• 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!

What is the acceptable percentage of evil?

What is an acceptable % of evil?

  • It depends on whether I'm a member of this demographic or not.

    Votes: 3 25.0%
  • Even 1% is enough to take away all their rights.

    Votes: 2 16.7%
  • 10% or more and we have to get their rights.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 50% at least before we start worrying about them too much.

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • It's got to be closer to 80%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Unless you can prove 100% are evil you cannot treat them as if they all may be evil.

    Votes: 6 50.0%

  • Total voters
    12

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
12,130
Reaction score
7,253
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?
 
This has been the most irrational movement in US history. Fixing our immigration system would take a concerted effort from both liberals and conservatives for the better part of two decades. What is currently going on that leads anyone to believe that is possible? Trump and his minions seem to be doing everything in their power to burn every bridge and make compromise impossible for generations.
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

I voted for the last option.

We as humans are terrible at assessing others and are easily blinded by prejudice and propaganda into believing things that are demonstrably false. Human rights apply to humans, irrespective of whatever arbitrary "group" we place them in. To undermine that, is to undermine the right of us all.
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

Who has stated "basic human rights" are to be denied anyone?

An "undocumented" is a silly way do describe those here illegally as many are documented. Forged documents. Borrowed documents. Stolen documents.

And 100% of illegal aliens have broken at least one law.
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

You should need no "justification" to enforce the federal immigration law other than the knowledge that it is being violated by many millions. The idea that about 6K ICE/ERO officers are sufficient to patrol the entire US interior is a joke. More than that many police officers are used to patrol a major US city (e.g. NYC has about 45K police officers).
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

There is no way this argument ends well.

The harsh truth is political ideology and rhetoric means there is no standard, and that is amplified by the idea of "basic human rights" applied to anyone.
 
I'm not sure about taking away rights, but caution or other social reactions would be commensurate with the level of evil, the level of danger.

If blue fruit has 8 times the poisoning risk that green fruit has, you wouldn't necessarily ban blue fruit, but you can't control the human reaction - the justified reaction - that blue fruit will be held in lower regard, lower esteem, and lower expectations for goodness than green fruit.
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

Your analogy is flawed on the outset as it isn't a matter of good and evil at all. It is a matter of the rule of law, a matter of right and wrong, and a matter of unalienable rights as well as national security.

Protected by the Constitution and rule of law, you have the unalienable right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness however you define that so long as you do not break the law and/or tread on the rights of others. That includes the privilege of working to buy your home and/or build up your business. And it affords you the right and power to say who is allowed to live in your home and who is entitled to share your resources and your profits.

Nobody can come live in your house without your permission and, other than the law that allows government to receive a percentage of what you earn, nobody can claim a right to your resources and profits without your consent.

I might be a wonderful person who loves people, gives a drink of cool water to a stray dog, give the homeless guy my coat, etc. But if I presume to move into your house and expect you to provide me shelter, feed me, clothe me, educate me, and pay my doctor bills, and you were not allowed to say 'no', you would likely consider that an evil thing no matter how great a person I might be. Or how needy I might be.

And you would be even more upset if you knew that the possibility existed that I might be one of the 1% with a track record for doing evil things. It is like a bowl containing 100 M&Ms. If you knew that 99 of those M&M were good, sweet candy, but one of them contained poison, would you take the chance?

The same principle applies to our country.
 
The poll question is misleading. If this is about immigration/the border crisis, say so. "Evil" is an abstract idea, and besides, who decides what is "evil" and what is not? Who "this demographic"/"their"/"them" is never even identified.
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

Only applies to brown illegals. White ones become First Lady.
 
During the early 1900's American anti immigration sentiment reached all time highs. The main targets Asians and Papists from Europe. Yet it was a era when desperately needed labor for both farms and industry. Poverty, political turmoil, oppression and social persecution drove the immigrants here, with dreams of finding a golden mountain and gold on the sidewalks. Instead they found slums, sweat shops, migrant farming jobs, oppression and social persecution. The media of the times painted images of criminal immigrants as a plague, opium abusing Asians with Fu Manchu crime conspiracies, the yellow peril, papist Irish drunk and raping white women, Italian and Spanish hoodlums wearing wide lapel suits with guns blazing as they robbed banks, trains, and waylaid travelers alone at night. Yet the clear majority of those arrested, convicted and prisoned for these crimes were 3rd and 4th generation white people. Black people weren't sent to prison, only chain gangs doing hard labor or lynched.

