In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
What are these polls supposed to tell us? If 8% of Turks were actual IS terrorists the country would not exist anymore. Absolutely meaningless statistics.
Believes in is very different from participating. That means 8% of the population would not turn someone from ISIS in if they knew about it.
Exactly. The Muslims who are actual terrorists aren't the only problem. All of the other Muslims who are at least tolerant (if not supportive) of the terrorists' ideas and causes are also a problem. And there are far more of this latter group of Muslims than people want to admit.
What are these polls supposed to tell us? If 8% of Turks were actual IS terrorists the country would not exist anymore. Absolutely meaningless statistics.
when you apply that do other countries, what do you get?
Here is a "meaningless" statistic. This means 33% of muslims worldwide btw. Source
On June 15 2016 10:52 On_Slaught wrote: Still wondering what the religious test is going to look like to prove people are Muslim. Are we going to continue to monitor every dark skinned person who enters the country after they get in to make sure they aren't Muslim, like they told us they weren't in the interview?
Which is why rhetoric and policy prescriptions are not the same thing. When promoting the PPACA they didn't talk about mandates, penalties, and minimum required coverage, but that is what the policy is in practice. Similarly, this would likely be a country of origin system, in practice. Which we already have and historically have had.
Honestly, it feels like intentional feigning of naivety when people ask this question. And I don't even particularly think its a good solution (just think this question is incredibly disingenuous).
Yes, asking Trump and his supporters for a basic, initial detail on how his stated plan would be carried out is naive and disingenuous.
Your analogy is way off because this detail we're requesting from Trump's supporters is fundamental. A religion ban and a country of origin ban are two very different things.
It's especially egregious because Trump's opponents in the primary (both Cruz and Paul) offered a country of origin ban and he maintained his own non-plan was distinct and superior.
Yes, that Cruz and Paul proposed options that are realistic showed they were smarter and more practical than Trump on this issue (one of many reasons I preferred them), but arguing against the practicality of a Muslim ban is an inherently dumb position to stake out (arguing its wisdom as policy is where you set up).
Practicality implies implementation, which means basically one of two options: 1) National origin; or 2) A strict, positive proof test (burden on the migrant) that essentially means no immigration. Neither is impractical, they just arent great policy long term.
Who are you to decide that it's OK to attack the policy but not the implementation? One of the biggest arguments against mass deportation, for example, is implementation, and rightfully so. This is the real world, not a high school debate, so pragmatism matters.
Having said that, I'm against it both practically and philosophically. The reasons why such a ban makes us look bad, is a anathema to our values, and has a real chance of putting us in further danger are so numerous and easy to find I won't waste my time listing them here.
Uhhg. You've got it backwards. Mass deportation is impractical because all possible implementation require the hiring of a massive police force. The "muslim ban" is not impractical because you are arguing against a straw man aka, "Hurr durr please fill out this immigration survey about your muslimness". The actual Muslim ban policy always boils down to a country of origin test OR a "burden of proof on the immigrant" test. Neither of which is impractical. .
Ironic that you're saying I'm using a strawman. Your argument is not Trumps. He has the burden of saying how it would work. Until he does, stop spouting you own ideas on it. Even if they are logical, Trump has shown no appetite for using logic himself.
Plainly, his call is for a ban of Muslims. Read my sig.
On a side note, Trump has said we have to do more to protect Christians in these countries. Wonder if he would be OK with banning them as part of a country ban. Somehow I doubt it.
I mean, you might think that, I might think that its a stupid policy, but it doesn't solve that you are arguing from a point of logical inconsistency. Either A) The "muslim ban" is as stupid as the strawman, and thus is not a Muslim ban, it is merely a ban of Muslims who are not liars (aka a policy that would never be implemented); 2) It is a correlative Muslim ban wherein people from certain areas are "presumed guilty" and not admitted; 3) It is a burden of proof on immigrants Muslim ban where the government rubberstamps the word "no" on applications for immigration unless you have overcome some high standard; or 4) some combination of #3 and #4 (most likely).
These are not good policies, but only #1 is "not practicable". The other ones work, they just are not good (except maybe #2 on a short term basis till better things are thought of).
