The Regressive Left and Islam -- What is happening here?

[Dogmaphobe]

Reason is what informs liberals.

Emotion is what informs conservatives. Specifically fear.

The only truth you have revealed is that simple-minded people reduce the complexity of the world to binary while reducing politics to nothing more than a game of coyboys and indians. .

So you expand every single thought and statement and contort it to fit your worldview. Whatever dingo. Hate to break it to you but you don't have the chops to judge the rest of the world. You see everything as a binary and then you project your miniscule worldview onto it. It's like looking through a microscope and declaring yourself "king of all the huge world you see on the slide".

It's called self delusion.

Oh, pulleeeze, child.

You made a very stupid and very simple-minded statement that amounted to nothing more than "Our guys are great, but those oter guys are a big bunch of poopooheads".

Grow the fuck up, son.

And you projected your black and white paradigm onto what I said as representing every thought I have ever had. I tend to assume certain things of 'adults', one being that you never look at a statement and think it applies to all things everywhere at all times.

The evidence I've seen shows that conservatives live on emotion. Fear is the driving force in most of the decisions conservatives make. Do liberals not feel fear? They do like every living thing does. But it isn't the driving force in their lives as it is with conservatives.

Liberals were on Columbus' ships heading out into the unknown. Conservatives were the ones on shore yelling at them that they would fall off the edge of the Earth. When you live in the jungle fear is a very useful trait. You are cautions about going into caves and walking across open spaces. In the modern world that same fear is more of a hindrance. Nothing wrong with being cautions but when it paralyzes your actions it is a detriment.

.....and the stupid, simple minded conservatives make the exact, same childish claim about Liberals.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Yo Dog.....

Do you agree with Trump that we should ban Muslims from entering the United States?

Yo, Lone -- I think as long as they are carefully vetted and are actual refugees instead of young, single male migrants, then they should not be banned.

Germany received an onslaught of young, single men and immediately experienced widespread rape Jihad.

Do you have any sympathy for the victims, or should they just be considered collateral damage and a necessary sacrifice to your politics?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yo Dog.....

Do you agree with Trump that we should ban Muslims from entering the United States?

Yo, Lone -- I think as long as they are carefully vetted and are actual refugees instead of young, single male migrants, then they should not be banned.

Germany received an onslaught of young, single men and immediately experienced widespread rape Jihad.

Do you have any sympathy for the victims, or should they just be considered collateral damage and a necessary sacrifice to your politics?

You a politician? The answer to that question requires a "yes" or a "no". I will try to decipher your bullshit and say that you do not agree with Trump and that you are OK with Muslims ( refugees, students, business people, tourists ) entering the US.

Excellent.

Why are you supporting Islam?

See how stupid you seem?

 

[ptbw forever]

What's going with the mass Muslim migration into Europe and all the backlash is probably more CULTURAL than it is religious. It's a matter of getting thru to the immigrants the very basic concept that their right to not to be offended by Western ways has been revoked. And that the mayor of Cologne (or whereever this happened) shouldn't be admonishing German woman to not dress provocatively. That's a leftist "solution" that is counter-productive to what "culture re-adjustment" needs to happen...

And I sympathize with the immigrants. Who must ponder now how to practice and live their religious convictions in a place that WILL NOT protect them from being offended. Leftist leaders trying to ACCOMMODATE these adjustments are just making it worse. It needs to be handled by the EXISTING Muslim community and by culture immersion. Perhaps at some point -- they give up and go back to the safety of tyranny and theocracy. But the danger is --- they might be subject to radicalization if they ABHOR western culture and don't adjust.

It IS a threat.

I think that is an over-simplified explanation. I talked about this in the thread I started in CDZ on Muslim Americans.

Muslim immigrant assimilation is little different from other immigrant assimilation - it depends on the culture of the country they are coming from and the culture of the country they are going to - not just the culture, but the culture of integration that country has. Why are countries like the US and Canada so successful at integrating immigrants and why do immigrants flourish here and end up not in other places? That is a question that Righwingers refuse to address because it is more satisfying to attack the alien religion than it is to examine complex problems. Instead they focus on religion as the only barrier, claim that therefore the SAME things will happen in the US as in ohter countries, and completely ignore culture. Like Leftwingers - it's ignoring huge pieces of information. How can there be a solution when you only have part of the data?

