46 percent of Americans support Trump's Muslim ban; 40 percent opposed

[NoleSoup4U]

Yes, technically you're correct. If we deport all Muslims there will be no mass murders by Muslims on US soil. But this is like saying you need to stop eating food to prevent food poisoning.

So, you're trying to compare something necessary for life to something not necessary for life?

Look, I'm not saying that we should eject all Arabs/Muslims from our society. I'm just telling all the people, who say that it wouldn't help anything, that they are retarded.

I'm also showing people who, in the past on here, have been all gung-ho about a democracy when it was something that they agreed with, and I warned them that a true democracy is very dangerous for this very reason. What if we held a true democratic vote tomorrow about what to do with the Muslims? The same issue that we are discussing in this thread would instantly be law. Some people need to wake up and realize democracy for what it truly is...mob rules. That's fine when you agree with what is being passed, but what about something horrendous like this bill would be?

 

[ThorneStockton]

Recruitment is going up regardless, but that doesn't have anything to do with the ultimate discussion, which is keeping people in this country safe. If your end game was to keep people from being the target of Muslim/Arab attacks on our soil, don't you think that deporting and banning all those people would accomplish this?

I'm not discussing this from a personal point of view, in which I'm telling you what I think should be done. I'm discussing this from a reality point of view. People who are not here can't attack us. I think most of us could agree to that.

C'mon, deporting all Muslims isn't a real scenario though. What point are you trying to make? If we didn't have guns in this country no one would get shot, not realistic either.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Let me count the ways.....

But only take the time to mention the tip of the iceberg, more would require depth of thought and be wasted on you.

The radicals in the Muslim world believe and blather that the West (US!) hates them for their religious belief. Ergo, they are part of a holy war going back 1500 years to Medina.

Radicals say the West (US!) claims to be for religious freedom and liberty, but are lying. If Trump's and your view is policy they are correct. After all, if Trump's and your view is policy, we stand for religious freedom for all except Muslims, and for liberty for all except Muslims.

The fundamental dispute is then, in their (and probably your) misguided world view, whose God is paramount. That is the radicals fundamental recruiting tool, do you love your God and if so you must be willing to fight and die for your God.

Just like Westboro Baptist and Planned Parenthood shooters who claim to act in the name of God DO NOT stand for your Christian views (I assume), actions of radical Islamists DO NOT stand for most Muslim's views.

Put it one other way, suppose briefly that Florida decided to deport and ban all Christians due to the horrific actions of Westboro and Planned Parenthood shooters in the name of Christianity. Would you have feelings (to the point of considering taking up arms) about a government that so treated all your congregation despite what you know to be their true beliefs and actions?

Of course you would, and of course the ignorant views of Trump significantly help radicals recruitment and loyalty in the Muslim world.

Sigh.

We aren't talking about any of that. We are discussing strictly what would make the people in this country safer. Can you tell me how people, who aren't allowed in the country, could attack U.S. citizens?

See, you insult me, but you don't understand the discussion that I'm trying to have. I'm not saying that it wouldn't make ISIL stronger in the ME. I'm not saying that it wouldn't bump up their recruiting. I'm saying that people who don't live here can't carry out attacks here. That's it.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

C'mon, deporting all Muslims isn't a real scenario though. What point are you trying to make? If we didn't have guns in this country no one would get shot, not realistic either.

You say that, but remember when we stuck all Japanese people in internment camps? And that was from one of the most "liberal" presidents that we've ever had.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

So, are you seriously advocating deporting American citizens due to their religion? Do you not thing that might be just a little bit unconstitutional and unAmerican? Not to mention how much of a radicalization effect on this group of American citizens.

JFC, dude. Just JFC.

 

[iCRUNCH]

 

[IACub]

So, you're trying to compare something necessary for life to something not necessary for life?

Look, I'm not saying that we should eject all Arabs/Muslims from our society. I'm just telling all the people, who say that it wouldn't help anything, that they are retarded.

I'm also showing people who, in the past on here, have been all gung-ho about a democracy when it was something that they agreed with, and I warned them that a true democracy is very dangerous for this very reason. What if we held a true democratic vote tomorrow about what to do with the Muslims? The same issue that we are discussing in this thread would instantly be law. Some people need to wake up and realize democracy for what it truly is...mob rules. That's fine when you agree with what is being passed, but what about something horrendous like this bill would be?

No, you're reading too much into my analogy. Like "cut off your nose to spite your face" doesn't really assume someone will lop off their schnozz. I understand you're playing Devil's Advocate and don't really want to deport all Muslims. But even as a hypothetical most reasoning Americans find the idea so appalling that we will immediately take offense.

As far as your argument on true Democracy, you're probably right. Which is why we have a Representative Democracy with added checks and balances. Thankfully the Constitution was written so well that it protects us from this type of scenario.

