Yes, pointing out the stupid lengths to which we go to make divisions berween human beings is extremely serious business.

 

It was certainly very serious business when establishing the United States of America and it's Constitution.

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Canadian

Cuban

Latino

Mexican

British

Hispanic

French

 

Bingo.  You have the right idea.

 

A black person born in the U.S. is NOT "African-American", that person is black.

A person of Mexican heritage born in the U.S. is NOT "Mexican-American", that person is sometimes referred to as brown.

A white person of Irish decent born in the U.S. is NOT "Irish-American", that person is white.

 

My point is, people, especially those on the left need to stop putting people into categories.  The thing is, each of the people above are Americans, nothing more, nothing less.  They might be described by skin color, but they are all American.

 

The same thing is true of this whole "LGBT" thing.

 

Lesbian = GAY.

Gay = GAY

Bisexual = GAY

Transgender = GAY.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Bingo. You have the right idea.


A black person born in the U.S. is NOT "African-American", that person is black.

A person of Mexican heritage born in the U.S. is NOT "Mexican-American", that person is sometimes referred to as brown.

A white person of Irish decent born in the U.S. is NOT "Irish-American", that person is white.


My point is, people, especially those on the left need to stop putting people into categories. The thing is, each of the people above are Americans, nothing more, nothing less. They might be described by skin color, but they are all American.

Does this mean you'd oppose the unconstitutional targeting of Americans who happen to be Muslim or of Arabic descent with a "registry" too?

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

Does this mean you'd oppose the unconstitutional targeting of Americans who happen to be Muslim or of Arabic descent with a "registry" too?

Of course.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It was certainly very serious business when establishing the United States of America and it's Constitution.

Yes. Are you proposing that we return to that society?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Does this mean you'd oppose the unconstitutional targeting of Americans who happen to be Muslim or of Arabic descent with a "registry" too?

 

Certainly.  However, I would not be opposed to creating a registry of non-Americans entering the country who fit the profile of terrorists.  Yes I would profile them.  Muslim?  On the list.  Arabic?  On the list.  Come from Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Afghanistan, etc.?  You're on the list.

 

Is that harsh?  Certainly it is.  It is rational?  Certainly.  You can't be PC when screening for potential threats, and the limited categories that I described are potential threats.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Is there such a thing as a "white Hispanic"?

Me!


What else do you call a Caucasian Colombian Canadian?

---

Does this mean you'd oppose the unconstitutional targeting of Americans who happen to be Muslim or of Arabic descent with a "registry" too?

100% we should scrutinize immigration solely on a national basis, to make it based on anything else is a horribly dangerous compromise of civil liberties.

---

Me!

What else do you call a Caucasian Colombian Canadian?

Droid model C3 Cay Co?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

100% we should scrutinize immigration solely on a national basis, to make it based on anything else is a horribly dangerous compromise of civil liberties.

We shouldn't scrutinize Americans at all, incoming immigrants should certainly be scrutinized by religious affiliation among other things.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

We shouldn't scrutinize Americans at all, incoming immigrants should certainly be scrutinized by religious affiliation among other things.

I get where your coming from I just think it's safer to say we won't take people from x country becuase it's a risk, than saying we won't take people of x religion or x culture. It's achieving the same end goal but without setting a precident that religion or culture is a choice that has to be approved by the state.

---

I get where your coming from I just think it's safer to say we won't take people from x country becuase it's a risk, than saying we won't take people of x religion or x culture. It's achieving the same end goal but without setting a precident that religion or culture is a choice that has to be approved by the state.

I would gladly accept a Coptic from Egypt but would reject a Muslim from the same country. Ditto an Israeli Jew vs. a "Palestinian" from the same area. It's unrealistic to believe that we are at war with countries, we're at war with an extremist religion. At this time I would not accept a Muslim of any type without deep vetting of his/her background.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Bingo. You have the right idea.


A black person born in the U.S. is NOT "African-American", that person is black.

A person of Mexican heritage born in the U.S. is NOT "Mexican-American", that person is sometimes referred to as brown.

A white person of Irish decent born in the U.S. is NOT "Irish-American", that person is white.


My point is, people, especially those on the left need to stop putting people into categories. The thing is, each of the people above are Americans, nothing more, nothing less. They might be described by skin color, but they are all American.


The same thing is true of this whole "LGBT" thing.


Lesbian = GAY.

Gay = GAY

Bisexual = GAY

Transgender = GAY.

Just shut up already and let Solid Snake play Jdub and tell you what kind of Mexican you are.

---

I would gladly accept a Coptic from Egypt but would reject a Muslim from the same country. Ditto an Israeli Jew vs. a "Palestinian" from the same area. It's unrealistic to believe that we are at war with countries, we're at war with an extremist religion. At this time I would not accept a Muslim of any type without deep vetting of his/her background.

Can't let the current times set the precedent for future actions.


Suppose the next protestant vs catholic fued fires up the you've set the precedent to ban Catholicism and Protestants.


Who's to say anyone with I'll intent won't lie about their religion?


It's impossible to vet religion, it has to be a geographical standard.

---

Can't let the current times set the precedent for future actions.

Suppose the next protestant vs catholic fued fires up the you've set the precedent to ban Catholicism and Protestants.

Who's to say anyone with I'll intent won't lie about their religion?

It's impossible to vet religion, it has to be a geographical standard.

You assume we have to let anyone in, the a false premise.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

And yet the Democrats trotted out a candidate so criminal and unlikable that she couldn't defeat him with the unabashed support of the media.

 

Yep.  That they did. 

 

I'm going to hold off on judging President Trump until he actually does something. 

 

You never know.  He could turn out to be the greatest President of all time.  It's possible.   

---

You assume we have to let anyone in, the a false premise.

In that scenario it's a total ban on everyone still safer than empowering the state to dictate religion

---

In that scenario it's a total ban on everyone still safer than empowering the state to dictate religion

Refusal to acknowledge the identity of the enemy is the surest way to lose any conflict.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

In that scenario it's a total ban on everyone still safer than empowering the state to dictate religion

Killing innocent people isn't a religious right.

 

It makes it fanaticism.

 

Go over to Iran and open up a nice Catholic church and see how long it takes before you're swinging from a rope.

 

There are ALREADY areas in the US where citizens are warned not to go due to this very thing. Dearborn, MI leads the list.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

Refusal to acknowledge the identity of the enemy is the surest way to lose any conflict.

I know who my enemy is, authoritarians be it the state, jihadist, communist, fascist ect....


My only point is the same point I've made about multiple topics on here. How we address a threat matters as much as addressing it. Banning or restricting immigration based on geographical borders is the only way to prevent one enemy from empowering another. I fully stand against empowering the state to dictate religion.

---