And when that’s turned on you, you’ll squeal like a stuck pig.
Because I feel it would be unconstitutional for the government to establish a preference for or against a specific religion.
I’m fine with stripping people of their freedom if they abuse it. But I’m not going to pre-emptively declare that the entire membership of a religion should be held responsible for what some followers of that religion have done. There have been terrible crimes committed by Muslim criminals. They have also been terrible crimes committed by Christian criminals, Jewish criminals, Hindu criminals, Buddhist criminals, and atheist criminals.
Hey! That’s religious discriminalation!
However, their U.S. citizen relatives and prospective employers are having their rights to petition for their relatives/prospective employees curtailed. I’d say the right to reside in the same country as one’s spouse is pretty important, wouldn’t you?
Like my Grandmother? Why do you hate my Grandma?
When you retire, YOU’LL be in the 47%, mooching off the rest of us with your SS and Medicare. Where will you go?
Your second point is quite noxious. Some freedoms are close to absolute. We don’t allow polygamy or sacrifices, but other than you’re 100% entitled to freedom of religion. The second need not be repealed, just add a few words to the end “while serving in the militia”.
He’ll be living off the tens of millions he saved while working his minimum wage job.
The US should not be limiting immigration by religion. Honestly, we shouldn’t even be asking about religion except maybe out of idle curiosity.
I’m not even a big fan of limiting immigration by country of origin. Should Europe treat American immigrants as if they are all the same?
I am in favor of measures like insisting on proper background checks, limiting immigration to those with certain skills or careers, following up with immigrants afterwards, those kinds of things. These are reasonable measures that can be applied to everyone regardless of their beliefs or backgrounds.
To what end? (IOW, no) I don’t see that the threat from Muslim immigration is all that high when you take a step back and look at the big picture and think about the probabilities. Are you more likely to be killed by a Muslim immigrant in the US than, oh, say swallowing a tooth pick? My guess is you are more likely to be killed by swallowing the tooth pick, even if we include 9/11, if we look time. The vast majority of Muslim immigrants to the US are, like all other ethnic and religious immigrants, an overall plus for the country. The few bad ones are, like all other ethnic and religious immigrants, bad, and might cause harm. Just like the vast majority of AMERICANS are good people, and a few bad ones get in the news doing crazy or evil shit.
Well since the gubmint has been taxing my check and my wife’s check specifically for SS and Medicare I don’t think so. I’d be perfectly willing for the government to stop taking those thousands each year and let me stick them in my own Vanguard account. Which fortunately for us, even without SS, we will be fine.
All freedoms are granted by the grace of the strong. The 1st is far from absolute.
I don’t hate your Grandmother. She’s a fine lady. Policy can be more nuanced and we can make exceptions for certain grandmothers.
And a religious test for immigrants would never survive a First Amendment challenge.
Actually many of the wingnuts are trying to do this themselves, though sadly they’re not going offshore. Like these lunatics who want to build a walled castle to house their denizens, apparently on the basis that if walled castles were good enough protection in the medieval Dark Ages, they’re good enough protection in 2016. This particular bunch aren’t Christian fundamentalist loons, they’re gun-nut loons, but it’s the same idea, and in fact they’re probably both. The sole industry of this community will be gun manufacturing, and the sole responsibility of the resident Patriots will be shooting them. Also, Patriots must avoid any liberal skulduggery like for instance recycling. It’s all pretty entertaining. This particular idiocy has been “in planning” for years and of course nothing has been done and nothing will. Too bad because it would be hilarious.
Quite true, and it creates a really wonderful dichotomy. Wingnuts like Trump absolutely refuse to consider any form of gun control despite the daily carnage because it might inconvenience Law Abiding Citizens™ and they argue that the Bad Guys™ and the insane might still be able to get guns, even though it could be made a whole lot harder and consequent gun violence therefore much less frequent, as it is in other countries. But those same wingnuts have no trouble at all condemning and outright banning all 1.6 billion members of the world’s largest religion even though it would be heinously discriminatory and ludicrously ineffective, and would in fact increase hostility against the US among radicals and create ill will throughout the civilized world.
Not that “meeting with” necessarily means anything, but;
I suspect that if Trump had his way this “list” would end up containing every Muslim in America. I don’t see this as reflecting any kind of flexibility on gun control, but rather, reflecting Trump’s view that Muslims don’t have rights. Trump has no problem with white supremacists and the insane being allowed to buy all the guns they want, just as long as they’re not Muslim.
You’d think of all the people who’d understand why castles are obsolete, it would be this crowd. The reason people stopped building medieval walled castles is because they’re easy to knock down with guns.
I think the porous border to the south/southwest is a far more critical concern with regard to immigration policy.
I mean, I want “immigration reform to fix a broken immigration system” by doing nothing to secure the border and not enforcing current immigration laws.
#liberalogic
Just can’t help it, huh?
“Praise The Lord for porus borders and unenforced immigration laws.
We won’t have to hire legal workers.”
#jobcreatorslogic
Yes, absolutely. Islam incompatible with Western civilization. Of course, a permanent ban on all Muslim immigration would be best, and that’s not what Trump’s proposing, but even a temporary ban is a start.