Do you oppose muslim immigration

[tres borrachos]

But what about women in New England being totally hot?

We can hang on to that stereotype, can't we?

Some of us are hot. :mrgreen:

 

[clownboy]

I voted no, on the grounds that it's bigoted and obnoxious. I know quite a few Muslims, and they are great people. Not all Muslims are radical killers, just like not all people from the South are like Dylann Roof and not all law students are like Ted Bundy and not all New Englanders are like Adam Lanza and not all men who dress up as clowns are like John Wayne Gacy. Let's just say I'm not a big fan of the broad brushing.

Except NONE of those were immigrants. How many Muslim immigrants do you know?

I'm okay with a temporary ban until the government gets a better handle on whom is immigrating and for what reasons. Immigration should be a vehicle for us to enrich our nation and not just to relieve the population stresses of other nations.

 

[Fledermaus]

Ghettoization IS a source of problems.

Stop forcing them to ghettos.

 

[tres borrachos]

Except NONE of those were immigrants. How many Muslim immigrants do you know?

I'm okay with a temporary ban until the government gets a better handle on whom is immigrating and for what reasons. Immigration should be a vehicle for us to enrich our nation and not just to relieve the population stresses of other nations.

My next door neighbors are Muslim immigrants.

 

[shrubnose]

I'm opposed to xenophobia and hate speech.

 

[clownboy]

My next door neighbors are Muslim immigrants.

And if we temporarily ban new Muslim immigration will you and your neighbors treat them differently? Of course not.

 

[clownboy]

I'm opposed to xenophobia and hate speech.

Good for you. Now you might want to find a thread where those are the subject at hand.

 

[Natan]

Looks like Trump can forget about that presidency. Too bad. The last time the US had the chance to turn things (NAFTA) around with Perot, they wasted the chance too.

 

[Lutherf]

If a person wishes to come to this country as a refugee from a war torn nation then we should offer them our support.

We welcomed Cambodians escaping the Khmer Rouge. We welcomed Vietnamese escaping Le Duan and the Communists. Granted, in those cases there was identifiable government oppression but Assad has gassed his own people too!

We need to understand that not even all Salafists and Wahhabists are head choppers, much less Muslims as a whole. The head choppers are a death cult. They don't care who they kill. If you are a moderate Muslim you are as likely to be their victim as if you are a Christian or a Jew. The result is that thousands upon thousands of people are attempting to save themselves from the insanity that has taken over their homeland.

While we would be morally bankrupt to merely shut our door to people in need we do need to consider the possibility of radicals using the guise of refugee status to infiltrate this country. That's why we need to treat all applicants as asylum seekers. They need to be protected from day one but also need to be interviewed and vetted to the best of our ability. We need to determine if their intent is to become Americans or to merely seek refuge until they can return home. Those that choose to stay must also be welcomed into our communities.

Will some head choppers get through? Yes, they will. Perhaps they will get through as "refugees" and perhaps as students and perhaps as infiltrators across our border. That, however, will happen whether we help the needy or not. To that end the humane thing to do is extend our hand but keep vigilant.

 

[ocean515]

Can you supply links for that (bolded above) assertion?

Are All Terrorists Muslims? It?s Not Even Close - The Daily Beast

I'm not convinced the information presented by Daily Beast is as accurate as the author would like readers to believe.

For example, one group left out of the article is ISIS, which is indeed a terrorist group, according to the UN:

ISIS had “carried out attacks deliberately and systematically targeting civilians and civilian infrastructure, with the intention of killing and wounding civilians.” The UN concluded that in the first eight months of 2014, at least 9,347 civilians had been killed and at least 17,386 wounded. While all these deaths are not attributable to ISIS alone, ISIS is identified as the primary actor. (The report also documents what could be considered war crimes committed by the Iraqi military.)​

 

[shrubnose]

Good for you. Now you might want to find a thread where those are the subject at hand.

The OP asked: Do you oppose Muslim immigration? and I answered that I oppose xenophobia and hate speech.

If you don't like my posts just ignore them.




"The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen." ~ Tommy Smothers

 

[clownboy]

The OP asked: Do you oppose Muslim immigration? and I answered that I oppose xenophobia and hate speech.

If you don't like my posts just ignore them.

No need to explain that you conflated xenophobia and hate speech with what was said, got that already. Thus my response.

 

[clownboy]

We welcomed Cambodians escaping the Khmer Rouge. We welcomed Vietnamese escaping Le Duan and the Communists.

To be fair, a large percentage of that was entirely due to deals we made with those people during the war. Help us now and when we leave we'll take you with us.

