You seem to have a solution looking for a problem.  Before we sharpen our swords on the issue, the burden of proof is yours, that is, what exactly is the problem with Islam being in the US right now?  And what does Islam mean for the future in the US?

You mean what is the problem besides the odd airplane flying into a building?

I’m looking at my continent of birth, where mass migration of Muslims started more than two generations ago.
I’m trying to imagine if the US would look any different if they followed the same path.
I have no reason yet to believe this.

The crux of the matter seems to me to be a matter of integration and assimilation. Being an immigrant nation, we assimilated about every single community and we’ve done OK so far, one might argue.
Islam is a different animal. It doesn’t assimilate.
Ask anyone in the Netherlands, for example, if they like sharing their country with Muslim immigrants. I can tell you their answer.
I’m using this example because the Dutch are not exactly known for their xenophobia.

Islam is antithetical to Western values, to the enlightenment, to all I care about.
How could it not be, it’s anchored to the morals and wisdom of the seventh century.

It seems to me blindingly obvious that if you wish to build a open and free society, there’re a few isms you want as little of as possible, Islamism is very high up that list.

 

 

 

 
 
Cheshire Cat
 
Avatar
 
 
Cheshire Cat
Total Posts:  1536
Joined  01-11-2014
 
 
 
30 January 2020 11:45
 

I don’t think American Muslims, or new Muslim immigrants, are any more of a threat, and are perhaps even less of one, than our own “Christian Taliban” — the Evangelical Christians.

The vetting process for people from Muslim countries is extremely rigorous.

Check out this article by a Syrian Muslim refugee, Mostafa Hassoun:

Over 15 months I was interviewed five times – in person, over the phone, by the United Nations and by the United States. They asked me about my family, my politics, my hobbies, my childhood, my opinions of the U.S., and even my love life. No less than four U.S. government agencies had the opportunity to screen me. By the time I received my offer to live in the United States, the U.S. officials in charge of my case file knew me better than my family and friends do.

In fact, there is probably nobody in the world that knows me better than the United States government.

https://tinyurl.com/tx5pzt4

This country has an extreme tolerance or crazy religious ideas. In fact, one person with such crazy beliefs is currently vice president of the United States. As long as the vetting process has proven these immigrants to be non-violent, moderate Muslims, then I don’t see these people as a problem to be feared.

 
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3318
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
30 January 2020 14:16
 
Vociferous Fuckweasel - 29 January 2020 03:22 PM

I’m tempted to answer my own question with a one-word answer - Europe -but that wouldn’t be much fun.

To put it plainly, my opinion is;  the less Islam the better.
And since we’re a sovereign nation, we get to decide who can join us and who can’t.

When Theo van Gogh (yes, he’s related) was butchered in the streets of Amsterdam by a Moroccan Muslim in 2004, Theo’s lasts words were allegedly ” Kunnen we hier niet over praten ?”, which translates to ” Can’t we talk about this ?”.
You can’t fault a man for expressing himself poorly while he’s being filleted, but this utterance is emblematic of the blind spot the West has when facing the old-time religion of Islam.
They’ve forgotten how things used to be, just like those well-educated Marin county parents who refuse to vaccinate their kids.

So now I find myself in the odd position of agreeing with the current president on this issue,
And I have a hunch that his election had quite a bit to do with speaking honestly, albeit idiotically, about the threat Islam poses to us.
Compare that to a current democratic candidate, Bloomberg, who declared a day after 911 that Islam had nothing to do with it.

It’s instructive to see how a dictatorship like China deals with this issue, since they don’t have to worry about PR.

Hopefully this is enough of a start for a illuminating conversation.

 

 

 

 

I found myself in agreement with the OP entirely… except puzzled by this sentence “I have a hunch that his election had quite a bit to do with speaking honestly, albeit idiotically, about the threat Islam poses to us.”

What idiotic things has he said about the threat of Islam?

He gave a speech to the Arab Islamic American Summit in 2 mos after taking office and said this looking right at them:

“Religious leaders must make this absolutely clear: Barbarism will deliver you no glory – piety to evil will bring you no dignity. If you choose the path of terror, your life will be empty, your life will be brief, and YOUR SOUL WILL BE CONDEMNED.”

What other President would have taken on the issue as openly and plainly as he did?

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7991
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
30 January 2020 15:02
 

VF, we’re largely in agreement here.

CC said:

This country has an extreme tolerance or crazy religious ideas. In fact, one person with such crazy beliefs is currently vice president of the United States. As long as the vetting process has proven these immigrants to be non-violent, moderate Muslims, then I don’t see these people as a problem to be feared.