Integration is a two-way street dependent on the immigrant and on the host country - when either end fails, there is room for radicalization.

I posted this before but I think it's relevent in this discussion also: Why Do American Muslims Fare Better Than Their French Counterparts?

Some 5 million Muslims live in France -- about 7.5 percent of the country’s population -- one of the largest Muslim populations in Western Europe. After the horror of the coordinated terrorist attacks on six sites in Paris last Friday, a climate of suspicion once again engulfs Muslims living in the Western world -- and French citizens and politicians alike are grappling with how to respond to homegrown threats. But experts say that the conditions of Muslims in some European countries can create fertile breeding grounds for extremism, whereas societies with more-integrated Muslim populations like the United States are less susceptible.

“In a very broad sense, you have the same communities in Europe and America. Both are Muslims living in the West. But in fact, there are huge sociological differences between the two groups. Most importantly, the relationship between Europe and its Muslims is one rooted in colonialism, whereas the U.S. has no previous history with its Muslim populations. So [in Europe] there is some of the residue of racial and cultural prejudices of the colonial era,” says Akbar Ahmed, chair of Islamic Studies at American University’s School of International Service and the author of several renowned field projects on Muslims, including “Journey Into Europe: Islam, Immigration and Empire.”

The result is two very different communities: One in America that is hopeful, affluent and better assimilated, versus one in Europe, particularly in countries like France, that exists on the periphery of society, both economically and socially. It’s that marginalization of European Muslim communities that can leave certain members vulnerable to recruitment attempts from groups like ISIS.

One of the main differences stems from the makeup of Muslim groups in European countries compared with those in the United States. Estimates vary, but Muslims in the United States account for 1 to 2 percent of the total population -- yet there is no one ethnic group that dominates: Muslims hail from 77 different countries in the Middle East, South Asia, Africa and Europe. That’s a stark contrast from Europe, where the Muslim populations are more homogenous and typically made up of residents of former colonies. For example, the Muslim community in the U.K. is dominated by Muslims of South Asian descent, while three-quarters of French Muslims are mostly of Morocco, Algeria or other North African origin, according to the Brookings Institution.

“In Europe, pockets of Muslims are isolated by country of origin, which hampers integration. That keeps Islamic identity tied to a home country and so the community is more insular. The umbilical cord is still there,” says Shahed Amanullah, who has worked as a senior adviser at the U.S. Department of State on issues surrounding Muslim youth around the world. “In America, no one group that dominates. It’s not an affinity-based community but a value-based community.”

This article makes strong points outlining the differences between America/Canada and Europe in terms of assimilation, how they are integrated into society, and affluence and prospects for the future - all of this plays into the potential for radicalization far more than simple religion or a matter of "abhoring western culture" - if they feel economically marginalized by western culture, if they feel they have few prospects for improvement AND if they are surrounded by like minded individuals and that view is consistently affirmed by the dominant culture then they are ripe for radical exploitation.

If the Right were truly looking for ways to reduce radicalization, they would be examining this data and asking - why does it work in some places and not in others ? Some models hamper assimilation and integration, other ones inhance it and again, it only works when it's a two-way street with immigrants seeking to assimilate and culture that helps them to assimilate by providing avenues for successful integration.

Except in Europe the "colonialism" goes back BOTH ways.

An inconvenient fact that the so called "left" refuses to acknowledge.

Europe has pretty much 'had it'... it is, by now, so pervasively undermined that it may be too far gone to recover its culture and identity.

Oh, well... at least our dumb-ass Euro-cousins can emigrate to New Europe (Canada, the US and Australia), when the pressure from Islam grows too great, as it will.

They're at grave risk of losing their cohesion and identity; having bled themselves white, twice, in the previous century, losing their empires, and exhausting themselves.

If they fail they will likely flee to East Asia.

America and Canada are too far gone to do anything but follow them there.

Disagree. America and Canada have a couple of skin-lesions, but the Cancer has not yet mestastisized. We need only look to Europe to see a Terminal Case.

America and Canada are demographically destroyed and are currently developing the culture of self-hatred that Europe has had since WWII, while Europe is being demographically destroyed right now.

We will all be in the same position in 20 years.

 

[jillian]

Culture does make a huge difference.

