Trump’s Anti-Muslim Plan Is Hateful, But Constitutional

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2015 3:05 AM GMT
    NYT: DONALD J. TRUMP’S reprehensible call to bar Muslim immigrants from entering the United States poses whether such a proposal would be constitutional?

    In the ordinary, non-immigration world of constitutional law, the Trump scheme would be blatantly unconstitutional, a clear violation of both equal protection and religious freedom (he had originally called for barring American Muslims living abroad from re-entering the country as well; he has since dropped that clearly unconstitutional notion).

    But under a line of rulings from the Supreme Court dating back more than a century, that’s irrelevant. As the court observed in its 1977 decision in Fiallo v. Bell, “In the exercise of its broad power over immigration and naturalization, Congress regularly makes rules that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/opinion/trumps-anti-muslim-plan-is-awful-and-constitutional.html?_r=0
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Dec 09, 2015 3:14 AM GMT
    it's not hateful at all, it's just plain prudent

    Islam, as practiced in most of the Middle East with Sharia law, is just not consistent with Western philosophy, it just isn't
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Dec 09, 2015 3:27 AM GMT
    Someone with bad intentions can easily fake or hide his Islamic ties. Its a blowhard waste of time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2015 3:32 PM GMT
    Hateful? Jimmy Carter banned entry to Iranians during the hostage crisis in 1980. It's not unheard of.

    "Fourth, the Secretary of Treasury [State] and the Attorney General will invalidate all visas issued to Iranian citizens for future entry into the United States, effective today. We will not reissue visas, nor will we issue new visas, except for compelling and proven humanitarian reasons or where the national interest of our own country requires. This directive will be interpreted very strictly."

    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=33233
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2015 4:18 PM GMT
    Hateful, schmateful. Enough of these faux-compassionate cliches! Muslims are a clear and present danger to the US, starting with the one sitting in the WH.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2015 7:42 PM GMT
    tj85016 saidit's not hateful at all, it's just plain prudent

    Islam, as practiced in most of the Middle East with Sharia law, is just not consistent with Western philosophy, it just isn't



    It is not prudent in the least and is just not a well thought out plan for all the reasons below combined.
    1. How are you gonna tell who is Muslim or not? You'd have to rely on people to self-disclose, which they won't if they are smart. There is no genetic test for religious state of mind. We can't even get all gay people to admit that they are gay. Would people really admit "Yes, I'm muslim AND I hate the US"?
    2. Many of the terrorists are already born citizens in non-muslim countries so using the country of origin is not nearly as effective as we think. In fact, oftentimes they are quite westernized using facebook, iphones, borrowing money from banks etc. The terrorists who are true threats aren't dumb and tribal like we characterize them.
    3. The terrorists are driven by the sense that Western culture is ostracizing them/invading them. Policies such as this only make isolation a reality which increase tensions. They also drastically reduce the number of informants and indigenous operatives we have as well as cause people to not cooperate with us.
    4. Do we really need to offend and insult ALL muslims just to feel safe when in reality, we are more likely to be killed by a car accident, or by drug overdose than in a terror attack? Instead, we should actually increase our exposure so that we aren't demonizing each other. It worked with race relations here.

    Fear often makes us irrational and paranoid.
  • bro4bro

    Posts: 1034

    Dec 09, 2015 8:12 PM GMT
    Fear of terrorism aside, why would we want to welcome a population who believe in the subjugation of women? It's a huge part of their belief system, you know. And why is it "reprehensible" to bar such people from entering our country?

    Let's be honest. If there were no terrorism issue, if their home countries were stable, would you welcome a huge influx of people who famously subjugate women and hate gays into our country?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2015 8:43 PM GMT
    musclmed saidSomeone with bad intentions can easily fake or hide his Islamic ties. Its a blowhard waste of time.


