The not-so-veiled threat to non-Muslims in Tennessee

[Kondor3]

"...That is perhaps an even MORE Un-American attitude."

Not at all.

There is no place in our Charter Documents nor Laws nor Culture nor Traditions which mandates that we continue to accept new immigrants forevermore; especially once we've become full-up and can't even tend to our own properly, nevermind newcomers.

In the main, we are NOT a 'nation of immigrants'.

We are a 'nation of the descendants of immigrants'.

There are no longer any vast unsettled lands to the West to conquer and warehouse people, nor transcontinental railroads nor cities to build, and we can't even provide healthcare and jobs for our own people, so advocating that we give it a rest and conserve our resources for ourselves is by no means 'un-American'.

Unless, of course, one has relatives and friends and ethnic brethren on the other side of the border that one wants to bring here; in which case, such a moratorium would put a damper on such hopes.

Putting the needs of outsiders before the needs of our own People... now THAT's arguably FAR more UN-American than merely proposing a lengthy moratorium, before considering a better-controlled re-opening of the doors later, once we've healed a bit.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We should not allow any Islamic immigrants.

That is an Un-American attitude.

Let's just put a moratorium on ALL immigration for about 20 years to let things cool off...

Hell, at 330,000,000, we're pretty much full-up anyway, and can't take care of our own, and don't have enough jobs to go around...

Just close the doors and hang a 'No-Vacancy' sign on the Statue of Liberty until 2033 or so...

That'll take care of any latent Discrimination concerns...

Fortunately that will never happen.

But thanks for sharing your paranoid, delusional xenophobia.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Fortunately that will never happen. But thanks for sharing your paranoid, delusional xenophobia."

Why is that fortunate?

And whatever-in-the-world makes you think that advocating for a lengthy moratorium on immigration has anything whatsoever to do with paranoia, delusion or xenophobia?

Rather, it has everything to do with having 330,000,000 million people to deal with already; a population that we cannot keep gainfully employed, housed or medically cared-for.

We don't need still more mouths to feed when we cannot 'feed' what we already have.

But, in truth, it was tossed-out there as a bit of good-natured banter rather than anything likely to ever see the light of day, so...

 

[Kondor3]

And, with 330,000,000 living here, I'd say we've reached that point.

We are nowhere near "full up." That's stupid, ignorant, and again Un-American.

That is neither stupid nor ignorant nor un-AMerican, despite your protestations to the contrary.

We cannot employ and care for those already here.

That tells me we're overloaded... beyond capacity... full-up.

You can gainsay logic all you like but it's still illogical.

But let's have this discussion in the Immigration zone, rather than hijacking this thread.

Unless you intend to continue acting stupidly, ignorantly and un-American, by denigrating those whose only 'crime' was to give voice to an opinion in direct opposition to your own.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We should not allow any Islamic immigrants.

Setting aside for the moment that this is idiotic and un-Constitutional, how exactly do you propose this be accomplished? How would you determine if someone is an ‘Islamic immigrant’?

How they’re dressed?

Their name?

Where they come from?

Ask them?

The irony of this is you’re just as hateful and destructive as you accuse Muslims of being.

Mandatory background checks. Required to buy guns and should also be required to enter the country. Nothing unconstitutional about it if you wish to be allowed into our country you should meet our criteria or be turned away.

It is un-Constitutional if your ‘background check’ is designed to discriminate against Muslims only.

Note also that non-citizens are entitled to due process and equal protection rights, even those undocumented. See: Plyler v. Doe (1982).

No, you’re just ignorant and frightened. That ignorance and fear is amplified by your conservative dogma manifesting in an unfounded hatred of Muslims.

You are, in essence, what’s wrong with America. Your ignorance, hate and fear pose a greater threat to this Nation than any ‘terrorist.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"...Fortunately that will never happen. But thanks for sharing your paranoid, delusional xenophobia."

Why is that fortunate?

Because this Nation has always thrived and benefited from diversity and inclusiveness.

Your ‘full-up’ motif is ignorant nonsense, predicated on fear and devoid of fact.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Take a long plane ride, look down and tell me how we're 'full-up'. That's absurd."

Overreliance upon Literalism strikes again...

I'm not talking JUST about PHYSICAL SPACE... although I suspect that the more Liberal amongst us won't be satisfied until we're packed cheek-by-jowl, coast-to-coast, and the American People will put a stop to that kind of $hit long before it happens.

No, I'm also - and mostly - talking about capacity.

We cannot employ and house and feed and care-for the 330,000,000 already here.

And we have another 12,000,000 who have snuck across our borders in the past couple of decades who aren't even counted in that 330,000,000.

