Jump to content

Ban or Don't Ban Trump?


johnl023
 Share

  

54 members have voted

  1. 1. Would banning Trump from places be a good idea?

    • Yea
      20
    • Nay
      32


Recommended Posts

Trump wrote the 1st Amendment?

 

Mind blown.........

 

Great that you mentioned the First Amendment!:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

Disallowing Muslims to enter the US, and disallowing them to use mosques clearly violates the First Amendment. But I am not surprised to see that neo-Nazis only remember the freedom of speech part to justify their hate speech.

  • Upvote 1
77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I am not surprised to see that neo-Nazis only remember the freedom of speech part to justify their hate speech.

 

 

What you refer to as the Liberal Tyranny is what separates your country from !@#$ed up theocracies.

Uh, no. You can have Liberalism without the attempt at destroying people for saying what is considered distasteful by a certain group of people with certain beliefs. The Liberal Tyranny may market itself as tolerant, but it as just as intolerant as any other paradigm. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Uh, no. You can have Liberalism without the attempt at destroying people for saying what is considered distasteful by a certain group of people with certain beliefs. The Liberal Tyranny may market itself as tolerant, but it as just as intolerant as any other paradigm. 

 

Intolerance of things harmful to the society is desirable. Rape, murder, thievery, racism, religious fundamentalism etc. are all things that a modern society is better off not tolerating. But we are well aware this restricts your ability to promote essentialist thoughts such as the superiority of your race or religion. Oh well....

  • Upvote 1
77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Intolerance of things harmful to the society is desirable. Rape, murder, thievery, racism, religious fundamentalism etc. are all things that a modern society is better off not tolerating. But we are well aware this restricts your ability to promote essentialist thoughts such as the superiority of your race or religion. Oh well....

 

Rape/murder/thievery = physical actions. Un-PC talk = verbal actions. The majority of people are against rape and murder so you tie them up together with un-PC talk so to better beat people over the head with it. However they are not comparable.

 

Well admittedly I am firm believer of nationalism which has a bad reputation, but I personally don't believe in making it a racial issue. When a big hullabaloo was going on of some Arab boys getting their citizenship revoked for being terrorists was in the news at the time here, I was someone who was completely against such an act. As for religion I'm agnostic so I'm not even a follower of the religion/belief of Atheism, nor of course Christian which is what I assume you're implying. 

Edited by Rozalia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rape/murder/thievery = physical actions. Un-PC talk = verbal actions. The majority of people are against rape and murder so you tie them up together with un-PC talk so to better beat people over the head with it. However they are not comparable.

 

Well admittedly I am firm believer of nationalism which has a bad reputation, but I personally don't believe in making it a racial issue. When a big hullabaloo was going on of some Arab boys getting their citizenship revoked for being terrorists was in the news at the time here, I was someone who was completely against such an act. As for religion I'm agnostic so I'm not even a follower of the religion/belief of Atheism, nor of course Christian which is what I assume you're implying. 

 

When left unchecked, "un-PC talk" paves the way for a new Kristallnacht, and causes exactly rape, murder and thievery against the minorities being targeted. The world learned this back in the first half of 20th century, but it seems like the lessons are being forgotten. The similarity between how that episode came after the Great Depression, and this one after the Great Recession is also uncanny.

 

Good to hear about your second paragraph. Then why do you think Trump should be able to advocate for shutting down mosques and denying Muslims entry?

77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When left unchecked, "un-PC talk" paves the way for a new Kristallnacht, and causes exactly rape, murder and thievery against the minorities being targeted. The world learned this back in the first half of 20th century, but it seems like the lessons are being forgotten. The similarity between how that episode came after the Great Depression, and this one after the Great Recession is also uncanny.

 

Good to hear about your second paragraph. Then why do you think Trump should be able to advocate for shutting down mosques and denying Muslims entry?

 

I don't agree. People have long resented the threat to them if they speak their beliefs and that is why you see such people all support Trump regardless of their other beliefs. People who are economically completely against Trump support him for this tyranny I spoke of. Even the people you scorn the most, the Neo-Nazis who have called Trump a Jew lover in the past support him even though they know he ain't a Nazi or even a fascist.

What should have been done is to allow those people to have a voice which would have led to the splitting of support from people with the viewpoints you hate. Instead this tyranny was put in place and now Trump as the only man against it is enjoying the full support from that whole group of people.