 

[iacardsfan]

No. And the best part is he wants to bar muslim AMERICAN CITIZENS from re-entry into the country. If there is ever a violation of the 1st amendment, this is it.

 

[clownboy]

No. And the best part is he wants to bar muslim AMERICAN CITIZENS from re-entry into the country. If there is ever a violation of the 1st amendment, this is it.

A direct quote would go a long way towards proving you haven't just drunk the MSM koolaid.

 

[shrubnose]

No need to explain that you conflated xenophobia and hate speech with what was said, got that already. Thus my response.

Donald Trump conflates xenophobia and hate speech on a regular basis.

 

[tres borrachos]

And if we temporarily ban new Muslim immigration will you and your neighbors treat them differently? Of course not.

You lost me on this. Treat who differently?

My next door neighbors are great people. We've known them now for 15 years. They have a key to our house. Their kids babysat mine. I trust them with my house, my kids, my dogs. They are hardworking, decent people who live as American as we do. They are living proof that not all Muslims are bad people. If we banned them from coming in 18 years ago this town, my neighborhood, my state and this country would have missed out on exceptional people. They are also now American citizens. They love the USA and love the great and better life they got here.

 

[Objective Voice]

Ghettoization IS a source of problems.

Then perhaps the solution to this problem is to STOP attempting to hoard large groups of people into confined residential communities where the conditions reduce men to the lowest basic human instinct of "survival of the fittest" and "only the strong survive".

Just a thought...

As to your poll question: See post 2, & 4.

 

[Zyphlin]

The percentage that does seems uncomfortably high and rather seems to suggest taking the safe route.

We have immigration officials who are tasked with vetting people for a reason. Wholesale punishing those seeking to immigrate here...AND citizens of this country who are sponsoring their immigration in some cases...because we'd rather our government be lazy and punish people because of what OTHER people think is lazy and poor policy.

 

[The Mark]

No.

Because, apart from such a move being unconstitutional, Muslims are not a threat.

 

[Bodi]

I voted yes but then again I support closing the borders to immigration completely...

 

[DA60]

I don't give a **** what religion they are.

As with ANYONE, do an extensive background check and if they are okay...let 'em in. If they are not, don't.


But to turn away everyone who is a certain major religion is the result of stupidity and/or cowardice and/or xenophobia.

 

[Zyphlin]

If someone intimates support for terrorist action, I'm fine with revoking their ability to immigrate. This goes for those who believe actions of Islamic terrorists are justified or those believing the IRA's actions are justified.

If someone indicates support or agreement with an enemy of the united states, regardless of what their religion may be.

If someone gives sufficient reason to believe they have no desire to assimilate to our rule of law and will be a supporter and advocate for unconstitutional forms of law, then I'm fine with denying them the ability to immigrate. This goes for those who's stance is that Sharia law should be used in place of or in conjunction with American law, just as it would go for an individual suggesting that "Gods Law" or the 10 commandments or the edicts of the Pope should over rule / replace / be used instead of American law.

If the issue is not inherently the religion of the individuals coming in, but rather the views/beliefs/mentality of some of those within that religion, then we should be targeting those views/beliefs/mentalities and not the religion in and of itself.

I'll take a thousand Muslims who through vetting we can reasonably state believes that secular government is proper, that ISIS and other terrorist groups should be wiped out, and that terrorism is not justified due to religious beliefs or "offense" over a non-Muslim who through vetting is shown to believe "Gods Law" should overrule that of man, that believes terrorist or unlawful actions are justified or a viable option to combat things they disagree with due to religious moral grounds, and has a positive view of groups who seek to secede from this country.

 

[German guy]

Even though there are way too many Muslims with sympathies for islamism (not a majority, but a significant minority) and even more who hold conservative values that clash with Western values, there are still many Muslims who can easily be integrated and pose no threat. They shouldn't be held hostage for the deeds of radicals.

That said, I do care that immigrants are chosen by criteria that make sense and exclude people with problematic political and/or religious views. No system is perfect and there will always be people able to cheat them, but I'm sure ways can be found to minimize the risk down to an acceptable level. Not sure what exactly such a system is supposed to look like, I'd leave that to experts for the time being.

 

[Lovebug]

We have immigration officials who are tasked with vetting people for a reason. Wholesale punishing those seeking to immigrate here...AND citizens of this country who are sponsoring their immigration in some cases...because we'd rather our government be lazy and punish people because of what OTHER people think is lazy and poor policy.

Yes, and lets not forget that we have people born in this country who may pose a greater threat than any immigrant, regardless of religion.