Quote:Not yet, anyway. Don't worry: if you give them the power to strip others of their rights, they'll come for yours soon enough.
Let's be clear: foreigners do not have the right to enter this country.
As dear old dad used to say, you have to plug the hole before you start to bale.
As for internal matters, that should be something for the police to handle as best they are able without violating the rights of the populace. And the populace should be prepared to defend itself against the bad actors.
Quote:Not yet, anyway. Don't worry: if you give them the power to strip others of their rights, they'll come for yours soon enough.
Immigrants do not have US rights outside of this country (once they are in it is a different story), therefor there is nothing to strip. Also, aren't you giving in to fear mongering at this point as well?
Quote:Immigrants do not have US rights outside of this country (once they are in it is a different story), therefor there is nothing to strip. Also, aren't you giving in to fear mongering at this point as well?
I refuse to let fear dictate my personal policies. Blocking immigration based upon country of origin is rooted in precedent and a common sense move. Blocking it based upon intangible factors like which nonspecific deity someone claims to pray to is unenforceable and unamerican.
Quote:I refuse to let fear dictate my personal policies. Blocking immigration based upon country of origin is rooted in precedent and a common sense move. Blocking it based upon intangible factors like which nonspecific deity someone claims to pray to is unenforceable and unamerican.
Not only that, but also, it is incredibly stupid strategy to tell 1.6 billion people they cannot enter the US, even as tourists. That simply enables ISIS to tell those 1.6 billion people, "See, the US does hate Muslims, and this is proof that this is a war between Islam and the United States. Come join us in our righteous cause."
There are 1.6 billion Muslims all over the world, and Trump would draw a line and put them on the other side of it, alongside ISIS. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Not even workable, anyway.
Quote:Not only that, but also, it is incredibly stupid strategy to tell 1.6 billion people they cannot enter the US, even as tourists. That simply enables ISIS to tell those 1.6 billion people, "See, the US does hate Muslims, and this is proof that this is a war between Islam and the United States. Come join us in our righteous cause."
There are 1.6 billion Muslims all over the world, and Trump would draw a line and put them on the other side of it, alongside ISIS. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Not even workable, anyway.
Why are Muslims so touchy that, by being denied immigration to the US, they should suddenly become murderous psychopaths?
Quote:I don't know, I am not a seer. What do you think? What would you do to handle the situation?
I would not sacrifice core values over a technicality.
Quote:Why are Muslims so touchy that, by being denied immigration to the US, they should suddenly become murderous psychopaths?
"All in all you're just another brick in the wall"
Quote:I would not sacrifice core values over a technicality.
Alright, but what are you going to
do? Can you provide an example of how you would keep potential terrorists out of the country? You like to criticize the solutions presented, but offer up empty words as a counteraction. Lets hear something concrete.
Quote:Alright, but what are you going to do? Can you provide an example of how you would keep potential terrorists out of the country? You like to criticize the solutions presented, but offer up empty words as a counteraction. Lets hear something concrete.
First, show me where our current immigration policies are the problem. Since 9/11 and subsequent changes in immigration policy and organizational structure, there have been 9 domestic attacks attributed to Islamist extremism. Of those, most were committed by self radicalized citizens or legal residents, often American born. The wife of the San Benardino couple came here on a fiance visa. The Little Rock assailant, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, was born here and went to Yemen, from where he was deported after overstaying his visa. Ironically, he wasn't even tried as a terrorist because investigators saw too many similarities to domestic extremist attacks. The LAX shooter immigrated in the early 1990s.
I'm not naive, but I'm also not quick to a knee jerk reaction. Increase scrutiny, tighten up the vetting process, whatever. But for all the talk of slippery slopes, if you can't see how The Donald is right at the top, opening the spigot of oil keeping this one slick, you aren't looking.
Quote:You aren't giving up your liberty, unless I have you confused with immigrant Achmed Eric from Tajikistan. Aren't you a citizen? What liberties are you giving up by restricting immigration? I agree with your other points.
Ok going to try and stay within the coc but homeland security the atf and a multitide of other federal agencies have all said they view home green radical cjristian movements as the greatest threat for domestic terroism. Now leaving out if that's a fair or accurate assumption I'm pointing it out that's the assumption numerous federal agenicea have made. So don't think for a minute the precedent of using religion (any religion) as a qualifier or disqualifier is going to begin and end with Muslim immigrants. Once you open that door who knows how deep the rabbit hole goes. That's why HOW problems are addressed is so important.
It shouldn't even be an issue. Jimmy Carter blocked Iranians from coming to the U.S. Israel has EXTREMELY strict policies regarding immigration yet nobody is calling them Nazis, LOL.
Fact is, refugees from all over the world are arriving in the West with fake Syrian passports. Trump is correct that we should block refugees from this country (and possibly others) until we can figure out how to properly vet them.