What's going with the mass Muslim migration into Europe and all the backlash is probably more CULTURAL than it is religious. It's a matter of getting thru to the immigrants the very basic concept that their right to not to be offended by Western ways has been revoked. And that the mayor of Cologne (or whereever this happened) shouldn't be admonishing German woman to not dress provocatively. That's a leftist "solution" that is counter-productive to what "culture re-adjustment" needs to happen...

And I sympathize with the immigrants. Who must ponder now how to practice and live their religious convictions in a place that WILL NOT protect them from being offended. Leftist leaders trying to ACCOMMODATE these adjustments are just making it worse. It needs to be handled by the EXISTING Muslim community and by culture immersion. Perhaps at some point -- they give up and go back to the safety of tyranny and theocracy. But the danger is --- they might be subject to radicalization if they ABHOR western culture and don't adjust.

It IS a threat.

I think that is an over-simplified explanation. I talked about this in the thread I started in CDZ on Muslim Americans.

Muslim immigrant assimilation is little different from other immigrant assimilation - it depends on the culture of the country they are coming from and the culture of the country they are going to - not just the culture, but the culture of integration that country has. Why are countries like the US and Canada so successful at integrating immigrants and why do immigrants flourish here and end up not in other places? That is a question that Righwingers refuse to address because it is more satisfying to attack the alien religion than it is to examine complex problems. Instead they focus on religion as the only barrier, claim that therefore the SAME things will happen in the US as in ohter countries, and completely ignore culture. Like Leftwingers - it's ignoring huge pieces of information. How can there be a solution when you only have part of the data?

Integration is a two-way street dependent on the immigrant and on the host country - when either end fails, there is room for radicalization.

I posted this before but I think it's relevent in this discussion also: Why Do American Muslims Fare Better Than Their French Counterparts?

Some 5 million Muslims live in France -- about 7.5 percent of the country’s population -- one of the largest Muslim populations in Western Europe. After the horror of the coordinated terrorist attacks on six sites in Paris last Friday, a climate of suspicion once again engulfs Muslims living in the Western world -- and French citizens and politicians alike are grappling with how to respond to homegrown threats. But experts say that the conditions of Muslims in some European countries can create fertile breeding grounds for extremism, whereas societies with more-integrated Muslim populations like the United States are less susceptible.

“In a very broad sense, you have the same communities in Europe and America. Both are Muslims living in the West. But in fact, there are huge sociological differences between the two groups. Most importantly, the relationship between Europe and its Muslims is one rooted in colonialism, whereas the U.S. has no previous history with its Muslim populations. So [in Europe] there is some of the residue of racial and cultural prejudices of the colonial era,” says Akbar Ahmed, chair of Islamic Studies at American University’s School of International Service and the author of several renowned field projects on Muslims, including “Journey Into Europe: Islam, Immigration and Empire.”

The result is two very different communities: One in America that is hopeful, affluent and better assimilated, versus one in Europe, particularly in countries like France, that exists on the periphery of society, both economically and socially. It’s that marginalization of European Muslim communities that can leave certain members vulnerable to recruitment attempts from groups like ISIS.

One of the main differences stems from the makeup of Muslim groups in European countries compared with those in the United States. Estimates vary, but Muslims in the United States account for 1 to 2 percent of the total population -- yet there is no one ethnic group that dominates: Muslims hail from 77 different countries in the Middle East, South Asia, Africa and Europe. That’s a stark contrast from Europe, where the Muslim populations are more homogenous and typically made up of residents of former colonies. For example, the Muslim community in the U.K. is dominated by Muslims of South Asian descent, while three-quarters of French Muslims are mostly of Morocco, Algeria or other North African origin, according to the Brookings Institution.

“In Europe, pockets of Muslims are isolated by country of origin, which hampers integration. That keeps Islamic identity tied to a home country and so the community is more insular. The umbilical cord is still there,” says Shahed Amanullah, who has worked as a senior adviser at the U.S. Department of State on issues surrounding Muslim youth around the world. “In America, no one group that dominates. It’s not an affinity-based community but a value-based community.”

This article makes strong points outlining the differences between America/Canada and Europe in terms of assimilation, how they are integrated into society, and affluence and prospects for the future - all of this plays into the potential for radicalization far more than simple religion or a matter of "abhoring western culture" - if they feel economically marginalized by western culture, if they feel they have few prospects for improvement AND if they are surrounded by like minded individuals and that view is consistently affirmed by the dominant culture then they are ripe for radical exploitation.