 

[naturalmwa]

there is no international uproar, just the media being the media. he says it, we agree, his numbers bump higher, he doubles down

I know a few guys in Britain and Israel said a few things, big deal

When a foreign government debates banning you from their nation, it is an international uproar.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

No, you're reading too much into my analogy. Like "cut off your nose to spite your face" doesn't really assume someone will lop off their schnozz. I understand you're playing Devil's Advocate and don't really want to deport all Muslims. But even as a hypothetical most reasoning Americans find the idea so appalling that we will immediately take offense.

As far as your argument on true Democracy, you're probably right. Which is why we have a Representative Democracy with added checks and balances. Thankfully the Constitution was written so well that it protects us from this type of scenario.

I understand, but you can't have an analogy that contains two different situations.

And for the record, I believe what we have is called a Constitutional Republic, but I think we both agree that the Constitution should be the basis for our laws. The problem is that we threw out the Constitution a long time ago, so now something like deporting all Muslims/Arabs is possible, as scary as that sounds.

 

[LifelongHawk]

See, you insult me, but you don't understand the discussion that I'm trying to have

I understand that the discussion you are trying to have is ignorant, unrealistic, shallow, un-American, and helpful to Islamist radicals when attributable to so-called leaders.

But carry on, its a free country and I support your and Trump's right to make me less safe with uninformed blather.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Usury is the big one that keeps making them targets of the west.

 

[naturalmwa]

Does anyone remember me constantly warning people like WWJD, Natural, Ciggy, Huey, and the rest of the Stalin Youth about the cons of a democracy? Well, here you go.

Do you remember us championing your right to do so? Well here you go. You're damn lucky you got libs looking out for you.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I understand that the discussion you are trying to have is ignorant, unrealistic, shallow, un-American, and helpful to Islamist radicals when attributable to so-called leaders.

But carry on, its a free country and I support your and Trump's right to make me less safe with uninformed blather.

You have no idea of what I'm talking about, or my reasons for doing it.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Do you remember us championing your right to do so? Well here you go. You're damn lucky you got libs looking out for you.

Mind splaining?

 

[ThorneStockton]

You say that, but remember when we stuck all Japanese people in internment camps? And that was from one of the most "liberal" presidents that we've ever had.

That has been pretty much been unanimously determined to have been wrong, I'd contend that something that happened in the 1940's, doesn't make it realistic in 2015.. No idea the relevance of your second sentence, and am still not sure what your point is.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

That has been pretty much been unanimously determined to have been wrong, I'd contend that something that happened in the 1940's, doesn't make it realistic in 2015.. No idea the relevance of your second sentence, and am still not sure what your point is.

Of course it was wrong. That doesn't mean that something like that couldn't happen again. The people of the U.S. sold themselves out, with the Patriot Act, because they were so scared. You don't think they wouldn't sell a different culture/religion out? You have too much faith in people who are too easily manipulated.

 

[LifelongHawk]

You have no idea of what I'm talking about, or my reasons for doing it.

I know what your are typing no matter what you think you are talking about. One possible reason is you belong to ISIS and are furthering their agenda.

Kareem Abdul Jabbar:

If violence can be an abstraction — and it can; that’s what a threat is — the Trump campaign meets this definition. Thus, Trump is ISIS’s greatest triumph: the perfect Manchurian Candidate who, instead of offering specific and realistic policies, preys on the fears of the public, doing ISIS’s job for them.

Muhamad Ali:

I am a Muslim and there is nothing Islamic about killing innocent people in Paris, San Bernardino, or anywhere else in the world. True Muslims know that the ruthless violence of so called Islamic Jihadists goes against the very tenets of our religion.

Deport em!

 

[naturalmwa]

We aren't talking about any of that. We are discussing strictly what would make the people in this country safer. Can you tell me how people, who aren't allowed in the country, could attack U.S. citizens?

See, you insult me, but you don't understand the discussion that I'm trying to have. I'm not saying that it wouldn't make ISIL stronger in the ME. I'm not saying that it wouldn't bump up their recruiting. I'm saying that people who don't live here can't carry out attacks here. That's it.

You seem to have developed a great deal of confidence in the state's ability to control people and geography here. You're pretty statist when you want to be. When nations are attacked, its often by people who don't live in those nations.

 

[naturalmwa]

Mind splaining?

Voltaire, look it up.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

You seem to have developed a great deal of confidence in the state's ability to control people and geography here. You're pretty statist when you want to be. When nations are attacked, its often by people who don't live in those nations.

Come on, dude. I've said, in this thread, multiple times that I didn't personally agree with this line of thinking.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Voltaire, look it up.

I tried to google "Voltare telling Nolesoup4u about a true democracy", but it didn't turn anything up.

Are you drunk already?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I know what your are typing no matter what you think you are talking about. One possible reason is you belong to ISIS and are furthering their agenda.

