or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Official Terrorist Bombing and Other Acts of Inhumanity Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official Terrorist Bombing and Other Acts of Inhumanity Thread - Page 9

post #121 of 1314
It doesn't take a right-wing Sherlock (or a convenient brown spokesperson!) to prove that large swaths of the Muslim world are suffering from problems of fundamentalism and of extremism. The question (again, that's beyond my pay grade--and yours too!) is how best to deal with that problem at home and abroad. Suited keeps stroking his patriotism boner by arguing persuasively declaring that we have to close our borders to Muslims!

Let's just put aside the fact that religious discrimination of this sort cuts directly against America's supposed founding values (I mean, cuts directly against the same Founding Fathers toward whom your patriotism boner is always supposed to point). Islam is not a country or an ethnicity--it's a fucking world religion that a quarter of the world's population subscribes to. Here's a handy list of Muslim populations by country: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country . Where's your proposed cutoff list for banning immigration from a country? Does Malaysia not make the fucking list? I'm sure you'll herp derp in response about how the answer is obvious (you know, one of those Mooslem countries! We all know!). But it's not fucking simple at all. What if some Kurds who are technically from Iraq (98.9%) get sick of fighting and want to try the American dream?

You want a religious affiliation test at the borders? Check for circumcised dicks (as long as they don't, uhh, look Jewish)?

The practical problems with your non-solution hints at the conceptual basis behind your non-solution and why you're so worked up about it. Islam is one of those global/international phenomena that keeps thwarting your patriotic/nationalist/nation-based worldview. (Yes, terrorism is another one.) You keep looking for a conveniently locatable national enemy for the U.S. to be opposed to. The actual world doesn't work that way.
post #122 of 1314
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by origenesprit View Post

Yes. Is there a Ben Affleck reaction video?

You did not watch it, as yes, Ben was in this video.
post #123 of 1314
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

The practical problems with your non-solution hints at the conceptual basis behind your non-solution and why you're so worked up about it. Islam is one of those global/international phenomena that keeps thwarting your patriotic/nationalist/nation-based worldview. (Yes, terrorism is another one.) You keep looking for a conveniently locatable national enemy for the U.S. to be opposed to. The actual world doesn't work that way.


We can control who comes into our country. "We" (meaning the tiny percentage of greedy corporations and leftist race hustlers and haters that control the nation) just don't want to.

I have always advocated converting these people to Christianity. There is a reason migrants are risking life and limb to escape their homelands (homesland.)
post #124 of 1314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Did anyone bother watching the video I posted? Just wondering.

I did. She made a lot of sense.
post #125 of 1314
The "supposed founding values" do not require us to be religiously neutral in our decisions regarding who we allow to immigrate to the United States.

Do you actually believe that any of our Founding Fathers would have been advocates for large scale muslim immigration to the United States?

Just because Islam is a world religion that a quarter of the world's population subscribes to doesn't mean that Islam is compatible with U.S. culture and values. In fact, past and recent history has shown Islam to be inimical to the liberal Western traditions that are the basis for the "supposed founding values" of the United States.

We should absolutely be discriminating on the basis of religion when formulating immigration policy. We should also be discriminating based on education, financial status, intelligence, and skill level. Currently, our immigration system seems designed to favor immigrants who are least likely to be culturally compatible, and most likely to be a financial and social burden.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

Let's just put aside the fact that religious discrimination of this sort cuts directly against America's supposed founding values (I mean, cuts directly against the same Founding Fathers toward whom your patriotism boner is always supposed to point). Islam is not a country or an ethnicity--it's a fucking world religion that a quarter of the world's population subscribes to.
post #126 of 1314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

You did not watch it, as yes, Ben was in this video.

Why would I have brought him up if I hadn't seen him in the video?
post #127 of 1314
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by origenesprit View Post

Why would I have brought him up if I hadn't seen him in the video?

Thought you had maybe seen the original airing of the Mahr program and was referencing that.
post #128 of 1314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai View Post

The "supposed founding values" do not require us to be religiously neutral in our decisions regarding who we allow to immigrate to the United States.