    Exactly. Notwithstanding that the vast majority of Muslims traveling to the US have no ill intent, a terror group could just send "sleeper agents" if such a ban were imposed. The USSR sent sleeper agents to the UK and US, who managed to conceal their true (communist) loyalties and true identities for years.
  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Dec 09, 2015 9:10 PM GMT
    LMAO @ NY Times and "reprehensible," "hateful."

    O fuck me. Idiot white Liberals are so easily offended. Trump isn't "hateful," he's just trolling the progressive retards.

    Yes, you so called "liberals" who are even now clutching your pearls and collapsing on the fainting couch. Please STFU.


  • JackNNJ

    Posts: 1051

    Dec 09, 2015 9:12 PM GMT
    bro4bro saidFear of terrorism aside, why would we want to welcome a population who believe in the subjugation of women? It's a huge part of their belief system, you know. And why is it "reprehensible" to bar such people from entering our country?

    Let's be honest. If there were no terrorism issue, if their home countries were stable, would you welcome a huge influx of people who famously subjugate women and hate gays into our country?


    Because Muslims make the good side of the victimization balance sheet. They are non-white, therefore noble in their very essence. Subjugated alterns, Other, etc. They are the salt of the Earth as far as white Liberals are concerned.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2015 10:10 PM GMT
    Woodford's point about self-disclosure is a valid one, but not for the reason he offers: how can you believe any Muslim, given the sura in the Koran that condones lying and deceit to advance their "religion?"

    I'd submit that it's Muslims who are ostracizing themselves from Western society, as they have demonstrated wherever they go, legally or not. And yes, ALL Muslims share the blame for what arose, persists, festers, and grows even stronger in their "communities," for their failure to root it out and destroy it before it grew. There IS such a thing as "collective responsibility."

    By their own creed, they've disqualified themselves from entering the US. And that's perfectly fine with me. We don't need them, and are much better off without them, ANY of them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 09, 2015 10:15 PM GMT
    theantijock%20engage%20stalker%20reducti

    bro4bro said...why would we want to welcome a population who believe in the subjugation of women? It's a huge part of their belief system, you know. And why is it "reprehensible" to bar such people from entering our country?

    Let's be honest. If there were no terrorism issue, if their home countries were stable, would you welcome a huge influx of people who famously subjugate women and hate gays into our country?


    Besides that we're not throwing out all the gays on this forum who have not, would not champion gay rights yet benefit from the bravery of Liberal others, you might be underestimating the strength of American culture which derives from diversity.

    What if Muslim immigration reduced hardship on their women, since you state that you are against the policy in part because you think they are hurtful to their women. Would you be for the policy if you saw that immigration here reduced suffering of their women?

    Because, I reported here http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/4148757 that

    Muslim Americans are more supportive of the role of women in society. Virtually all Muslim Americans (90%) agree that women should be able to work outside of the home. Most (68%) also think that there is no difference between men and women political leaders. These are not the prevailing views of Muslims in most predominantly Muslim countries...


    Or are their woman, now, no longer a concern?

    What is the promise of America?
  • bro4bro

    Posts: 1034

    Dec 10, 2015 4:37 AM GMT
    So you want to solve the world's problems by inviting all seven billion to come live in America and let them become civilized by osmosis?

    Muslim women may have it better here than they do in their home countries, but they don't have it as good as non-Muslim women, do they? Are we supposed to cheer because their husbands let them go out and earn money? And if you truly think most of them don't see a difference between male and female political leaders, why don't you see Muslim women running for office? Or is it that they don't see a difference between male and female infidels?

    Let's be clear, there is no inherent strength in diversity alone. Diversity leads to strength only when people unite to achieve a common goal. Sorry, I just don't see that with the Muslim community. And I've personally known my share.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Dec 10, 2015 5:17 AM GMT
    I'm not sure I understand what he said that was wrong. I thought he said we should TEMPORARILY halt immigration of Muslims until we can get something in place to prevent jihadist from trying to enter the country .... so why is that wrong? Quite obviously the jihadist are slipping in as innocent Muslims that love Christians, America and gays

    icon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 10, 2015 5:30 AM GMT
    So Liberals, why wasn't it hateful when Obama stopped Iraqi's for 6 months from coming into the US in 2011:

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obamas-duty-to-refugees-and-america/article/2577017
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 10, 2015 6:19 AM GMT
    bro4bro saidSo you want to solve the world's problems by inviting all seven billion to come live in America and let them become civilized by osmosis?

