Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How about people belonging to the Nazi party or communists? Should they be allowed to immigrate?You know, there was definitely a time, when America was being built, that low skilled immigrants were of great value to the country, but that's really not so much the case anymore. You need to be able to offer something and show that you wouldn't be a burden on the economy or the taxpayer.
I think there is an argument to be made on selective immigration based on say, skill set. As you're right.....there was a greater appetite for low skilled workers in the past than there are now. I'd be cool with limits on immigration based on what you can bring to the economy.
But religion? Ethnicity? Race? Definitely not.
The only stupidity I am seeing is from you. You constructed a false premise to push for discrimination against a religion. That's about as un-American as it gets. No wonder people like you and bripat don't want to talk about our history and the reasons we do the things we do, such as NOT discriminate against religions or peoples.The thread title was a rhetorical question. They're stupid enough to really believe that.
It is not a coincidence that whenever there is a topic about discrimination against one group or another, it is always the same hateful characters who are found on the side of that discrimination. Gays, Muslims, Mexicans...there you are.
Our history is that we have always discriminated against group or another when it comes it immigration. Numskulls like you think the kind of people we allow to immigrate here doesn't matter. Importing a bunch of bloodthirsty Muslim savages into this country would change it's character for the worst forever.
Liberal Dictionary:
==============================================
Hateful - Speaks the truth. Accepts reality.
The US Began a discriminatory immigration policy against the Chinese in the 1860's.
Immigration remains purely a state matter. NATURALIZATION is a federal matter.
The reason Muslims seek revenge is because they are dealing with a bunch of bloodthirsty savages who control the Judeo-American axis of evil.
.
Wrong. They are bloodthirsty savages because they follow a bloodthirsty cult that commands them to kill all infidels.
Bullshit
It surprises me that they have waited this long to RETALIATE. The zionuts invaded Palestine in 1925. In 1947 the US began subsiding their genocide.
The US invaded Iraq in 1990 and remained them for approximately 18 years..
The perpetrators of the above mentioned crimes are most definite criminals.
when do they change your diapers?Alright big mouths, I'm "billo on the left",
you got any questions, you can ask me!
The only stupidity I am seeing is from you. You constructed a false premise to push for discrimination against a religion. That's about as un-American as it gets. No wonder people like you and bripat don't want to talk about our history and the reasons we do the things we do, such as NOT discriminate against religions or peoples.
It is not a coincidence that whenever there is a topic about discrimination against one group or another, it is always the same hateful characters who are found on the side of that discrimination. Gays, Muslims, Mexicans...there you are.
Our history is that we have always discriminated against group or another when it comes it immigration. Numskulls like you think the kind of people we allow to immigrate here doesn't matter. Importing a bunch of bloodthirsty Muslim savages into this country would change it's character for the worst forever.
Liberal Dictionary:
==============================================
Hateful - Speaks the truth. Accepts reality.
The US Began a discriminatory immigration policy against the Chinese in the 1860's.
Immigration remains purely a state matter. NATURALIZATION is a federal matter.
The reason Muslims seek revenge is because they are dealing with a bunch of bloodthirsty savages who control the Judeo-American axis of evil.
.
Wrong. They are bloodthirsty savages because they follow a bloodthirsty cult that commands them to kill all infidels.
Bullshit
It surprises me that they have waited this long to RETALIATE. The zionuts invaded Palestine in 1925. In 1947 the US began subsiding their genocide.
The US invaded Iraq in 1990 and remained them for approximately 18 years..
The perpetrators of the above mentioned crimes are most definite criminals.
Ah, you're one of the nutburgers who blames "Zionism" for all the problems in the Middle East. Then how do you explain Muslim massacres in India, West Africa and the Philippines? The fact is, wherever they go, Muslims kill infidels. It's what they believe in. Blaming the Jews or U.S. military intervention is just a cover story.
whatever -- no one says they doWhatever, people from other countries certainly don't have any "constitutional right" to immigrate here.
Well that's the OP question, so what are you arguing about?
really? the OP:
please, ChrisL highlight where this is so
So what if I were to suggest that the United States stop all immigration from Islamic nations and all immigration from Muslims.
Would that be....racist? Would I be violating their "civil rights"? Isn't the point of immigration policy for any nation to select only those immigrants that are believed to be a net benefit to the country?
We can choose our immigration policy based on anything we like, even religion and national origin. And many nations are now seeing the wisdom of discussion the sequestering of any more Muslims in their country. We should too.