If the Right were truly looking for ways to reduce radicalization, they would be examining this data and asking - why does it work in some places and not in others ? Some models hamper assimilation and integration, other ones inhance it and again, it only works when it's a two-way street with immigrants seeking to assimilate and culture that helps them to assimilate by providing avenues for successful integration.

Except in Europe the "colonialism" goes back BOTH ways.

An inconvenient fact that the so called "left" refuses to acknowledge.

Europe has pretty much 'had it'... it is, by now, so pervasively undermined that it may be too far gone to recover its culture and identity.

Oh, well... at least our dumb-ass Euro-cousins can emigrate to New Europe (Canada, the US and Australia), when the pressure from Islam grows too great, as it will.

They're at grave risk of losing their cohesion and identity; having bled themselves white, twice, in the previous century, losing their empires, and exhausting themselves.

If they fail they will likely flee to East Asia.

America and Canada are too far gone to do anything but follow them there.

 

[ptbw forever]

I think that is an over-simplified explanation. I talked about this in the thread I started in CDZ on Muslim Americans.

Muslim immigrant assimilation is little different from other immigrant assimilation - it depends on the culture of the country they are coming from and the culture of the country they are going to - not just the culture, but the culture of integration that country has. Why are countries like the US and Canada so successful at integrating immigrants and why do immigrants flourish here and end up not in other places? That is a question that Righwingers refuse to address because it is more satisfying to attack the alien religion than it is to examine complex problems. Instead they focus on religion as the only barrier, claim that therefore the SAME things will happen in the US as in ohter countries, and completely ignore culture. Like Leftwingers - it's ignoring huge pieces of information. How can there be a solution when you only have part of the data?

Integration is a two-way street dependent on the immigrant and on the host country - when either end fails, there is room for radicalization.

I posted this before but I think it's relevent in this discussion also: Why Do American Muslims Fare Better Than Their French Counterparts?

Some 5 million Muslims live in France -- about 7.5 percent of the country’s population -- one of the largest Muslim populations in Western Europe. After the horror of the coordinated terrorist attacks on six sites in Paris last Friday, a climate of suspicion once again engulfs Muslims living in the Western world -- and French citizens and politicians alike are grappling with how to respond to homegrown threats. But experts say that the conditions of Muslims in some European countries can create fertile breeding grounds for extremism, whereas societies with more-integrated Muslim populations like the United States are less susceptible.

“In a very broad sense, you have the same communities in Europe and America. Both are Muslims living in the West. But in fact, there are huge sociological differences between the two groups. Most importantly, the relationship between Europe and its Muslims is one rooted in colonialism, whereas the U.S. has no previous history with its Muslim populations. So [in Europe] there is some of the residue of racial and cultural prejudices of the colonial era,” says Akbar Ahmed, chair of Islamic Studies at American University’s School of International Service and the author of several renowned field projects on Muslims, including “Journey Into Europe: Islam, Immigration and Empire.”

The result is two very different communities: One in America that is hopeful, affluent and better assimilated, versus one in Europe, particularly in countries like France, that exists on the periphery of society, both economically and socially. It’s that marginalization of European Muslim communities that can leave certain members vulnerable to recruitment attempts from groups like ISIS.

One of the main differences stems from the makeup of Muslim groups in European countries compared with those in the United States. Estimates vary, but Muslims in the United States account for 1 to 2 percent of the total population -- yet there is no one ethnic group that dominates: Muslims hail from 77 different countries in the Middle East, South Asia, Africa and Europe. That’s a stark contrast from Europe, where the Muslim populations are more homogenous and typically made up of residents of former colonies. For example, the Muslim community in the U.K. is dominated by Muslims of South Asian descent, while three-quarters of French Muslims are mostly of Morocco, Algeria or other North African origin, according to the Brookings Institution.

“In Europe, pockets of Muslims are isolated by country of origin, which hampers integration. That keeps Islamic identity tied to a home country and so the community is more insular. The umbilical cord is still there,” says Shahed Amanullah, who has worked as a senior adviser at the U.S. Department of State on issues surrounding Muslim youth around the world. “In America, no one group that dominates. It’s not an affinity-based community but a value-based community.”