We're overloaded... beyond capacity... full-up, in the sense that we can't handle what we already have, never mind bringing-in millions of new mouths to feed.

 

[Indofred]

how come the government doesn't speak up in the same way for Christians.....?

What was that constitution thing about freedom of religion?

Traitor.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Fortunately that will never happen. But thanks for sharing your paranoid, delusional xenophobia."

Why is that fortunate?

Because this Nation has always thrived and benefited from diversity and inclusiveness.

True. Nolo contendere. No contest.

And we now have sufficient Diversity and Inclusiveness to last us for quite a while without bringing in still more mouths to feed.

Declaring a moratorium on immigration does nothing to stifle diversity and inclusiveness.

It merely means that we continue to enjoy and benefit from what we already have, rather than seeking more just for the sake of having more while we hemorrhage cash to prop-up those already here plus untold millions more.

"...Your ‘full-up’ motif is ignorant nonsense, predicated on fear and devoid of fact."

Your styling it as either 'ignorant nonsense' or 'predicated on fear' does not, in actuality, render it thus.

And as to being devoid of fact...

Well...

You go ahead and counterpoint the reasons I gave for considering a moratorium...

1. high unemployment

2. inability to properly house our people without heavy subsidies to the sector

3. inability to properly feed and clothe our people without heavy subsidies

4. inability to properly care for (medical care) our people without heavy subsidies

...etc, etc, etc...

If you can serve-up a convincing counterpoint to the above, then you'll have a leg to stand on, in disputing that we are full-up (operating in overflow conditions, beyond our capacity).

Otherwise... even though you don't much like what you're hearing... what you're hearing is truthful, accurate and a sound basis for contemplating such a moratorium.

And, although I regret that you disagree, I think I can learn to live with that...

 

[Indofred]

In the main, we are NOT a 'nation of immigrants'.

We are a 'nation of the descendants of immigrants'..

Moronic

You fully admit you are in America because your forefathers immigrated into the country but you don't want immigrants in the country.

Jesus effing christ on a pair of lollypop sticks - what a cretinous post.

 

[Pogo]

In the main, we are NOT a 'nation of immigrants'.

We are a 'nation of the descendants of immigrants'.

Don't be facile. Those immigrants had to immigrate before issuing their descendants; the nation didn't wait to exist until we got born. So everybody that built this nation from the beginning was an immigrant. Everybody who's not Native American.

This latter-day "now that I'm here" revisionism amounts to a desire for a national caste system. Which runs directly counter to our professed moral compass that 'all men are created equal'.

 

[Pogo]

In the main, we are NOT a 'nation of immigrants'.

We are a 'nation of the descendants of immigrants'..

Moronic

You fully admit you are in America because your forefathers immigrated into the country but you don't want immigrants in the country.

Jesus effing christ on a pair of lollypop sticks - what a cretinous post.

This ^ has been the inherent flaw in this thread from its beginning. Yet on they go with flailing attempts to defend it. Markable and remarkable.

 

[Pogo]

"...Take a long plane ride, look down and tell me how we're 'full-up'. That's absurd."

Overreliance upon Literalism strikes again...

I'm not talking JUST about PHYSICAL SPACE... although I suspect that the more Liberal amongst us won't be satisfied until we're packed cheek-by-jowl, coast-to-coast, and the American People will put a stop to that kind of $hit long before it happens.

No, I'm also - and mostly - talking about capacity.

We cannot employ and house and feed and care-for the 330,000,000 already here.

And we have another 12,000,000 who have snuck across our borders in the past couple of decades who aren't even counted in that 330,000,000.

We're overloaded... beyond capacity... full-up, in the sense that we can't handle what we already have, never mind bringing-in millions of new mouths to feed.

As an American I'm not sure I'm OK with your central idea here: "we cannot".

 

[Osomir]

you said......If both parties think saying something is wrong though they are welcome (with the full consent of both parties) to take it to a third party arbitrator for the creation of a legally binding ruling though.

if an American muslim was accused of blasphemy and apostasy....how could he be legally charged in America.....?

The answer is in what you quoted. Both parties would have to willingly agree to a third party arbitration and create a contract between themselves that they would follow the arbitrator's ruling. No one is forcing them to do it and they could back out under breach of contract terms. it would all have to be completely voluntary.

Heck you could do it without a "court" it happens all of the time in religion. Two parties go to a minister to resolve a dispute, or ask for guidance, or a Catholic goes to confessional, etc. Some Jewish communities utilize Beth Din courts.

None of this has anything to do with changing our legal system or with implementing blasphemy laws in the US. I don't see how it in any way affects you.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

you said......If both parties think saying something is wrong though they are welcome (with the full consent of both parties) to take it to a third party arbitrator for the creation of a legally binding ruling though.

if an American muslim was accused of blasphemy and apostasy....how could he be legally charged in America.....?

