• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Americans Support Trump's Stance on Refugees

You all remember this quote:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.

I seem to remember conservatives supporting this quote, especially when discussing gun rights. Now, I for one, disagree with Franklin's quote, but then again, my disagreement is universal. Seems to me that some of our conservative friends are being hypocritical.

We're not giving up any liberties, we're telling these nations to get their act together. This should be a call to action for these nations to start dealing with their problem children and stop ignoring them or even worse supporting them. If doing that is more of a burden on them than not being able to send their best taxi drivers here, then I'd say that the issue isn't all that big a deal.

Can you agree that the best solution for the whole world would be for these nations to not be in a place where they get tagged as being supporters of terrorism??
Shouldn't we be doing everything we can to encourage them to fix their problems??
 
Okay, that's refugees. Trump's travel ban applies to all citizens for all reasons. How many Clinton supporters support banning Canadians or Swiss citizens from vacationing in America because their parents were born in Iran?

That isn't what the directive says at all. The 90-day moratorium is strictly limited to people, all people regardless of race, ethnicity, religion etc., traveling from the seven countries identified by the Obama Administration as the most dangerous countries harboring and/or exporting terrorists. And it is just 90 days to give the administration time to get more effective vetting procedures into place so that we have a better chance for terrorists to be denied admission.

The 'we-hate-Trump-and-intend-for-him-to-fail' media and internet people are citing various anecdotal evidence to show how 'hateful' the policy is. But among the many thousands traveling to the U.S. every day, the very few cases in which people have been inconvenienced are fairly insignificant. And in most of those case, the administration is already letting long time green card holders and already vetted people through.
 
How do you extreme vet tourists and businessmen? How long does the process take? What are the economic costs of doing so?

IMO, we shouldn't be doing any "extreme vetting". For the people who come from this small list of countries, we should be telling them that THEY have to prove that they are safe. Either that or we set a "vetting fee" for ALL immigrants and those who come from these countries have to pay a much higher fee than people from countries that aren't on the list. If they are too poor, then I suggest that they turn to their fellow Muslims for financial help as per the 3rd Pillar of Islam: Zakat: paying an alms (or charity) tax to benefit the poor and the needy.
 
Given that any national or religion could be a terrorist/criminal, surely your national security must require a ban on all citizens in the world from entering the US.

Throwing out the good, because it's not perfect is a great way to kill progress...
 
This is not entirely accurate, and a bit of a hollow victory to walk away with that conclusion.

It does turns out that "27% of Clinton supporters" think that the US "does not have a responsibility to accept refugees from Syria." But that is not really the point of the study.

The main point of that research is to illustrate that the US has allowed refugees into this nation all along, even though the amounts of those allowed in fluctuate based on "global events" (which of course determines who qualifies as refugee) and political dispositions of our government at the time. The biggest impact to the trend, over the study period, was post 9-11 thinking. When this nation by majority decided "safety at the expense of liberty" and we birthed today's flavor of anti-refugee sentiment that still exists today, created the bloated NSA and all that it implies, designed systematic removal of the 4th Amendment at the whim of political intentions, and in the end came up with the Patriot Act that turned out to be the largest power grab by the government over the populace in modern times. Also important to note, while the influx of Muslim refugees was on the incline before Trump's policies we were still accepting plenty of others from other religions as well. At the same time we have been allowing Muslim refugees into this nation both before and after 9-11 suggesting the politics of the situation is what people are clinging to instead of the facts the Pew Report is trying to present.

All that said, the stat that "54% of registered voters said the U.S. does not have a responsibility to accept refugees from Syria, while 41% said it does" means that 54% of the nation is looking to continued governance to "protect them" via the illusion of policy they think keeps them safe. Those are political leaning determinations, and that is with the harsh reality that we have little evidence we are more really more safe after Trump's policies. And speaking of Trump, all he represents is a shift to right leaning authoritarianism from Obama's brand of left wing authoritarianism.

In the end the conclusion is the same, the illusion of safety.
Yes, perfect safety is an illusion.

Risk is a part of life. Knock on wood, a Russian satellite may fall out of the heavens and come crashing down to crush me even if I never venture from my front porch. But there is a reason most of our parents taught us to look both ways [ I still do even with a one way ] before crossing the street. There are ways of minimizing much of the risk and those who do not understand that...

Well, don't look now, but those screeching brakes you hear are a semi headed your way. To your home town. I know, I lived in Orlando about 2 miles away from where the Pulse nightclub worst mass shooting murders occurred.
 
You all remember this quote:

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.

I seem to remember conservatives supporting this quote, especially when discussing gun rights. Now, I for one, disagree with Franklin's quote, but then again, my disagreement is universal. Seems to me that some of our conservative friends are being hypocritical.

Thousands of Japanese and German immigrants were interned for 4 years during our participation in WW2, by Franklin Roosevelt. A 90 day restriction is not going to break the US.
 
27% of Clinton supporters

When did 27% become 1 out of 3?

Oh hey tres, haven't seen you in a while. Lets go with 1 out of 4, since it was late when I made this thread. 16,500,000 Hillary Clinton supporters support Trump's ideas about refugees. Are you one of them?
 
Oh hey tres, haven't seen you in a while. Lets go with 1 out of 4, since it was late when I made this thread. 16,500,000 Hillary Clinton supporters support Trump's ideas about refugees. Are you one of them?

I love it when people make stupid posts. Everyone with a functioning brain cell on this board knows I didn't support Hillary Clinton. I guess that explains why you didn't know that.
 
I love it when people make stupid posts. Everyone with a functioning brain cell on this board knows I didn't support Hillary Clinton. I guess that explains why you didn't know that.

eeewwww ... suh-mack
 
I love it when people make stupid posts. Everyone with a functioning brain cell on this board knows I didn't support Hillary Clinton. I guess that explains why you didn't know that.

I know, you chose Gary Johnson, because his complete lack of knowledge (where's Aleppo?) was a perfect match for yours. Plus, he's usually stoned by 12 pm. There's 2 common factors.
 
I know, you chose Gary Johnson, because his complete lack of knowledge (where's Aleppo?) was a perfect match for yours. Plus, he's usually stoned by 12 pm. There's 2 common factors.

I like you. You're funny. Isn't it time for your Trump fan club meeting?
 
Thousands of Japanese and German immigrants were interned for 4 years during our participation in WW2, by Franklin Roosevelt. A 90 day restriction is not going to break the US.



your post is just plain stupid
 
None, from what I see. Liberty, in my example, is more of a larger concept. From my observation, it is often conservatives who fight for liberty over safety and liberals who fight for safety over liberty. Yes, I understand that this is a huge generalization, but it often fits. However, in this case, the roles seem to be reversed.

Well seeing as you yourself said Americans are giving up zero liberty how exactly does you analogy fit. Seems to me you don't like the EO so are just looking for a way to attack the right.
 
Back
Top Bottom