I think a key point that almost always gets brushed under the carpet is that Islam is not a religion. Islam is a totalitarian ideology that happens to have a religious component.

==

For decades now, the US immigration laws have allowed us to deny entry to members of terrorists organizations. I think it’s very easy to make the case that Islam is a terrorist organization.

Now for anyone who wants to let the poor Mussie Wussies in, my answer is this: “Fine, Islam is just a set of ideas. All you have to do is declare that you have decided you don’t support that set of ideas, and we’ll consider letting you in.” But it baffles me why we allow people who proclaim their allegiance to this horrible set of ideas into the country.

As for the two-wrongs-make-it-right “but other religions are bad too” argument, yes we have other problems, so what? Why would we want to exacerbate them.

And finally, I honestly think that in the long run, the kindest thing we can do to help the 1.8 billion people who were born with this anchor around their necks, is to continue to criticize this barbaric, misogynistic, homophobic, anti-semitic, supremacist, theocratic load of crap they call Islam. If we don’t, we’re just allowing this horrible birth burden to spread further.

 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  18127
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
30 January 2020 19:23
 
Cheshire Cat - 30 January 2020 11:45 AM

This country has an extreme tolerance or crazy religious ideas. In fact, one person with such crazy beliefs is currently vice president of the United States.

So basically there is no point in not importing more people with crazy religious ideas to fight with and elect to office. Nice!

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5315
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
30 January 2020 22:00
 

I don’t think this is very well thought out. At least not the stated reasons.

Banning the immigration of self declaring Muslim immigrants and tourists would never have stopped or even slowed down an event like 911. Might as well ban Muslim shampoo at airport security. On that issue its a purely superficial and reactionary policy that doesn’t intersect with real security at all.

On the refugee issue you may have a salient point but I don’t think you ever answered Twissels question. If a propensity for violence is the main justification for discriminatory policies toward a group shouldn’t the total established threat be the deciding factor in the application of such a policy?

Rather than rely on unreflective intuitions informed by newsreels of explosions would we not want to look at the relevant facts? If we are to divide the nations into groups based on religion or some analogous category would we not want to identify the most immediate and most egregious threats first?

Finally, whatever threat Islam may pose from the standpoint of immigration I don’t think its responsible to consider policy changes in a vacuum. Discrimination on the basis of religion is about as unconstitutional as anything I can think of. If we absolutely must do such a thing to survive so be it but I think we need to be wholly sober about the full ramifications. I think it would clearly set a precedent that ones religions is justification as a bar to entry or even a justification for deportation. You can’t close that door and you will have no way of ensuring that some other belief system isn’t next. In fact, we have every reason to believe it would not stop there.

 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6541
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
31 January 2020 12:01
 

Assimilation has become a bad word, but really it’s about constitutional assimilation. Things like liberty, freedom, due process, equality and fairness boil down to affording citizens the right to be able to think, feel, dress, express and say what we please so long as we do so reasonably under the circumstances. It’s actually a pretty solid standard when you look at the rest of the world - especially the middle east.

The brainwashing power of Islamic indoctrination is that it deamonizes every other legal system and ideology as being soul crushing. So on one hand, they come here and become more modern by default. Or they stay there and continue to fear what they can’t fathom. Their demand for political coddling is basically them trying to shed feeling like they sold their soul to the devil for some Levi’s and a cheeseburger. But for the ones who don’t budge at all, they have like zero cultural or legal influence so really who cares? They’re just like the white supremacists or the evangelicals in that nobody really cares about their rigidity anymore. Their time has come and gone, so to speak.

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  7015
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
31 January 2020 13:02
 

We should keep out people whose values are antithetical to our own. Be they Sharia-embracing Muslims; raping, murdering, drug-dealing Central American gang members; or white supremacists—doesn’t matter.

 
 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7991
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
31 January 2020 13:06
 

brick:

If a propensity for violence is the main justification for discriminatory policies toward a group shouldn’t the total established threat be the deciding factor in the application of such a policy?

I for one am not bringing violent terrorism into this discussion.

brick:

Discrimination on the basis of religion is about as unconstitutional as anything I can think of.

Old timers here like to claim that others are sometimes making “category errors”, and I think this is such a case. I believe it’s a mistake to label Islam a religion. It is a totalitarian ideology. And for decades our immigration laws have disqualified applicants who are members of totalitarian ideologies.

 
 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7991
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
31 January 2020 13:07
 
Antisocialdarwinist - 31 January 2020 01:02 PM

We should keep out people whose values are antithetical to our own. Be they Sharia-embracing Muslims; raping, murdering, drug-dealing Central American gang members; or white supremacists—doesn’t matter.

+1

 
 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›