Why NOT stop Muslims from entering the US?

What about a waiting period? If it's OK for guns, it should be OK for people. Or is that not "democratic"?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Excellent post with many great points.

I also wonder why people seem to have the notion that there currently isn't a vetting process in place? There is actually a very good vetting process in place.

For instance, reports that the United Nations selects the refugees who enter the U.S. are simply not true. In fact, the vetting process for refugees is "quite intensive and involves several government agencies," the senior official said.

The approval rate for refugees seeking asylum in the United States currently stands at just over 50 percent, senior administration officials said. The process for obtaining refugee status in the United States typically takes 18 to 24 months.

About 1,800 Syrian refugees have entered the U.S. in the past year. So far, only about 2 percent of the Syrian refugees entering the United States are single men of "combat age." Roughly half of the Syrian refugees are children, and 2.5 percent are adults over 60.

Refugees --- from any nation -- are accepted only "after subjecting them to the most rigorous screening and security vetting of any traveler to the United States," a senior administration official said.

www.cbsnews.com...

I would also agree that one of the major risks of complete ban on Muslim immigrants/refugees is to increase tensions and therefore radicalization of not only people outside the country, but also people who are already inside the country. Are we really willing to take that risk?

Remember that the male shooter in San Bernardino was a citizen. We didn't catch his immigrant wife, because she had no official ties with any extremist groups.

The only way to curtail radicalization within the U.S. is to shut down the internet, shut down email and cell/land line phone service to other countries, and shut down all Mosques. What kind of a country would we be if we did all that? Not a country I would want to live in. And even after all that, it still wouldn't eliminate the risk 100 percent.

Some think it is as simple as telling peaceful Muslims to "just stop the bad guys from preaching the stuff". To that I would say to us Americans to "just stop our bad government guys from doing bad things". It's not that easy.

Why not bar Muslims from entering the U.S., and deport anyone who causes problems here
with regard to their religious beliefs too?.

Or maybe just put religion in the realm of personal preference as there is no PROOF that there is a god any way one may try to justify their beliefs.

Anyone who spouts delusions of being created by something greater than themselves must consider themselves to be pretty great and awesome too.

"Religion and Narcissism"....Feed that to your search engine.

(Facepalm)
There already is a vetting process for people who want to enter the USA from places like Syria. And it's a very long one. Here's a handy run-through.

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: stolencar18

Those are the key words. Most people who want to halt Muslims from entering aren't asking to do so because of Islam, they are asking so because [B]there is too high of a percentage of extremism within Islam.[/B]

That's an extremely bold statement. Care to substantiate that? What exactly is 'too high a percentage? Are there too high a percentage of pedophiles in the Catholic church? Too high a percentage of mentally ill that ended up being killers? Should we ban/deport/lock-up them as well? Ever heard the expression, 'throwing the baby out with the bath water'?

a reply to: stolencar18

what if we (uk) banned all americans from entering until 'vetted' '? after all a whole lot of americans "believe some incredibly intolerant things, and practice some extreme violence", no? see where your 'logic' collapses?

a reply to: stolencar18

There was, and is a time, when Communists and Nazis were banned from entering US. Those times, they were indeed considered a viable threat.

So, today, muslims by far have proved to be such a vile bunch, it is more than prudent to consider twice who would be allowed to enter US.

I say stop all immigration. We have enough problems taking care of the population we have now. For that matter, bring all of our troops home to help protect our borders from illegal immigration. I think it's time we take care of ourselves instead of blowing billions on countries around the globe that hate us.

I know what I just stated above will never happen and is obviously over simplistic, but I'm at the point where I just don't care anymore. I wish our government and citizens would just concentrate on our country and leave the rest of the world alone.

I think I just need to take a break from the news. I can't even get into the Christmas spirit this year. Blah.

Trump's plan would effectively punish huge swaths of law-abiding U.S. citizens by preventing their families from visiting them.

His comments were so broad -- they weren't relegated to immigration.

So when Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Turkey, Pakistan, UAE, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Kyrgyzstan, Somalia, Ethiopia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Chad, and Eritrea - all the Islamic countries in which the US has military bases (and civilian contractors, and oil interests, and trade agreements) turn the tables and refuse entry to non-muslims, the Amerian people will shrug their shoulders, kick a stone, put their hands in their pockets and walk off whistling?