    Muslim women may have it better here than they do in their home countries, but they don't have it as good as non-Muslim women, do they? Are we supposed to cheer because their husbands let them go out and earn money? And if you truly think most of them don't see a difference between male and female political leaders, why don't you see Muslim women running for office? Or is it that they don't see a difference between male and female infidels?

    Let's be clear, there is no inherent strength in diversity alone. Diversity leads to strength only when people unite to achieve a common goal. Sorry, I just don't see that with the Muslim community. And I've personally known my share.


    Pretty sure I never suggested we tie-dye the world.

    Change occurs over time. While 1st generation women might wear burkas, their children might not be swimming in them. And the children of them might just wear a head covering and their children might be completely assimilated. Are Muslim African American woman subjugated? Independence runs pretty big in America.

    As to Muslim American politician women? Not really anything I ever studied, but lemme google:

    http://muslimobserver.com/elected-muslim-politicians-federal-and-state-levels/
    Elected Muslim Politicians–Federal, State and Local Levels
    Rashida Tlaib, Michigan State Rep-Elect; Jamilah Nasheed, Missouri Rep.


    So out of 20 that shows at local level 10% are women. So not half but not insignificant. To compare with America in general, 20% of the Senate are women and 19.3% in Congress.

    So those numbers are not far off as you'd suggest.

    To diversity...

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/07/16/stem-strength-through-diversity
    Strength through Diversity

    America’s cultural and human diversity has historically fueled progress, prosperity, and growth across our Nation.

    In science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), diversity leads to enhanced creativity and innovation. A growing body of research shows that diversity in groups bolsters their ability to solve problems; that diversity on campuses enhances students’ advanced thinking and leadership skills; and that diversity in companies improves innovation and strengthens the bottom line....


    As to playing that strength by coming together, I believe that's a function of time.

    https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/comparing-immigrant-assimilation-north-america-and-europe-5846.html
    Comparing Immigrant Assimilation in North America and Europe

    the state of immigrant assimilation—the degree of similarity between the native- and foreign-born populations—in the United States. This report provides new information on the characteristics of newly arrived immigrants and the pace of their integration into society

    •Most of the United States' major immigrant groups were more assimilated in 2009 than they were in 2000.

    •Upon arrival, the most recent immigrants are significantly more assimilated along cultural and civic lines than their counterparts of a decade ago.

    •On the whole, immigrants in the United States are more assimilated than those in most European countries

    •Immigrants from Canada rank first in terms of overall assimilation, largely as a consequence of their high rate of naturalization.

    Breaking assimilation down still further, by both origin and destination, shows the United States to be ahead of most of Europe but behind Canada in a wide variety of categories.

    •Muslim immigrants, identified by data on religion in some nations and by country of birth in others, are most integrated in Canada, followed closely by the United States.

    •Muslim immigrants in Italy and Switzerland are much less assimilated than Mexican and Central American immigrants are in the United States. Muslim immigrants' standing in Spain is roughly equal to the standing of Mexicans and Central Americans in the United States.

    •The United States' ranking behind Canada but ahead of European nations also holds for immigrants from China and Southeast Asia. Assimilation in the United States is ahead of all but one European country for immigrants from India and Eastern Europe.

    ...it is clear that the United States, compared to the other countries studied, is doing a good job of absorbing newcomers...

    Here's their full report http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/cr_64.pdf


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Institute_for_Policy_Research
    The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (renamed in 1981 from the International Center for Economic Policy Studies) is a conservative American think tank...
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19133

    Dec 10, 2015 6:48 AM GMT
    Sam27 saidWhatever you believe in principle, have you ever been wary or fearful of a person because they appeared to be Muslim or from a Middle Eastern background?