The answer is in what you quoted. Both parties would have to willingly agree to a third party arbitration and create a contract between themselves that they would follow the arbitrator's ruling. No one is forcing them to do it and they could back out under breach of contract terms. it would all have to be completely voluntary.

Heck you could do it without a "court" it happens all of the time in religion. Two parties go to a minister to resolve a dispute, or ask for guidance, or a Catholic goes to confessional, etc. Some Jewish communities utilize Beth Din courts.

None of this has anything to do with changing our legal system or with implementing blasphemy laws in the US. I don't see how it in any way affects you.

you always truncate my posts when quoting them....obviously you don't like alot of what i say...

and it's quite obvious you are advocating a separate Islamic court system from our American court system.....one that undermines our Constitution.....Judge Judy and the Beth Din religious courts don't do that...

when an organization or club or group becomes actively involved in anti-American activities it is time to dismantle them....which is why i advocate dismantling anti-American organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, and all associated groups, schools and mosques and arrest those advocating and supporting jihad...it is time we recognize our enemy...

 

[9thIDdoc]

The irony of this is you’re just as hateful and destructive as you accuse Muslims of being

Mandatory background checks. Required to buy guns and should also be required to enter the country. Nothing unconstitutional about it if you wish to be allowed into our country you should meet our criteria or be turned away. [/QUOTE]

It is un-Constitutional if your ‘background check’ is designed to discriminate against Muslims only.

Wrong again. Any sovereign nation can use whatever criteria it likes when deciding who will be allowed to immigrate. Obviously if we did not have a right to limit who is allowed there would be no illegal immigrants.

Note also that non-citizens are entitled to due process and equal protection rights, even those undocumented. See: Plyler v. Doe (1982).

No. I do note however that some courts and idiots seem to think so.

No, you’re just ignorant and frightened. That ignorance and fear is amplified by your conservative dogma manifesting in an unfounded hatred of Muslims.

I'm certainly no more ignorant or frightened than you are. And any hatred I have for Muslims is well founded

You are, in essence, what’s wrong with America. Your ignorance, hate and fear pose a greater threat to this Nation than any ‘terrorist.

It is in fact your willingness to sell out and give in to tyranny that is wrong with this country. And we've had all the "diversity and inclusion" that we need or want. We absolutely don't need any more people determined to be part of the problem instead of the solution. That would apparently include you.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Doc explain to us why it's well founded, because you appear to have the victim hood mentality which you need to cut loose.

 

[Pogo]

Doc explain to us why it's well founded, because you appear to have the victim hood mentality which you need to cut loose.

Hard to claim "well founded" when you admit going to the event and not going in to the meeting-- which means the only side you heard was the Pam Geller gadfly wackadoodility.

 

[9thIDdoc]

Doc explain to us why it's well founded, because you appear to have the victim hood mentality which you need to cut loose.

If you need it explained, you haven't been paying attention to current events for the past several decades. Why would I want Muslims living near my children and grandchildren more than anyone else prone to bloody murder, rape, and child molestation" my in-laws had two innocent young women who went down with the WTC. Enough is more than enough.

 

[Kondor3]

In the main, we are NOT a 'nation of immigrants'.

We are a 'nation of the descendants of immigrants'..

Moronic

You fully admit you are in America because your forefathers immigrated into the country but you don't want immigrants in the country.

Jesus effing christ on a pair of lollypop sticks - what a cretinous post.

Yes.

I fully admit that I am in America because my forefathers immigrated into the country.

When they came here, there were 31 States.

When they came here, the population was 23,000,000.

There was plenty of land still to be had.

That was 1850.

This is 2013.

There are 50 States.

We're all out of free land to give to newcomers.

Our population today is 330,000,000.

And that's not even counting the 12,000,000 to 20,000,000 lurking in the shadows at the moment.

We cannot employ or house or feed or care for those who are already here.

We don't need more mouths to feed.

Just because a country is built on immigration does not mean that it is obliged to keep its doors open forevermore.

Not unless it wants to turn into a Third World $hithole within a handful of generations.

Now THAT would be TRULY moronic and cretinous.

So would advocating for same.

And I'm not even suggesting that we discontinue Immigration.

Rather, I light-heartedly suggested that we may want to consider putting a freeze on Immigration - putting a Moratorium on it - for a couple of decades, in order to give our overstrained social safety net and the pocketbooks of those who pay for it a rest.

As I mentioned in my dealings with someone else who seems to have a vested interest in keeping the doors wide open, spitting in the face of logic...

Although I regret that you don't like my opinion, I suspect that I'll learn to live with that unfortunate state of affairs...