Quote:It shouldn't even be an issue. Jimmy Carter blocked Iranians from coming to the U.S. Israel has EXTREMELY strict policies regarding immigration yet nobody is calling them Nazis, LOL.
Fact is, refugees from all over the world are arriving in the West with fake Syrian passports. Trump is correct that we should block refugees from this country (and possibly others) until we can figure out how to properly vet them.
That's not what he's saying.
Quote:It shouldn't even be an issue. Jimmy Carter blocked Iranians from coming to the U.S. Israel has EXTREMELY strict policies regarding immigration yet nobody is calling them Nazis, LOL.
Fact is, refugees from all over the world are arriving in the West with fake Syrian passports. Trump is correct that we should block refugees from this country (and possibly others) until we can figure out how to properly vet them.
No one would argue against that, Trump is saying he want to create a religious test before accepting immigrants. Trump is advocating weather on not he knows it for the state to have the power to ask what is your religion, based upon that answer we are going to do ____.
That's a mighty dangerous rabbit hole to go down in the name of security.
Quote:No one would argue against that, Trump is saying he want to create a religious test before accepting immigrants. Trump is advocating weather on not he knows it for the state to have the power to ask what is your religion, based upon that answer we are going to do ____.
That's a mighty dangerous rabbit hole to go down in the name of security.
Trump recognizes that Islam is antithetical to Western Culture. This isn't breaking news, it's been this way for 1300 years.
Quote:Trump recognizes that Islam is antithetical to Western Culture. This isn't breaking news, it's been this way for 1300 years.
So let's say that, hypothetically, Trump gets his way, and a religious litmus test is placed on immigrants. How long do you think it takes for the next homegrown Muslim shooter to pop up? And what do you think happens then, hm? Here's a hint: "religion" becomes a field on government IDs. Want to get on a plane? If there's an "I" next to the new "religion" line on your driver's license, you'll be stepping into a private room to have your butt probed first.
And who says it stops there? Muslims are all terrorists and deserve that level of scrutiny, right? But what if the new Republican Party--the Trump Party--notices that atheists vote overwhelmingly Democratic? It becomes politically expedient to remove them from the voter pool, right? And what better way to do that than to whip the morons who are already licking Trump's boots on the topic of Islam into a frenzy by claiming that atheism is a threat to our society? How? Does it really matter how? The caliber of person who would fall for the concept of "banning Islam" would fall for banning any other religion for whatever reason Trump threw out there, I promise you that.
And now that I've danced with the COC and hopefully lived to tell about it, my point: freedom of religion is a right afforded by the documents that founded this country to all HUMANS. Not all Americans. We're a subset of humanity, not the whole thing. Denying someone immigration or a visa based on their religion--or even their refusal to identify their religion--goes against what we as Americans stand for. Don't agree? Read the bleep-bleeped Statue of Liberty. Denying immigration based upon country of origin? Yeah, go for it. That's how it should be done, and if a few Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists or Scientologists get left out in the cold as a result, then so be it. We're applying our policies evenly to
everyone, as it should be.
Quote:Trump recognizes that Islam is antithetical to Western Culture. This isn't breaking news, it's been this way for 1300 years.
What a load of bunk. Trump recognizes calling for a ban on Muslim immigrants stirs controversy, draws attention and appeals to his base.
It's so funny to see the PC crowd go on offense against Trump. Hilarious haha
Quote:Intrigued to hear peoples opinion on this... Will this finally break the Trump campaign?
"Break"?
It's completely reasonable.
If the system is broken and the checks can't be made and/or aren't reliable, there's nothing wrong with a wait/freeze/cooling off period.
No one has ever said "forever."
Very reasonable in today's climate. It would be irresponsible to accept the status quo, the thing those opposed to him are religiously preaching about in their "progressive" conquest to dominate public groupthink.
Quote:What a load of bunk. Trump recognizes calling for a ban on Muslim immigrants stirs controversy, draws attention and appeals to his base.
With the most important point being the media relishes in it. They disagree, but selfishly devour it for ratings.
Quite simply, he's practicing the art of the deal.
He'd never implement something as drastic as the ludicrous left would suggest. He'd "compromise" on that stance and end up with exactly the policy he'd (privately) find reasonable in the beginning.
Quote:With the most important point being the media relishes in it. They disagree, but selfishly devour it for ratings.
Quite simply, he's practicing the art of the deal.
He'd never implement something as drastic as the ludicrous left would suggest. He'd "compromise" on that stance and end up with exactly the policy he'd (privately) find reasonable in the beginning.
People say things. Other people repeat the things that were said, take them at face value, and criticize them and those are the ridiculous people? That doesn't really compute.
It wasn't that long ago that "words have meaning" was some kind of battle cry.