This article makes strong points outlining the differences between America/Canada and Europe in terms of assimilation, how they are integrated into society, and affluence and prospects for the future - all of this plays into the potential for radicalization far more than simple religion or a matter of "abhoring western culture" - if they feel economically marginalized by western culture, if they feel they have few prospects for improvement AND if they are surrounded by like minded individuals and that view is consistently affirmed by the dominant culture then they are ripe for radical exploitation.

If the Right were truly looking for ways to reduce radicalization, they would be examining this data and asking - why does it work in some places and not in others ? Some models hamper assimilation and integration, other ones inhance it and again, it only works when it's a two-way street with immigrants seeking to assimilate and culture that helps them to assimilate by providing avenues for successful integration.

Except in Europe the "colonialism" goes back BOTH ways.

An inconvenient fact that the so called "left" refuses to acknowledge.

Europe has pretty much 'had it'... it is, by now, so pervasively undermined that it may be too far gone to recover its culture and identity.

Oh, well... at least our dumb-ass Euro-cousins can emigrate to New Europe (Canada, the US and Australia), when the pressure from Islam grows too great, as it will.

They're at grave risk of losing their cohesion and identity; having bled themselves white, twice, in the previous century, losing their empires, and exhausting themselves.

If they fail they will likely flee to East Asia.

America and Canada are too far gone to do anything but follow them there.

Disagree. America and Canada have a couple of skin-lesions, but the Cancer has not yet mestastisized. We need only look to Europe to see a Terminal Case.

Have to agree, but the American Left is forcing us down the Western Europe path. If unchecked, the Left will destroy our Immigration System as well. It's already happening.

It has already happened.

All Trump can do is delay the inevitable by a couple of years.

 

[ptbw forever]

What's going with the mass Muslim migration into Europe and all the backlash is probably more CULTURAL than it is religious. It's a matter of getting thru to the immigrants the very basic concept that their right to not to be offended by Western ways has been revoked. And that the mayor of Cologne (or whereever this happened) shouldn't be admonishing German woman to not dress provocatively. That's a leftist "solution" that is counter-productive to what "culture re-adjustment" needs to happen...

And I sympathize with the immigrants. Who must ponder now how to practice and live their religious convictions in a place that WILL NOT protect them from being offended. Leftist leaders trying to ACCOMMODATE these adjustments are just making it worse. It needs to be handled by the EXISTING Muslim community and by culture immersion. Perhaps at some point -- they give up and go back to the safety of tyranny and theocracy. But the danger is --- they might be subject to radicalization if they ABHOR western culture and don't adjust.

It IS a threat.

I think that is an over-simplified explanation. I talked about this in the thread I started in CDZ on Muslim Americans.

Muslim immigrant assimilation is little different from other immigrant assimilation - it depends on the culture of the country they are coming from and the culture of the country they are going to - not just the culture, but the culture of integration that country has. Why are countries like the US and Canada so successful at integrating immigrants and why do immigrants flourish here and end up not in other places? That is a question that Righwingers refuse to address because it is more satisfying to attack the alien religion than it is to examine complex problems. Instead they focus on religion as the only barrier, claim that therefore the SAME things will happen in the US as in ohter countries, and completely ignore culture. Like Leftwingers - it's ignoring huge pieces of information. How can there be a solution when you only have part of the data?

Integration is a two-way street dependent on the immigrant and on the host country - when either end fails, there is room for radicalization.

I posted this before but I think it's relevent in this discussion also: Why Do American Muslims Fare Better Than Their French Counterparts?

Some 5 million Muslims live in France -- about 7.5 percent of the country’s population -- one of the largest Muslim populations in Western Europe. After the horror of the coordinated terrorist attacks on six sites in Paris last Friday, a climate of suspicion once again engulfs Muslims living in the Western world -- and French citizens and politicians alike are grappling with how to respond to homegrown threats. But experts say that the conditions of Muslims in some European countries can create fertile breeding grounds for extremism, whereas societies with more-integrated Muslim populations like the United States are less susceptible.

“In a very broad sense, you have the same communities in Europe and America. Both are Muslims living in the West. But in fact, there are huge sociological differences between the two groups. Most importantly, the relationship between Europe and its Muslims is one rooted in colonialism, whereas the U.S. has no previous history with its Muslim populations. So [in Europe] there is some of the residue of racial and cultural prejudices of the colonial era,” says Akbar Ahmed, chair of Islamic Studies at American University’s School of International Service and the author of several renowned field projects on Muslims, including “Journey Into Europe: Islam, Immigration and Empire.”