 

He isn't as far as I'm aware advocating for deporting American Muslims. I don't see a huge issue with shutting down immigration be it on religious grounds or where they are from. Most people do in fact want to discriminate like that anyway, even those against this plan by Trump. Look merely at the discrimination of the poor where such people want to take all the richer immigrants but want to reject the poor ones. Why is Trump so wrong in wanting to turn away Muslims, but people wanting to turn away the poor is so accepted? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree. People have long resented the threat to them if they speak their beliefs and that is why you see such people all support Trump regardless of their other beliefs. People who are economically completely against Trump support him for this tyranny I spoke of. Even the people you scorn the most, the Neo-Nazis who have called Trump a Jew lover in the past support him even though they know he ain't a Nazi or even a fascist.

What should have been done is to allow those people to have a voice which would have led to the splitting of support from people with the viewpoints you hate. Instead this tyranny was put in place and now Trump as the only man against it is enjoying the full support from that whole group of people.

 

He isn't as far as I'm aware advocating for deporting American Muslims. I don't see a huge issue with shutting down immigration be it on religious grounds or where they are from. Most people do in fact want to discriminate like that anyway, even those against this plan by Trump. Look merely at the discrimination of the poor where such people want to take all the richer immigrants but want to reject the poor ones. Why is Trump so wrong in wanting to turn away Muslims, but people wanting to turn away the poor is so accepted? 

 

Answering this without any condescension would make it look like you have a valid point worth replying to. However, I also do not really want to make a condescending post. If you wonder why it is bad to disallow immigration based on religion, we are not even speaking the same language. I had directed this question to Bourhann earlier on: How do you measure "Muslimness?" This is even worse than McCarthyism, but I guess you were in favor of that as well? IDK, I don't think we can even reach an agreement to respect each others beliefs here.

77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty clear who "they" was considering the placement of it in post, so I think you're trying to give your post a little more punch but it ain't working. I was referring to the religion and it's political and dogmatic views yes, pretty obvious.

 

Case in point, you address everything in my post except my talk of apostasy. Their treatment of apostasy and overall views trample on freedom of religion yet I hear nothing from you there even though I gave you enough of a prompt to do so. That was the point I was making. People such yourselves will play the holier than thou game over issues such as Muslims, but when it comes to confronting fundamental problems shy away, in fact you try to hush it all away with talk of Islamophobia/Racism.

 

So him and his sister lost their jobs due to being Muslims did they? Such a thing called the courts if so, but I doubt that was the reason. It's all anecdotes at the end of the day anyway, I could give you my own to counter yours if you like.

 

Also the "ignorance" buzzword doesn't work on me, try something else. Framing anyone against your views as ignorant is both ignorant and sanctimonious. 

 

 

The Liberal Tyranny is weakening yes. Trump wins and it dies completely. 

 

REALLY? Cut it out Rozalia. This type of thing is ruining lives. LIVES. STOP placing all muslims in the same boat. Stop placing them in a fashion to blame all this on. 

 

You know why they didn't go to court? HUH? Well it was because there was so much public shame and public hate against them in their eyes that they were afraid. Afraid to step in an American court because America had been abandoning them. America had been trampling their lives just because of their background. America's seemed hatred for them was not something they thought they could escape in the courts. Trust me, I tried to get them to go to the courts to solve the issue but they could bring themselves to it. 

 

Honestly I don't know a lot about apostacy. THAT's why I didn't answer that. 

 

So Rozalia, how about all the Muslims that serve and have died in the armed forces for the US? How about the Muslims that serve as nurses or other public officials. Should we turn our backs on them as well? Should we make them sit in constant fear while they protect and help us? 

 

I'll just leave you with this. I hope this helps plant in your head any sense of what is going on. If not, well then I'm truly sorry to hear that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answering this without any condescension would make it look like you have a valid point worth replying to. However, I also do not really want to make a condescending post. If you wonder why it is bad to disallow immigration based on religion, we are not even speaking the same language. I had directed this question to Bourhann earlier on: How do you measure "Muslimness?" This is even worse than McCarthyism, but I guess you were in favor of that as well? IDK, I don't think we can even reach an agreement to respect each others beliefs here.

 

Lets not play at that now. You were implying I was some sort of Nazi a couple of posts back. My language can be crude at times I admit, but I've not gone that far. 

 

You're framing that in a way to favour your viewpoint while ignoring what I mentioned. Again, why is discrimination of the poor in regards to immigration perfectly dandy, but not Muslims? If I saw the same level of defense of the poor that I see for Muslims then I could respect the view point. As there isn't, I only see hypocrisy. 

 

As for your question, you should ask it to me before assuming I have no answer for it. Now firstly this is speculation on my part because we can only speculate at the end of the day, no one really knows exactly what Trump plans to implement on the matter. They know the general idea he has, but not the fine details.