Um.. what are you talking about? My entire point is we are discussing based on Trump's words, since you know he is the one running for President, not any of us. All we know is he wants to ban Muslims and has been inconsistent on any specifics.
My original point was simply that beyond the fact this is philosophically and politically a horrible move, it will also face implementation problems. Nothing more.
On June 15 2016 16:07 On_Slaught wrote: Um.. what are you talking about? My entire point is we are discussing based on Trump's words, since you know he is the one running for President, not any of us. All we know is he wants to ban Muslims and has been inconsistent on any specifics.
My original point was simply that beyond the fact this is philosophically and politically a horrible move, it will also face implementation problems. Nothing more.
It's nearly impossible to implement a ban on something that is extremely difficult if not impossible to prove. It's like Trump has never heard of people lying. If you want to prevent violent Muslim's from entering the country you provide for a moratorium on immigration from the countries that they come from. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt, Libya, Pakistan, etc. etc. If they attempt to come into the country from another country there should be a chain of paperwork indicating that they're not be forthwith. This is what Rand proposed and is something that could work if people were actually serious about this issue. Personally, this would be a band-aid for an amputated limb. Our actions abroad and our geo-political handiwork has laid this foundation. You don't see Brazil, or Switzerland, or the Congo get bombed by Jihadi's.
Maybe you can make the argument that the cat is all ready out of the bag. If that's the case, then halting immigration isn't going to effectually end the situation either. You either cut the head off the snake or you don't antagonize it in the first place.
On June 15 2016 13:17 SK.Testie wrote: The vast majority of people in the middle east take their religion far more seriously than in the good ol' US of A.
This is, actually, why the alt-right obsesses over islam, they wish they could be good christians but their heart just isnt in it anymore. they are anxious about their own countries' lack of religiousity. they pray to baby jesus once a year in december, muslims don't eat while the sun is up for a whole month, that shit's gotta make you feel inadequate about your own devotion :X
On June 15 2016 12:34 Doodsmack wrote: Why am I arguing with not-willing-to-admit-it Trump supporters on the internet again? About whether we should ban a religion LOL
Here is the religion in question. It is up to you to make the case on how they benefit the country, to make a fair comparison of whether they put more into the country than they take out, or whether they integrate into western secular democracies.
Don't care if they and the audience call themselves normal muslims, they're still extremists in a way. Would you waste your precious time to attend such bs meeting if you were moderate believer? I wouldn't. Jihadist warriors hold the banner of extremism in this era, but there are normally many sects and believers who are extremists but not jihadists.
And you won't spot the ones who put things in, mostly because they're busy working and there aren't any counter propaganda to show you them. Seattle has full of muslims that work for Microsoft. Btw I'm actually ashamed to write this, as if they are inferior race or smth, they are as normal as you are and I am, alongside with many humans that work for Microsoft.
I am not at all taking Testie's side, but I am curious in light of your bolded sentence what then, in your opinion, is a normal Muslim? Because devoted religious people go to meetings all the time. I have noted a pattern of people lauding a form of so-called moderate believer, which is really just a non-practicing, nominal 'believer.' For practical purposes, this ideal moderate appears to be just another secularist, indistinguishable from an agnostic and not a true moderate believer at all, as believing something typically has a practical outworking of said beliefs. I wouldn't see going to an additional meeting outside of the normal Friday gatherings as a sign of extremism by any means.
On June 15 2016 13:17 SK.Testie wrote: The vast majority of people in the middle east take their religion far more seriously than in the good ol' US of A.
This is, actually, why the alt-right obsesses over islam, they wish they could be good christians but their heart just isnt in it anymore. they are anxious about their own countries' lack of religiousity. they pray to baby jesus once a year in december, muslims don't eat while the sun is up for a whole month, that shit's gotta make you feel inadequate about your own devotion :X
This is a vast misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the alt-right. But yes they do believe in traditional families being the best basis for the nation, however most of them are very accepting of everyone. The way you portray them... #notallalt-rights #youain'tnoalt-rightbruv
It's pretty clear what Trump needs to do. After all the normal documentation is done for the immigration process or vetting refugees, they meet with an immigration officer. It'll go something like this:
Officer: "In order to make sure that you're ok with Americas freedom of speech and expression, we need you to burn this Quran. This ensures that you accept the constitution above the Quran and guarantees that you will be an American first".