    Yes
    I'm not sure
    No


    Is this some sort of "Gotcha" question?

    This country went through a horrific traumatic event on 9/11 that shook Americans to their core. Being "wary" and/or "fearful" is, unfortunately, probably a very natural emotion for some. This is sad, but true. The saddest thing is that many innocent, loving muslims or people from Middle Eastern backgrounds are unfairly pigeon-holed because of this.
  • AMoonHawk

    Posts: 11406

    Dec 10, 2015 7:30 AM GMT
    Maybe we should wait and see if they poison some big city's water supply, or blow up a city with a nuclear bomb before we do something about it
    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • ATLANTIS7

    Posts: 1213

    Dec 10, 2015 9:38 AM GMT
    Does that include The Saudi Royal Family Mr Trump?

    OIL OIL OIL.....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 10, 2015 1:15 PM GMT
    I am atheist I criticize all religion including Islam. I am fed up people believing bs muslim propaganda. In this day of age Islam is not compatible with western society. I am tired of people using the term "Islamophobia" shut the hell up go study the religion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 10, 2015 1:17 PM GMT
    JackNNJ saidLMAO @ NY Times and "reprehensible," "hateful."

    O fuck me. Idiot white Liberals are so easily offended. Trump isn't "hateful," he's just trolling the progressive retards.

    Yes, you so called "liberals" who are even now clutching your pearls and collapsing on the fainting couch. Please STFU.

    Why do you keep using the term "white Liberals"? I guess there are no Black ones? Do you have some hangup about White people? You squeal loud enough if someone starts denigrating people because they're Black. A little racism, perhaps?
  • BuddhaLing

    Posts: 107

    Dec 10, 2015 1:50 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    JackNNJ saidLMAO @ NY Times and "reprehensible," "hateful."

    O fuck me. Idiot white Liberals are so easily offended. Trump isn't "hateful," he's just trolling the progressive retards.

    Yes, you so called "liberals" who are even now clutching your pearls and collapsing on the fainting couch. Please STFU.

    Why do you keep using the term "white Liberals"? I guess there are no Black ones? Do you have some hangup about White people? You squeal loud enough if someone starts denigrating people because they're Black. A little racism, perhaps?


    YES!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 10, 2015 2:22 PM GMT
    desertmuscl saidHateful? Jimmy Carter banned entry to Iranians during the hostage crisis in 1980. It's not unheard of.

    That was a political determination, not one based on religion. During the height of the Cold War the citizens of the USSR could not freely enter the US, either. Although those that claimed they were "fleeing" got special consideration. The USSR encompassed many religions, including Muslim.

    The US also placed restrictions against Cubans after the 1959 communist revolution, while again the claim of refugee status got them special entry status denied to others. That was purely a political decision, to embarrass and weaken Castro.

    Until Castro turned the tables on us, with the sudden influx of 125,000 during the Mariel Boatlift in 1980, that our anti-Castro immigration policy required we accept. Turns out many were the Cuban government's rejects, including convicted criminals, who had to be kept in detention camps while the US tried to deport them, leading to riots.

    About 50% of the "Marielitos" settled in the Miami area, where the crime and drug rates subsequently spiked. This boatlift episode is depicted in various fictionalized movies, including the bloody "Scarface" with Al Pacino.

    The point being, this issue of immigration is not new to the US; we've actually had it a number of times in our history. When it was inevitable that some undesirables were inadvertently admitted. And how it was handled in the past was largely political, and sometimes racially, without a consideration of religion. What Trump proposes would be based solely on religion, and that's a radical and non-American concept.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Dec 10, 2015 3:41 PM GMT
    ^^

    well, in this case, religion is politics
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 10, 2015 5:51 PM GMT
    both Fascism and or Communism were initially advertised to improve the working citizens digs.

    once this gets started; "Making America Great Again" it will be the devil to stop.

    image.jpg