Remember Trump says he doesn't mind losing foreign business over the things he says?
I wonder if everyone feels that way.

a reply to: stolencar18

Because we have this little thing in the bill of rights called "Freedom of Religion" and this very obviously infringes upon that freedom. Give the government an inch and they'll take a mile. Trump is a little too pro-censorship and pro-government to be a conservative, IMO.

a reply to: stolencar18

ok - you want to exclude an ideology from a country - i am not even going to argue the idiocy of this desire

i will just ask - how are you going to impliment it ???

a reply to: aorAki

They can deny faith if it furthers Islam in order to defeat enemies

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

There goes the honor system!

What now? LOL

I say lets put a ban on ALL immigration for awhile.

We have millions of illegals here who have long ago out stayed their visas. Find them, hold them accountable, and send them home. We have millions of illegals getting free health care, educations and other assistance when our own people can't get it. Stop rewarding people who break our laws and send them home. Illegals who continually commit crimes, get deported, come back and do it again and again and again. Fix the borders and policies so this doesn't keep happening. We have a horrible economy and most people are barely making it. The middle class is all but gone. We have a health care system that punishes the patient and rewards the insurance and pharmaceutical companies. The rights this country was founded on are slowly being chipped away at year after year, by our own government, and people refuse to see it. Terrorism is real and here on our shores, borders, cities and neighborhoods. I say we need to clean up our own economy, government and country and stop worrying about everyone else. When we finally get our country healthy again then maybe consider lifting the ban.

Most people ar e missing th e point that if they are not already american citizens and they ar e not yet here they have no legal standing under the constitution. the US has and can legally restrict immigration of certain countries peoples and their ethnic backround. NOTE i didnt say RELGION.

Trump later clarified his original statement to just be those outside the US already and not already here. Its not unconstitutional to restrict entry.

originally posted by: snowspirit
But if they want in badly enough, won't they just not admit they're Muslim?

Not if they have to eat a piece of bacon to get their passport stamped.

originally posted by: Okeyd57

originally posted by: snowspirit
But if they want in badly enough, won't they just not admit they're Muslim?

Not if they have to eat a piece of bacon to get their passport stamped.

This is either stupidly bigoted humor or a woefully ignorant assertion. The 9/11 hijackers were not devout Muslims. They drank and spent time at strip clubs:

www.sfgate.com...

You cannot exclude terrorists by excluding Muslims because all terrorists are political extremists first and constituents of an ideology second.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: aorAki
a reply to: enlightenedservant

Get out of here with your sensible post. This isn't the forum for that!

I liked it, by the way.

Thanks. I'm trying to stay out of these threads because the whole premise is too irrational to take seriously. But the political climate has become so irrational that this has become a "legit" topic.

You haven't seen anything yet.

The religions are nothing more than tools for agendas you are not privy too....and when they no longer need the religions to cause chaos, they will be dissolved so fast you will be thinking the Rapture took them all away.

Face it, your religion and everyone elses, at the core, are the ultimate confusers, who pretend to show "The Way" but have never actually done so.

But feel free to believe what you have been told too, not any ONE of the systems out there is much different, really.

originally posted by: Okeyd57

originally posted by: snowspirit
But if they want in badly enough, won't they just not admit they're Muslim?

Not if they have to eat a piece of bacon to get their passport stamped.

I see, so you want to get rid of vegetarians and Jews as well, do you? Congratulations on a truly silly post.

originally posted by: PresidentCamacho

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: PresidentCamacho
a reply to: intrepid

So what maybe 10 at most atrocities committed by the KKK in your life time equates to 1000's committed by ISIS in the name of Islam in the past decade?

Fail.

You're not really Mr. Current Events are you? ISIS has only been active for about 3-4 years. You want to check the rest of your facts? Fail? Uh huh.

Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, or simply Islamic State, is a Wahhabi/Salafi jihadist Islamic extremist militant group. Wikipedia
Founder: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
Founded: 1999

Mr Current Events I think you need to check your facts.

Oh, he actually means since Israel and the West fully sent support into the region to make sure they got a running start!!