The result is two very different communities: One in America that is hopeful, affluent and better assimilated, versus one in Europe, particularly in countries like France, that exists on the periphery of society, both economically and socially. It’s that marginalization of European Muslim communities that can leave certain members vulnerable to recruitment attempts from groups like ISIS.

One of the main differences stems from the makeup of Muslim groups in European countries compared with those in the United States. Estimates vary, but Muslims in the United States account for 1 to 2 percent of the total population -- yet there is no one ethnic group that dominates: Muslims hail from 77 different countries in the Middle East, South Asia, Africa and Europe. That’s a stark contrast from Europe, where the Muslim populations are more homogenous and typically made up of residents of former colonies. For example, the Muslim community in the U.K. is dominated by Muslims of South Asian descent, while three-quarters of French Muslims are mostly of Morocco, Algeria or other North African origin, according to the Brookings Institution.

“In Europe, pockets of Muslims are isolated by country of origin, which hampers integration. That keeps Islamic identity tied to a home country and so the community is more insular. The umbilical cord is still there,” says Shahed Amanullah, who has worked as a senior adviser at the U.S. Department of State on issues surrounding Muslim youth around the world. “In America, no one group that dominates. It’s not an affinity-based community but a value-based community.”

This article makes strong points outlining the differences between America/Canada and Europe in terms of assimilation, how they are integrated into society, and affluence and prospects for the future - all of this plays into the potential for radicalization far more than simple religion or a matter of "abhoring western culture" - if they feel economically marginalized by western culture, if they feel they have few prospects for improvement AND if they are surrounded by like minded individuals and that view is consistently affirmed by the dominant culture then they are ripe for radical exploitation.

If the Right were truly looking for ways to reduce radicalization, they would be examining this data and asking - why does it work in some places and not in others ? Some models hamper assimilation and integration, other ones inhance it and again, it only works when it's a two-way street with immigrants seeking to assimilate and culture that helps them to assimilate by providing avenues for successful integration.

Except in Europe the "colonialism" goes back BOTH ways.

An inconvenient fact that the so called "left" refuses to acknowledge.

Europe has pretty much 'had it'... it is, by now, so pervasively undermined that it may be too far gone to recover its culture and identity.

Oh, well... at least our dumb-ass Euro-cousins can emigrate to New Europe (Canada, the US and Australia), when the pressure from Islam grows too great, as it will.

They're at grave risk of losing their cohesion and identity; having bled themselves white, twice, in the previous century, losing their empires, and exhausting themselves.

If they fail they will likely flee to East Asia.

America and Canada are too far gone to do anything but follow them there.

I hope the Japanese, Koreans and Chinese carefully vet the white immigrants they will get over the course of the next 50 years so all the liberal looney tunes are sent back to the hellholes they ended up creating.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Reason is what informs liberals.

Emotion is what informs conservatives. Specifically fear.

The only truth you have revealed is that simple-minded people reduce the complexity of the world to binary while reducing politics to nothing more than a game of coyboys and indians. .

So you expand every single thought and statement and contort it to fit your worldview. Whatever dingo. Hate to break it to you but you don't have the chops to judge the rest of the world. You see everything as a binary and then you project your miniscule worldview onto it. It's like looking through a microscope and declaring yourself "king of all the huge world you see on the slide".

It's called self delusion.

Oh, pulleeeze, child.

You made a very stupid and very simple-minded statement that amounted to nothing more than "Our guys are great, but those oter guys are a big bunch of poopooheads".

Grow the fuck up, son.

And you projected your black and white paradigm onto what I said as representing every thought I have ever had. I tend to assume certain things of 'adults', one being that you never look at a statement and think it applies to all things everywhere at all times.

The evidence I've seen shows that conservatives live on emotion. Fear is the driving force in most of the decisions conservatives make. Do liberals not feel fear? They do like every living thing does. But it isn't the driving force in their lives as it is with conservatives.

Liberals were on Columbus' ships heading out into the unknown. Conservatives were the ones on shore yelling at them that they would fall off the edge of the Earth. When you live in the jungle fear is a very useful trait. You are cautions about going into caves and walking across open spaces. In the modern world that same fear is more of a hindrance. Nothing wrong with being cautions but when it paralyzes your actions it is a detriment.