Today this nation welcomes lawful immigrants, with the right skills, by arbitrary quotas, sponsorships from citizens and institutional entities, and of course labor markets like health care, tech, taxi driving and so on. We excoriate illegal immigrants, especially if they are Central Americans, Mexicans, or other Spanish speaking people, while never or rarely mentioning the majority who are from Europe, specifically Ireland, Scandinavia and eastern Europe. People who overstay tourist or student visas, work in the underground economy in construction for contractors, au pairs and housemaids, prostitution, masons, even nurses and doctors. The doorman at a building up the block from my own, here from Denmark for more than 20 years, married with 4 kids in public school, came here as a tourist with a two week visa, and stayed. Never bothered by any government agency, paying taxes with a SS # he got with a simple mailed request, never committing any crimes, loved by the tenants he works with. Still he's here illegally. Should we send him back to Denmark? If so, what would we gain? My auto mechanic, who barely speaks English, came here as a student from Italy 30 years ago. Stayed, married, raised his kids, paid his taxes, does an honest job with never a complaint from anyone who enjoys his services. Should we deport him back to Italy since he is here illegally? What will we gain. The super of my building, constantly complaining about the mess tenant's dogs make in the elevator, keep the building I live in immaculate, doing tenant repairs immediately, keeping the boiler and heat system running top notch and consistently during winters, raised three children now college graduates and professionals. He also overstayed a student visa from Pakistan. He doesn't blow up buildings or people, just quietly lives his life. Should we send him packing back to Pakistan? What would we gain?
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

Immigration isn't a right.
 
This has been the most irrational movement in US history. Fixing our immigration system would take a concerted effort from both liberals and conservatives for the better part of two decades. What is currently going on that leads anyone to believe that is possible? Trump and his minions seem to be doing everything in their power to burn every bridge and make compromise impossible for generations.

Our immigration system isn't broken.
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

Don't see the connection between the bolded. Whether it's an efficient use of resources to round them all up is a different question. Whether there are some that even if we could round them all up efficiently we'd let stay for humanitarian reasons is a different question.

But I don't think there's any question that an undocumented immigrant does not have a basic human right to be here.
 
All illegals should be returned to their home countries. It's a slap in the face to those who followed the rules, waited their turn, and did it the right way.

Having said that, our country needs immigration. But you can only assimilate a limited number of people at any one time. That's what legal immigration seeks to achieve. But if the country is overwhelmed by illegal immigration then social services, schools, law enforcement, and every other institution we depend on cannot do it's job effectively.

The establishment Democrat leadership wants open borders because they believe these people will need the services of big government, become dependent on the Democrats and eventually vote Democrat, or their kids born here will. The Republican establishment likes the cheap surplus labor; it keeps the unions in check, wages low, and offers a pool of surplus temporary labor when they need it.

Neither side cares about working class American laborers. The vanishing middle class. The ones being squeezed out by both cheap labor and automation. That's the people voting Trump.
 
Who has stated "basic human rights" are to be denied anyone?
Why don't you go take a peak inside one of these detention centers holding thousands of children who have been ripped away from their parents likely never to been seen again for the crime of having improper documentation and tell me if you think their basic human rights are being protected from this administration.

And 100% of illegal aliens have broken at least one law.
I don't think it would be far fetched to argue that 100% of American Citizens have broken at least one law. Virtually everything solitary person in the world has at one point drove too fast, rolled through a stop sign, tried to beat a stop light, littered, forgotten to wear a seat belt, drove after one too many drinks... But our bill of rights protects against cruel and unusual punishment because the punishment must fit the crime. If your only crime is to have bad documentation, but you are an otherwise perfectly law abiding you cannot justify destroying a family.
 
But I don't think there's any question that an undocumented immigrant does not have a basic human right to be here.

Would say that a child has a right not to be ripped away from their parents and locked in a cage likely to never see their family again for the crime of not having proper documentation. That doesn't sound like cruel and unusual punishment to you?

You could argue that a person with a single speeding ticket has no right to operate a motor vehicle for the rest of their life, but I think it's fair to say that if a state tried to pass such a law there would be uproar and it likely would not survive the courts. The only difference here is that as a citizen you know that there is no chance you could ever be made to suffer the same consequences you that an undocumented immigrant family currently is, but a speeding ticket? You or some member of your family could easily get one of those.
 
Immigration isn't a right.

You have a right against cruel and inhuman punishment. I'd say tearing apart a family and or sending women and children seeking asylum back to war torn countries to be raped and abused certainly qualifies.

When your nations entire existence is based upon immigration in search of freedom and opportunity it takes a pretty disgusting hypocrite to deny the same opportunity to someone else.
 