 

Anyway, I assume he will begin by banning all immigration from "Arab" countries or if he wants to be as ostentatious as always he will ban all Arabs wholesale wherever they are from. This however is not perfect as not all Muslims are Arab so he'll likely ban immigration from a list of countries such as Indonesia, India, Iran, Ethiopia, and so on. That leaves Western Europe as the entry point for "Crypto-Muslims" (by the context of your question they'd have to be lying about their faith) to sneak in but those countries with their censuses have good records on just who is and isn't a Muslim. Additionally a lot of them saying they are no longer Muslim could be banned regardless if they were at any point Muslim which the censuses will show. 

Of course even such measures are not 100% and some Crypto-Muslims will sneak through however the fear instilled in such people will stop them from publicly speaking for fear of being outed as a Muslim. Those a little braver the willing public will act on and carry out a Pogrom against. If some loony does a terrorist attack then if the state doesn't do it then the public will and a Pogrom will get rid of the terrorist's family and any suspected friends (any American Muslims who already in the country before Trump was elected are prime targets). Additionally such attacks will only allow Trump to point out that his policy is correct. 

 

That is my speculation on the matter. If Trump will be effective in carrying out his policy no one yet knows, however to say it cannot be done effectively is incorrect. You bring a firm enough hand down on a group and you can diminish it considerably.

 

REALLY? Cut it out Rozalia. This type of thing is ruining lives. LIVES. STOP placing all muslims in the same boat. Stop placing them in a fashion to blame all this on. 

 

You know why they didn't go to court? HUH? Well it was because there was so much public shame and public hate against them in their eyes that they were afraid. Afraid to step in an American court because America had been abandoning them. America had been trampling their lives just because of their background. America's seemed hatred for them was not something they thought they could escape in the courts. Trust me, I tried to get them to go to the courts to solve the issue but they could bring themselves to it. 

 

Honestly I don't know a lot about apostacy. THAT's why I didn't answer that. 

 

So Rozalia, how about all the Muslims that serve and have died in the armed forces for the US? How about the Muslims that serve as nurses or other public officials. Should we turn our backs on them as well? Should we make them sit in constant fear while they protect and help us? 

 

I'll just leave you with this. I hope this helps plant in your head any sense of what is going on. If not, well then I'm truly sorry to hear that.

 

Then there is no helping them. Kowtowing to them won't avail them because the idea there is some conspiracy against them has already taken root. They should have gone to court and seen the result, win or lose they can then take it to the media who love that sort of stuff. 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/global/2015/may/17/losing-their-religion-british-ex-muslims-non-believers-hidden-crisis-faith

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34357047

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/02/how-liberal-britain-is-betraying-ex-muslims/

 

British but relevant all the same as it's a problem across Muslims everywhere. You won't defend their freedom of religion against Muslims as it's not an important issue to you, so please do excuse me if I continue to see you as hypocritical on the matter.

 

I assume those Muslims are American? If so then they are in no danger of deportation as far as I'm aware, nor should they be. One issue among Muslims in the west is they are pushed to put their nationality third in the list of identity with being Muslim first and their grand/parents country being second. That is disturbing to me and one of the signs (this matter doesn't just apply to Muslims is what I'm saying here) that education has failed due to multiculturalism as nationality must be pushed strongly for it is what unifies us. Of course sadly even when you are a good person some people will attack you regardless which is sad to say the least, as a patriotic Arab Muslim should be seen like any other, a brother/sister. To help avoid such misunderstandings they could try doing away with all the Islamic clothing, take western names, that sort of thing.

 

Anyway... point is integration should be applauded and if those American Muslims are suffering unfair treatment from other Americans then I condemn that. Trump talking about banning foreign Muslims however is not targeting them. The unifying group is "American" not "Muslim". American Muslims should see the matter like any other American for that is what they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets not play at that now. You were implying I was some sort of Nazi a couple of posts back. My language can be crude at times I admit, but I've not gone that far. 

 

You're framing that in a way to favour your viewpoint while ignoring what I mentioned. Again, why is discrimination of the poor in regards to immigration perfectly dandy, but not Muslims? If I saw the same level of defense of the poor that I see for Muslims then I could respect the view point. As there isn't, I only see hypocrisy. 

 

As for your question, you should ask it to me before assuming I have no answer for it. Now firstly this is speculation on my part because we can only speculate at the end of the day, no one really knows exactly what Trump plans to implement on the matter. They know the general idea he has, but not the fine details.

 

Anyway, I assume he will begin by banning all immigration from "Arab" countries or if he wants to be as ostentatious as always he will ban all Arabs wholesale wherever they are from. This however is not perfect as not all Muslims are Arab so he'll likely ban immigration from a list of countries such as Indonesia, India, Iran, Ethiopia, and so on. That leaves Western Europe as the entry point for "Crypto-Muslims" (by the context of your question they'd have to be lying about their faith) to sneak in but those countries with their censuses have good records on just who is and isn't a Muslim. Additionally a lot of them saying they are no longer Muslim could be banned regardless if they were at any point Muslim which the censuses will show. 