If the Quran is not burned, the immigrant fails the test. But if it is burned...
"Congratulations! We hope you enjoy your new life in America. Good luck!" the officer says handing the man his complimentary gun.
"Isn't burning a Quran as a final test.. quite offensive?" the man replies.
"No sir, the outside is made to look like a Quran but on the inside is 50 shades of Grey which is absolutely Haram." the officer says smiling.
There, you have a religious litmus test and nobody is truly offended because you didn't burn the holy book. Your immigration policies are now solved and you have a legal immigrant who is an American first.
On June 15 2016 16:31 SK.Testie wrote: This is a vast misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the alt-right. But yes they do believe in traditional families being the best basis for the nation, however most of them are very accepting of everyone. The way you portray them... #notallalt-rights #youain'tnoalt-rightbruv
It's pretty clear what Trump needs to do. After all the normal documentation is done for the immigration process or vetting refugees, they meet with an immigration officer. It'll go something like this:
Officer: "In order to make sure that you're ok with Americas freedom of speech and expression, we need you to burn this Quran. This ensures that you accept the constitution above the Quran and guarantees that you will be an American first".
If the Quran is not burned, the immigrant fails the test. But if it is burned...
"Congratulations! We hope you enjoy your new life in America. Good luck!" the officer says handing the man his complimentary gun.
"Isn't burning a Quran as a final test.. quite offensive?" the man replies.
"No sir, the outside is made to look like a Quran but on the inside is 50 shades of Grey which is absolutely Haram." the officer says smiling.
There, you have a religious litmus test and nobody is truly offended because you didn't burn the holy book. Your immigration policies are now solved and you have a legal immigrant who is an American first.
I just hope you are a vast misrepresentation of the alt-right, because that spoilered immigration vetting process is the dumbest thing i have ever seen written. And I once argued with a man on a command and conquer forum who actually believed that the nazis had built a time machine, which they powered with Xerum-525 reactors.
I didn't say they are not accepting of everyone (although they aren't), what I said had nothing at all to do with that. And, nota bene, I actually have a lot of respect for religious people, I just think most of the people in your camp are terrible at being religious because they're not really into it
On June 15 2016 13:17 SK.Testie wrote: The vast majority of people in the middle east take their religion far more seriously than in the good ol' US of A.
This is, actually, why the alt-right obsesses over islam, they wish they could be good christians but their heart just isnt in it anymore. they are anxious about their own countries' lack of religiousity. they pray to baby jesus once a year in december, muslims don't eat while the sun is up for a whole month, that shit's gotta make you feel inadequate about your own devotion :X
This is a vast misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the alt-right. But yes they do believe in traditional families being the best basis for the nation, however most of them are very accepting of everyone. The way you portray them... #notallalt-rights #youain'tnoalt-rightbruv
It's pretty clear what Trump needs to do. After all the normal documentation is done for the immigration process or vetting refugees, they meet with an immigration officer. It'll go something like this:
Officer: "In order to make sure that you're ok with Americas freedom of speech and expression, we need you to burn this Quran. This ensures that you accept the constitution above the Quran and guarantees that you will be an American first".
If the Quran is not burned, the immigrant fails the test. But if it is burned...
"Congratulations! We hope you enjoy your new life in America. Good luck!" the officer says handing the man his complimentary gun.
"Isn't burning a Quran as a final test.. quite offensive?" the man replies.
"No sir, the outside is made to look like a Quran but on the inside is 50 shades of Grey which is absolutely Haram." the officer says smiling.
There, you have a religious litmus test and nobody is truly offended because you didn't burn the holy book. Your immigration policies are now solved and you have a legal immigrant who is an American first.
I hope that is sarcasm. Are you oblivious that Imams have given immunity to jihadists for violating traditional Muslim beliefs/activities? I mean, any cursory read into the men that flew the planes into the Twin Towers would make your anecdotal policy over there completely useless lmao. Quote on Quote litmus tests are one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard to be frank.
On June 15 2016 13:17 SK.Testie wrote: The vast majority of people in the middle east take their religion far more seriously than in the good ol' US of A.