Yes, that's what I said. The OP asks if it is Muslims have a constitutional right to immigrate to America? I say no. Nobody has a constitutional right to immigrate to America.
That of course was the OP question- and you are absolutely correct.
Of course at the heart of the question is can we specifically exclude Muslims? I think that would be a grey area when it comes the Constitution
Of course enforcing such a law would mean either asking all immigrants to tell us their religion or asking all applicants to confirm that they are or are not Muslim- and then presuming that the person is telling the truth- or what?
Is this a legal opinion you can share a link to or is it an opinion pulled out of your arse?whatever -- no one says they do
Well that's the OP question, so what are you arguing about?
really? the OP:
please, ChrisL highlight where this is so
So what if I were to suggest that the United States stop all immigration from Islamic nations and all immigration from Muslims.
Would that be....racist? Would I be violating their "civil rights"? Isn't the point of immigration policy for any nation to select only those immigrants that are believed to be a net benefit to the country?
We can choose our immigration policy based on anything we like, even religion and national origin. And many nations are now seeing the wisdom of discussion the sequestering of any more Muslims in their country. We should too.
Yes, that's what I said. The OP asks if it is Muslims have a constitutional right to immigrate to America? I say no. Nobody has a constitutional right to immigrate to America.
That of course was the OP question- and you are absolutely correct.
Of course at the heart of the question is can we specifically exclude Muslims? I think that would be a grey area when it comes the Constitution
Of course enforcing such a law would mean either asking all immigrants to tell us their religion or asking all applicants to confirm that they are or are not Muslim- and then presuming that the person is telling the truth- or what?
How is it a grehttp://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpuby area when it comes to the Constitution? What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?
Is this a legal opinion you can share a link to or is it an opinion pulled out of your arse?Well that's the OP question, so what are you arguing about?
really? the OP:
please, ChrisL highlight where this is so
So what if I were to suggest that the United States stop all immigration from Islamic nations and all immigration from Muslims.
Would that be....racist? Would I be violating their "civil rights"? Isn't the point of immigration policy for any nation to select only those immigrants that are believed to be a net benefit to the country?
We can choose our immigration policy based on anything we like, even religion and national origin. And many nations are now seeing the wisdom of discussion the sequestering of any more Muslims in their country. We should too.
Yes, that's what I said. The OP asks if it is Muslims have a constitutional right to immigrate to America? I say no. Nobody has a constitutional right to immigrate to America.
That of course was the OP question- and you are absolutely correct.
Of course at the heart of the question is can we specifically exclude Muslims? I think that would be a grey area when it comes the Constitution
Of course enforcing such a law would mean either asking all immigrants to tell us their religion or asking all applicants to confirm that they are or are not Muslim- and then presuming that the person is telling the truth- or what?
How is it a grey area when it comes to the Constitution? What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?
The only stupidity I am seeing is from you. You constructed a false premise to push for discrimination against a religion. That's about as un-American as it gets. No wonder people like you and bripat don't want to talk about our history and the reasons we do the things we do, such as NOT discriminate against religions or peoples.
It is not a coincidence that whenever there is a topic about discrimination against one group or another, it is always the same hateful characters who are found on the side of that discrimination. Gays, Muslims, Mexicans...there you are.
Our history is that we have always discriminated against group or another when it comes it immigration. Numskulls like you think the kind of people we allow to immigrate here doesn't matter. Importing a bunch of bloodthirsty Muslim savages into this country would change it's character for the worst forever.
Liberal Dictionary:
==============================================
Hateful - Speaks the truth. Accepts reality.
The US Began a discriminatory immigration policy against the Chinese in the 1860's.
Immigration remains purely a state matter. NATURALIZATION is a federal matter.
The reason Muslims seek revenge is because they are dealing with a bunch of bloodthirsty savages who control the Judeo-American axis of evil.
.
Wrong. They are bloodthirsty savages because they follow a bloodthirsty cult that commands them to kill all infidels.
Bullshit
It surprises me that they have waited this long to RETALIATE. The zionuts invaded Palestine in 1925. In 1947 the US began subsiding their genocide.
The US invaded Iraq in 1990 and remained them for approximately 18 years..
The perpetrators of the above mentioned crimes are most definite criminals.
Ah, you're one of the nutburgers who blames "Zionism" for all the problems in the Middle East. Then how do you explain Muslim massacres in India, West Africa and the Philippines? The fact is, wherever they go, Muslims kill infidels. It's what they believe in. Blaming the Jews or U.S. military intervention is just a cover story.