.....and the stupid, simple minded conservatives make the exact, same childish claim about Liberals.

All arguments are not equal.

“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” - Isaac Asimov -


By the way if partisan comments make you angry why are you posting at a political website.

 

[Mac1958]

By the way if partisan comments make you angry why are you posting at a political website.

Not everyone who has an interest in politics is a closed-minded, intolerant, narcissistic hardcore partisan ideologue.

Many of us choose to (1) just be honest and (2) think for ourselves.

It really ain't all that hard. Nothing special about us.

It does often get us in "trouble" in places like this, granted.
.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Yo Dog.....

Do you agree with Trump that we should ban Muslims from entering the United States?

Yo, Lone -- I think as long as they are carefully vetted and are actual refugees instead of young, single male migrants, then they should not be banned.

Germany received an onslaught of young, single men and immediately experienced widespread rape Jihad.

Do you have any sympathy for the victims, or should they just be considered collateral damage and a necessary sacrifice to your politics?

You a politician? The answer to that question requires a "yes" or a "no". I will try to decipher your bullshit and say that you do not agree with Trump and that you are OK with Muslims ( refugees, students, business people, tourists ) entering the US.

Excellent.

Why are you supporting Islam?

See how stupid you seem?

You are incapable of comprehending what I just wrote, and you accuse ME of looking stupid?

 

[Coyote]

Reason is what informs liberals.

Emotion is what informs conservatives. Specifically fear.

The only truth you have revealed is that simple-minded people reduce the complexity of the world to binary while reducing politics to nothing more than a game of coyboys and indians. .

Yes...isn't that exactly the truth. Reducing the problems of immigration and assimilation and culture into a simple black and white binary who's only purpose is to lend support to bigotry.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

It does often get us in "trouble" in places like this, granted.
.

Especially with those illiberal people who turn their lock-step orthodoxy into policy.

These regressives remind me of the similar group on the right constantly wagging their fingers at "Rinos". If people show any maturity, any moderation, and any tendency to think for themselves, all the little right wing Heathers start doing their thing just as the little left wing Heathers do in this forum.

In either case, it is an expression of insecurity, as those who only feel safe in the herd are frightened silly by the thought that somebody else might not want to join them in their neat, little box.

 

[Mac1958]

I think this will serve as another excellent answer to the question posed in the OP.

How ironic that an honest liberal provides it.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Reason is what informs liberals.

Emotion is what informs conservatives. Specifically fear.

The only truth you have revealed is that simple-minded people reduce the complexity of the world to binary while reducing politics to nothing more than a game of coyboys and indians. .

Yes...isn't that exactly the truth. Reducing the problems of immigration and assimilation and culture into a simple black and white binary who's only purpose is to lend support to bigotry.

Ah, yes, "Bigotry". I'm waiting for "Racism" and "Islamophobia" so you can hit the trifecta.

Don't you have some peace prize awards to give out, though? I mean, since you say that there should be nothing to prevent those who mass murder Jews from receiving one and all.

Of course, since it is only Jews, that wouldn't be considered "bigotry", now, would it?

 

[Mac1958]

It does often get us in "trouble" in places like this, granted.
.

Especially with those illiberal people who turn their lock-step orthodoxy into policy.

These regressives remind me of the similar group on the right constantly wagging their fingers at "Rinos". If people show any maturity, any moderation, and any tendency to think for themselves, all the little right wing Heathers start doing their thing just as the little left wing Heathers do in this forum.

In either case, it is an expression of insecurity, as those who only feel safe in the herd are frightened silly by the thought that somebody else might not want to join them in their neat, little box.

Yep, the behaviors of both far ends of the spectrum are so freaking similar in so many freaking ways.

And they HATE to hear that.


.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

It does often get us in "trouble" in places like this, granted.
.

Especially with those illiberal people who turn their lock-step orthodoxy into policy.

These regressives remind me of the similar group on the right constantly wagging their fingers at "Rinos". If people show any maturity, any moderation, and any tendency to think for themselves, all the little right wing Heathers start doing their thing just as the little left wing Heathers do in this forum.

In either case, it is an expression of insecurity, as those who only feel safe in the herd are frightened silly by the thought that somebody else might not want to join them in their neat, little box.