This is, actually, why the alt-right obsesses over islam, they wish they could be good christians but their heart just isnt in it anymore. they are anxious about their own countries' lack of religiousity. they pray to baby jesus once a year in december, muslims don't eat while the sun is up for a whole month, that shit's gotta make you feel inadequate about your own devotion :X
This is a vast misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the alt-right. But yes they do believe in traditional families being the best basis for the nation, however most of them are very accepting of everyone. The way you portray them... #notallalt-rights #youain'tnoalt-rightbruv
It's pretty clear what Trump needs to do. After all the normal documentation is done for the immigration process or vetting refugees, they meet with an immigration officer. It'll go something like this:
Officer: "In order to make sure that you're ok with Americas freedom of speech and expression, we need you to burn this Quran. This ensures that you accept the constitution above the Quran and guarantees that you will be an American first".
If the Quran is not burned, the immigrant fails the test. But if it is burned...
"Congratulations! We hope you enjoy your new life in America. Good luck!" the officer says handing the man his complimentary gun.
"Isn't burning a Quran as a final test.. quite offensive?" the man replies.
"No sir, the outside is made to look like a Quran but on the inside is 50 shades of Grey which is absolutely Haram." the officer says smiling.
There, you have a religious litmus test and nobody is truly offended because you didn't burn the holy book. Your immigration policies are now solved and you have a legal immigrant who is an American first.
Are you serious about that test or is it some kind of sarcasm that I cannot understand? I am far, far from a religious person but I would be uncomfortable burning any religious text, Quran or Bible. It doesn't make any sense. Literally zero sense.
What are these polls supposed to tell us? If 8% of Turks were actual IS terrorists the country would not exist anymore. Absolutely meaningless statistics.
Believes in is very different from participating. That means 8% of the population would not turn someone from ISIS in if they knew about it.
It also means 13% of Americans wouldn't report a plan to assassinate Obama. These polls prove very little. Like 5%-8% of the US population thinks the earth is flat.
On June 15 2016 13:17 SK.Testie wrote: The vast majority of people in the middle east take their religion far more seriously than in the good ol' US of A.
This is, actually, why the alt-right obsesses over islam, they wish they could be good christians but their heart just isnt in it anymore. they are anxious about their own countries' lack of religiousity. they pray to baby jesus once a year in december, muslims don't eat while the sun is up for a whole month, that shit's gotta make you feel inadequate about your own devotion :X
This is a vast misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the alt-right. But yes they do believe in traditional families being the best basis for the nation, however most of them are very accepting of everyone. The way you portray them... #notallalt-rights #youain'tnoalt-rightbruv
It's pretty clear what Trump needs to do. After all the normal documentation is done for the immigration process or vetting refugees, they meet with an immigration officer. It'll go something like this:
Officer: "In order to make sure that you're ok with Americas freedom of speech and expression, we need you to burn this Quran. This ensures that you accept the constitution above the Quran and guarantees that you will be an American first".
If the Quran is not burned, the immigrant fails the test. But if it is burned...
"Congratulations! We hope you enjoy your new life in America. Good luck!" the officer says handing the man his complimentary gun.
"Isn't burning a Quran as a final test.. quite offensive?" the man replies.
"No sir, the outside is made to look like a Quran but on the inside is 50 shades of Grey which is absolutely Haram." the officer says smiling.
There, you have a religious litmus test and nobody is truly offended because you didn't burn the holy book. Your immigration policies are now solved and you have a legal immigrant who is an American first.
Are you serious about that test or is it some kind of sarcasm that I cannot understand? I am far, far from a religious person but I would be uncomfortable burning any religious text, Quran or Bible. It doesn't make any sense. Literally zero sense.
Why would you feel uncomfortable about burning it if you do not subscribe to it?
Doesn't really need a friend to show some respect. Otherwise they could also ask at Immigration to just burn all other countries flags, because you know, you should now subscribe only to your new home countries flag. Nothing hostile about it, but just burn a US flag when immigrating to the EU, thanks.
Considering that majorities (sometimes large ones) support Sharia law, you still are going to find a large number of Muslims supporting the death penalty for apostasy.
EPT