Is this a legal opinion you can share a link to or is it an opinion pulled out of your arse?really? the OP:
please, ChrisL highlight where this is so
So what if I were to suggest that the United States stop all immigration from Islamic nations and all immigration from Muslims.
Would that be....racist? Would I be violating their "civil rights"? Isn't the point of immigration policy for any nation to select only those immigrants that are believed to be a net benefit to the country?
We can choose our immigration policy based on anything we like, even religion and national origin. And many nations are now seeing the wisdom of discussion the sequestering of any more Muslims in their country. We should too.
Yes, that's what I said. The OP asks if it is Muslims have a constitutional right to immigrate to America? I say no. Nobody has a constitutional right to immigrate to America.
That of course was the OP question- and you are absolutely correct.
Of course at the heart of the question is can we specifically exclude Muslims? I think that would be a grey area when it comes the Constitution
Of course enforcing such a law would mean either asking all immigrants to tell us their religion or asking all applicants to confirm that they are or are not Muslim- and then presuming that the person is telling the truth- or what?
How is it a grey area when it comes to the Constitution? What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?
I can't prove a negative, queer bait.
Let me spell it out for you, Deep Throat.Is this a legal opinion you can share a link to or is it an opinion pulled out of your arse?Yes, that's what I said. The OP asks if it is Muslims have a constitutional right to immigrate to America? I say no. Nobody has a constitutional right to immigrate to America.
That of course was the OP question- and you are absolutely correct.
Of course at the heart of the question is can we specifically exclude Muslims? I think that would be a grey area when it comes the Constitution
Of course enforcing such a law would mean either asking all immigrants to tell us their religion or asking all applicants to confirm that they are or are not Muslim- and then presuming that the person is telling the truth- or what?
How is it a grey area when it comes to the Constitution? What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?
I can't prove a negative, queer bait.
So it's an opinion pulled out of your arse, and not based on any legal argument you can share?
Is this a legal opinion you can share a link to or is it an opinion pulled out of your arse?Let me spell it out for you, Deep Throat.Is this a legal opinion you can share a link to or is it an opinion pulled out of your arse?That of course was the OP question- and you are absolutely correct.
Of course at the heart of the question is can we specifically exclude Muslims? I think that would be a grey area when it comes the Constitution
Of course enforcing such a law would mean either asking all immigrants to tell us their religion or asking all applicants to confirm that they are or are not Muslim- and then presuming that the person is telling the truth- or what?
How is it a grey area when it comes to the Constitution? What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?
I can't prove a negative, queer bait.
So it's an opinion pulled out of your arse, and not based on any legal argument you can share?
I can't prove a negative. That means if you're claiming that the Constitution vouchsafes rights to foreigners to immigrate here regardless of religion, it's up to you to prove it.
I can't dumb it down for you any further, Nancy.
the Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither
the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges
any distinction between citizens and resident aliens."
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub
saintmichaeldefendthem
the Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither
the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges
any distinction between citizens and resident aliens."
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub
saintmichaeldefendthem
you cannot link to anything where Dante took a position. he merely asked you to clarify what you think you were sayingthe Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither
the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges
any distinction between citizens and resident aliens."
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub
saintmichaeldefendthem
You're a dumbass if you don't know the difference between somebody who's here legally and a foreign national that wants to immigrate here. I don't argue with dumbasses so goodbye.
Is this a legal opinion you can share a link to or is it an opinion pulled out of your arse?How is it a grey area when it comes to the Constitution? What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?
..
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub
I can't prove a negative, queer bait.
So it's an opinion pulled out of your arse, and not based on any legal argument you can share?
You're a dumbass if you don't know the difference between somebody who's here legally and a foreign national that wants to immigrate here. I don't argue with dumbasses so goodbye.
the Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither
the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges
any distinction between citizens and resident aliens."
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub
saintmichaeldefendthem
saintmichaeldefendthem: "What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?"
the Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither
the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges
any distinction between citizens and resident aliens."
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub
saintmichaeldefendthem
saintmichaeldefendthem: "What in the 1st Amendment confers rights to foreign nationals?"
what a doltyou cannot link to anything where Dante took a position. he merely asked you to clarify what you think you were sayingthe Supreme Court has squarely stated that neither
the First Amendment nor the Fifth Amendment "acknowledges
any distinction between citizens and resident aliens."
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub
saintmichaeldefendthem
You're a dumbass if you don't know the difference between somebody who's here legally and a foreign national that wants to immigrate here. I don't argue with dumbasses so goodbye.