Who's denying who rights? Christians, white guys, conservatives? I can say this: no one from those groups, especially conservative Christians, have taken away rights. The only white males that have tried and have taken away rights a LONG time ago were Leftist white males and they were a part of the Democrat party, rounding up black slaves, treating them inhumanely, after the Founding Fathers had already said that slavery was to be outlawed. These Leftist men throughout our nation's history, one after the other, have done the following:

-created the KKK

-owned slaves

-opposed and tried to stop the Civil Rights Movement

-had a Klan member, Robert Byrd, elected into Congress (and was friends with Slick Willy Clinton and Hillary)

-help create Planned Parenthood, whose founder, Margaret Sanger, was racist and wanted to eliminate future black people through abortion

-established internment camps and forced Asians (American or not) into them after WWII

-protested the Vietnam Veterans after the Vietnam War

-created a welfare state with Medicare and Medicaid, and telling others there's no way to make it on their own without their (the government's) help

-encouraged extremist, radical, and, sometimes, domestic terrorist groups like Antifa, The Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, and The Weather Underground to go out and attack people (especially if they were white), intimidate them, and destroy their property

-helped pass a law to allow the killing of babies right before they're born (in New York only, for now, but almost happened in Virginia and they want it in other states)

Those white males that were involved were bad and NONE OF THEM were Christians nor conservatives. Now watch, some Leftist is going to pull a picture of a neo-Nazi or white supremacist, and maybe have a quote from the Bible or a conservative(s). I guarantee the only reason why they would like a white Republican isn't because that person is a Republican. Hell, it doesn't mean they like their policies. The New Zealand shooter said he liked the idea of Trump but hated him at the same time and his policies. The real reason for these white supremacists to like these white Republicans: they're white and they display it out in public to try and drive minorities nuts. That's it. Other than that, they're just as much for big government as these non-white supremacists are, white or not. They are every bit as Left wing as the people in the Democrat party. And they're not Christians. They use that as a way to try and justify what they do, but instead they twist what the Bible says and make up their own material (Just like the vast majority of the Left).

Evil doesn't make sense, it's not logical, and no one benefits, but people do it to try and get a thrill out of what they're doing. The people that are actually wanting to take away rights are in the minority (thank God). Most people are decent and good, even when they have their shortcomings because no one's perfect. However, most people, regardless of skin color, understand taking away rights that actually benefit and lift people up is wrong. Stuff like abortion, though, ends lives, so it's not a real human right because you're, literally, taking away another's. This author is trying to say Trump and conservative, Christian, white males are trying to take away constitutional rights but there's no evidence. It's all happening on the other side of the aisle, and I hope they stay in the minority.
 
Why don't you go take a peak inside one of these detention centers holding thousands of children who have been ripped away from their parents likely never to been seen again for the crime of having improper documentation and tell me if you think their basic human rights are being protected from this administration.


I don't think it would be far fetched to argue that 100% of American Citizens have broken at least one law. Virtually everything solitary person in the world has at one point drove too fast, rolled through a stop sign, tried to beat a stop light, littered, forgotten to wear a seat belt, drove after one too many drinks... But our bill of rights protects against cruel and unusual punishment because the punishment must fit the crime. If your only crime is to have bad documentation, but you are an otherwise perfectly law abiding you cannot justify destroying a family.

Who has stated "basic human rights" are to be denied anyone? Anyone? Hello? Anyone on this board?

BTW - Did you cry when Obama had children in cages by the thousands? When his Border Patrol detaining people.

And American citizens are not breaking the law by being here. ILLEGAL immigrants are. Every one of them. 100%. If they work, that's another crime. Faked papers to get the work? Another crime. Driving in most states? Another crime. No insurance on the car they are illegally driving? Another crime.

Kinda adds up.
 
What percentage of a given population or demographic can be evil before it is acceptable to deny the entire population basic human rights?

I recently saw a claim that there was around 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. They said that if even 1% committed a violent crime that would be 12K victims/year. Apparently that was justification for round up all undocumented immigrants and deporting them.

So, apparently in the mind of that Trump supporter 1% is all you need. Of course that's a problem because 1% of white christian men in the United States have committed violent crimes as well. So what is the percentage?

The issue is not violent crimes. That's a side effect. The issue is what you term undocumented which is librospeak for criminal invading of our borders without our permission.

In that, the number of criminals in the group is 100%.
 
Only applies to brown illegals. White ones become First Lady.

Melania became an American citizen in 2006. Before that she was a legal resident. She became first lady in 2017.

As usual you have no point. Which doesn't stop you from making it.
 
Would say that a child has a right not to be ripped away from their parents and locked in a cage likely to never see their family again for the crime of not having proper documentation. That doesn't sound like cruel and unusual punishment to you?

I said they don't have a right to be here, not everything that you could do to them would be justified, or even that everything that is being done to them is justified. Undocumented immigrants do not have the right to be in this country. That is all I said.

You could argue that a person with a single speeding ticket has no right to operate a motor vehicle for the rest of their life, but I think it's fair to say that if a state tried to pass such a law there would be uproar and it likely would not survive the courts. The only difference here is that as a citizen you know that there is no chance you could ever be made to suffer the same consequences you that an undocumented immigrant family currently is, but a speeding ticket? You or some member of your family could easily get one of those.

This, therefore, is irrelevant.
 
Back
Top Bottom