Do you actually believe that any of our Founding Fathers would have been advocates for large scale muslim immigration to the United States?

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendI_religions45.html

I know actually quoting Jefferson won't help at all because you'll believe in whatever Jefferson you want believe in. And, of course, whenever it suits you, you'll revert to some sloppy appeal to historical contextualization whereby Jefferson could never have foreseen these complex modern times we live in with the existential threat of large-scale mooslem immigration. But, in any case, there's a quotation for you to weasel around. Have fun.
post #129 of 1314
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai View Post

Do you actually believe that any of our Founding Fathers would have been advocates for large scale muslim immigration to the United States?

If there's an afterlife somewhere there is a crap ton of Indians shaking their heads and laughing.
post #130 of 1314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post

I have always advocated converting these people to Christianity.

Great idea, if a bit unoriginal! But say, trinitarian doctrine has always been a serious point of contention between Christianity and Islam and will probably get in the way of your benevolent missionary endeavors. Islamic theology (speaking broadly) tends to see trinitarian doctrine as a strange concession to polytheism--and you gotta admit Muslims have a point there! Maybe you can get together with your fellow Christian leaders and reviewing the conditions under which trinitarian doctrine became orthodoxy in the third and fourth centuries.

I'm sure you'll pray on it!
post #131 of 1314
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

Great idea, if a bit unoriginal! But say, trinitarian doctrine has always been a serious point of contention between Christianity and Islam and will probably get in the way of your benevolent missionary endeavors. Islamic theology (speaking broadly) tends to see trinitarian doctrine as a strange concession to polytheism--and you gotta admit they have a point! Maybe you can get together with your fellow Christian leaders and reviewing the conditions under which trinitarian doctrine became orthodoxy in the third and fourth centuries.

I'm sure you'll pray on it!

If I was to take a religious bent I'd be all over polytheism.
post #132 of 1314
Here is a question for Eric, or anyone else who wants to chime in:

I will presume you are in favor of some kind of numerical limit on the number of immigrants the US allows annually. Maybe that number is 200K, maybe 10M, it's not hugely important.

Given that a limit is going to exist, do you think it makes sense to prioritize the people most compatible with our existing society? If we can fill up our queue with immigrants from the anglosphere, europe, and east asia... why go looking in rural Pakistan for recruits?


Phrased another way-- there are probably hundreds of thousands of Chinese who would move here permanently if a path existed. They don't get to come, and yet during 2009-2013 we have issued 680,000 green cards to migrants from countries no one would argue are Muslim (83K from Pakistan, 83K from Iraq, 75K from Bangladesh, 73K from Iran, 45K from Egypt, 31K from Somalia, etc.) Someone is going to get left out due to hard number limits, why not make sure it's the folks least accretive to our culture?
post #133 of 1314

I'm actually not in favor of some arbitrary limit to immigration.  Anyone who comes here gets screened for certain things (such as risk of being a terrorist), and if they pass the screening they come in as permanent residents.  Then after some period of time, they can apply for citizenship.  They take a test, and then are full citizens.  I would also reform welfare, so it only applies to citizens.

post #134 of 1314
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

I'm actually not in favor of some arbitrary limit to immigration.  Anyone who comes here gets screened for certain things (such as risk of being a terrorist), and if they pass the screening they come in as permanent residents.  Then after some period of time, they can apply for citizenship.  They take a test, and then are full citizens.  I would also reform welfare, so it only applies to citizens.


no no no you're not playing the game right

you have to answer the question only while keeping to pennglock's assumptions: everyone believes in numerical quotas on immigration; there's a hierarchy of cultures whereby brown pakis are less accretive* to our culture than chinamen

* - i cringed typing this phrase. i know it's too much to ask pennglock to say something smart, but maybe he could work on making his prose a little less abject
post #135 of 1314
Thread Starter 
When I decided to move to the US it took over a year and a few trips to both the Detroit immigration center and the US embassy in Toronto.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Official Terrorist Bombing and Other Acts of Inhumanity Thread