Of course even such measures are not 100% and some Crypto-Muslims will sneak through however the fear instilled in such people will stop them from publicly speaking for fear of being outed as a Muslim. Those a little braver the willing public will act on and carry out a Pogrom against. If some loony does a terrorist attack then if the state doesn't do it then the public will and a Pogrom will get rid of the terrorist's family and any suspected friends (any American Muslims who already in the country before Trump was elected are prime targets). Additionally such attacks will only allow Trump to point out that his policy is correct. 

 

That is my speculation on the matter. If Trump will be effective in carrying out his policy no one yet knows, however to say it cannot be done effectively is incorrect. You bring a firm enough hand down on a group and you can diminish it considerably.

 

Wow, way to put words in my mouth. When did I say discrimination of the poor is OK? I didn't. So who or what are you responding to? I state that discriminating in immigration due to religion is wrong, and so is shutting down mosques. You are fighting against a straw man that isn't even tangentially related to the discussion at hand. You don't know my views on immigration overall. In fact, I root for a world with no borders, so you are shit out of ammunition on that frontier, bruv.

 

Your paragraph about how to identify Muslims is ridden with imperfect generalizations as well as using census information in countries that is confidential by law. The whole idea reeks of how Jews were identified in Nazi Germany. I do not want to invoke Godwin's Law, but man, are you even aware how close what you say is to what was done back then?

 

Kudos to seeing Pogroms as a solution. You are a wonderful human being.

The First Amendment is about freedom of speech and religion, (as the rest of your post talks about, not ignoring it) it has nothing to do with barring entry to a specific group of people.

Remember, foreigners have no rights until we let them in. Therefore, there is nothing making us take anyone in.

 

The First Amendment would not allow anyone to shut down mosques, which Trump is suggesting. Try to weasel your way out of this one.

77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, way to put words in my mouth. When did I say discrimination of the poor is OK? I didn't. So who or what are you responding to? I state that discriminating in immigration due to religion is wrong, and so is shutting down mosques. You are fighting against a straw man that isn't even tangentially related to the discussion at hand. You don't know my views on immigration overall. In fact, I root for a world with no borders, so you are shit out of ammunition on that frontier, bruv.

 

Your paragraph about how to identify Muslims is ridden with imperfect generalizations as well as using census information in countries that is confidential by law. The whole idea reeks of how Jews were identified in Nazi Germany. I do not want to invoke Godwin's Law, but man, are you even aware how close what you say is to what was done back then?

 

Kudos to seeing Pogroms as a solution. You are a wonderful human being.

 

Where did I say you said discrimination of the poor is OK? Merely saying by the large all those who protest Trump are the kind who when faced with having to give a solution to immigration will answer "just let the richer ones in as we need doctors/so on, but the poor keep well away". As you do mention it, no borders is madness though it's your right to believe in such a thing and in fact I'd laud you for living the life of no borders, just go to any immigrant ghetto and live life to the fullest.

 

You're trying a nice bit of punch there but I've already ducked it. As I said it's merely speculation on my part on what Trump will do and what would happen as a result, and in fact said that a few times in the hope you'd not jump into that pitfall but there you go. As for the Census... it's America. Western Europe will fall in line if they demand it so, getting such information would be no trouble I'm sure. 

 

i guess we saw which side won

 

Trump's over brother jack dude. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did I say you said discrimination of the poor is OK? Merely saying by the large all those who protest Trump are the kind who when faced with having to give a solution to immigration will answer "just let the richer ones in as we need doctors/so on, but the poor keep well away". As you do mention it, no borders is madness though it's your right to believe in such a thing and in fact I'd laud you for living the life of no borders, just go to any immigrant ghetto and live life to the fullest.

 

You're trying a nice bit of punch there but I've already ducked it. As I said it's merely speculation on my part on what Trump will do and what would happen as a result, and in fact said that a few times in the hope you'd not jump into that pitfall but there you go. As for the Census... it's America. Western Europe will fall in line if they demand it so, getting such information would be no trouble I'm sure. 

 

You've got to be kidding me. You started talking about the discrimination against the poor in immigration as if I said it, and now claim that you didn't use it as an argument against me. Why do you even bring that irrelevant point up? I don't think we are even talking with each other, I am just responding to your unrelated monologue.

77oKn5K.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume the Constitution is a pick and choose what you take literally to suit your own needs in a debate. Amusing. Maybe we need to update the First Amendment to modernize it for today's issues, as suggested by the same people.

Idiots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.