Yep, the behaviors of both far ends of the spectrum are so freaking similar in so many freaking ways.

And they HATE to hear that.


.

They don't see themselves.

They never will.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yo Dog.....

Do you agree with Trump that we should ban Muslims from entering the United States?

Yo, Lone -- I think as long as they are carefully vetted and are actual refugees instead of young, single male migrants, then they should not be banned.

Germany received an onslaught of young, single men and immediately experienced widespread rape Jihad.

Do you have any sympathy for the victims, or should they just be considered collateral damage and a necessary sacrifice to your politics?

You a politician? The answer to that question requires a "yes" or a "no". I will try to decipher your bullshit and say that you do not agree with Trump and that you are OK with Muslims ( refugees, students, business people, tourists ) entering the US.

Excellent.

Why are you supporting Islam?

See how stupid you seem?

You are incapable of comprehending what I just wrote, and you accuse ME of looking stupid?

Of course I understand what you wrote.

You answered a "yes or no" question, which was not about refugees, with some claptrap about vetting refugees. You have some kind of standard for Muslims that you don't have for others....because a small percentage of Muslims want to blow shit up.

You then brought up Germany....which also is unrelated to the question. In your view, Germany is being overrun by hordes of Muslim extremists who are posing as poor refugees. And, if we don't watch out, we will invite the same. Of course, that theory disregards the fact that we vet refugees from struggling Mulsim nations more vigorously than we vet any other class of immigrants. In other words...we won't have that problem.

Finally...you thought you'd ask the obligatory stupid question regarding whether or not I have sympathy for the victims ( of rape? ). That's you being a disingenuous blowhard asshole....and you just couldn't help yourself.

In the end....you DO NOT wish to ban all Muslims from entering the US. You are OK with innocent Muslims coming to and living in the United States. So..if I hold you to your own ridiculous standard......you are supporting Islam.

Yes?

 

[Mac1958]

Looks like the Regressive Lefties are trying to change the subject of the thread.

Again.


.

 

[Coyote]

Reason is what informs liberals.

Emotion is what informs conservatives. Specifically fear.

The only truth you have revealed is that simple-minded people reduce the complexity of the world to binary while reducing politics to nothing more than a game of coyboys and indians. .

Yes...isn't that exactly the truth. Reducing the problems of immigration and assimilation and culture into a simple black and white binary who's only purpose is to lend support to bigotry.

Ah, yes, "Bigotry". I'm waiting for "Racism" and "Islamophobia" so you can hit the trifecta.

Don't you have some peace prize awards to give out, though? I mean, since you say that there should be nothing to prevent those who mass murder Jews from receiving one and all.

Of course, since it is only Jews, that wouldn't be considered "bigotry", now, would it?

Don't you have some dogs to go electrocute, you want to emulate your hero after all don't you?

Ignorance and fear feed bigotry and there is certainly a lot of ignorance on display. How funny that you, who are calling people simple-minded, regressives, hive minded, lock step, and other similar adjectives have trouble recognizing that in yourself

For some reason, immigrants assimilate well here and in Canada but rather than stir from your intellectual sloth (it's easier to regurgitate your talking points from hate sites) and wonder what factors are at play, you just blame it all on religion and label those who look further "regressive".

Sure, we can't ignore the security issues, but how much of American freedoms and rights are you willing to give up for security? Or, is it only the freedoms and rights of others you and your followers are willing to give up?

Polls, research and information can be presented showing the American Muslim community is not substantively different than the American Christian community (this is where independent thinking and maturity come into play) and - it doesn't make any difference because everyone knows that all Muslims must follow Sharia (independent of whether the author has a clue what Sharia is) and there for the vast majority want Sharia to be the law of the land. How is that for regressive reasoning free from evidence? And you talk about "lock step" and "independent thinking" and "hive minds" and "regressive leftists".

 

[LoneLaugher]

I dislike religion in general but see that Islam is the most dangerous of all of them.

The religion itself?

It is true that there are significant numbers of Muslims who are extreme fundamentalists and employ violence in reaching their political goals. More than any other religion that I can think of. With greater harm done to more people.

Still.....is it the religion itself that is dangerous? If that is the case, then is it impossible to be a peaceful Muslim. Does danger accompany all Muslims?