Kareem Abdul Jabbar:

If violence can be an abstraction — and it can; that’s what a threat is — the Trump campaign meets this definition. Thus, Trump is ISIS’s greatest triumph: the perfect Manchurian Candidate who, instead of offering specific and realistic policies, preys on the fears of the public, doing ISIS’s job for them.

Muhamad Ali:

I am a Muslim and there is nothing Islamic about killing innocent people in Paris, San Bernardino, or anywhere else in the world. True Muslims know that the ruthless violence of so called Islamic Jihadists goes against the very tenets of our religion.

Deport em!

You're so lost, dude. It's actually quite humorous watching you try to keep up.

 

[naturalmwa]

Come on, dude. I've said, in this thread, multiple times that I didn't personally agree with this line of thinking.

You asked us to point out problems with your thinking. I did that in a way that you could understand. You're welcome.

 

[naturalmwa]

I tried to google "Voltare telling Nolesoup4u about a true democracy", but it didn't turn anything up.

Are you drunk already?

Clearly one of us is. You really should take the opportunity to take some philosophy and government classes. You miss way too many references that should be part of your vocabulary.

 

[joelbc1]

Despite an international uproar and condemnation by President Obama and nearly all of those running for the presidency, Donald Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims coming to the United States has the support of a sizable majority of Republicans – and a plurality of all voters.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 66% of Likely Republican Voters favor a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the United States until the federal government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Just 24% oppose the plan, with 10% undecided.

Among all voters, 46% favor a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States, while 40% are opposed. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording,click here.)

Trump, the front-runner in the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, proposed the ban following last week’s massacre in San Bernardino, California. Sixty-five percent (65%) of voters believe the two shooters in the incident were radical Islamic terrorists. Those individuals had entered the United States without problem and escaped detection despite several actions here suggesting that they had violent intentions.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of voters believe it is too easy for foreigners to legally enter the Untied States. Only 10% believe it is too hard, while 23% say the level of difficulty is about right.

Still, when thinking about immigration policy in general, 59% also feel that the United States should treat all potential immigrants equally, down only slightly from June. Thirty percent (30%) think the United States should allow more immigrants from some countries than others, a finding that’schanged very from past surveying. Eleven percent (11%) are not sure.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub..._2015/voters_like_trump_s_proposed_muslim_ban

Tradition....The masses are the asses. Just because most people are wrong on an issue, doesn't mean they are right. Not even in your definition of a democracy.

 

[The Tradition]

Tradition....The masses are the asses. Just because most people are wrong on an issue, doesn't mean they are right. Not even in your definition of a democracy.

When did I ever say I'm in favor of banning Muslims? I just posted the poll.

I certainly don't expect the mob to rule on any issue.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

You asked us to point out problems with your thinking. I did that in a way that you could understand. You're welcome.

So, you call me a statist for giving a statist hypothetical in which I've said, multiple times, that I don't believe in? You understand how ridiculous that is, right?

 

[naturalmwa]

So, you call me a statist for giving a statist hypothetical in which I've said, multiple times, that I don't believe in? You understand how ridiculous that is, right?

Isn't that the point of this exercise? To point out how ridiculous you are? I thought I did an admirable job of that. Even you think you're ridiculous now.

 

[BondHawk]

Not that I agree with Trump's thought process, but how would deporting and banning all Muslims be playing into the hands of ISIS? If they can't get in the country, how do they plan and carry out terror attacks?

If this works, maybe we should ban semi-automatic weapons in Chicago. Oh wait...

 

[joelbc1]

When did I ever say I'm in favor of banning Muslims? I just posted the poll.

I certainly don't expect the mob to rule on any issue.

I was just reacting to the poll you showed. We are a law driven society, not a society driven by opinion polls. There are some folks who do not understand this.
As my mother used to tell me..."Just because so and so jumped out the upstairs window,,,that doesn't mean you have to."

 

[The Tradition]

I was just reacting to the poll you showed. We are a law driven society, not a society driven by opinion polls. There are some folks who do not understand this.
As my mother used to tell me..."Just because so and so jumped out the upstairs window,,,that doesn't mean you have to."

The poll really goes to the political election thing going on.

I will say this: banning all Muslims is a breathtakingly stupid idea. But a temporary halt to people from Iraq and Syria in order to make sure we have sufficient vetting procedures in place is an idea most clear-headed people would agree with.

(Yemen and Saudi Arabia should probably also be on this list).

 

[Tom Paris]

It baffles me how the Democrats, and they are who I generally vote for, have wanted to make so many changes to this country but aren't really interested in changing "The Melting Pot" idea. Times have changed folks...the Swedes, Germans, Italians, English, Irish, etc., when they arrived, didn't have a single one who wanted to KILL everybody else in America. Hispanics aren't moving here wanting the rest of us to die. Today there are people moving here that want to change our beliefs to theirs...and there are a few of them who want the rest of us and our children to die. This isn't dramatic...it's the world we live in and we better get our crap together and close the borders...now.

 

[Huey Grey]

Why did the couple in California kill all those people ? We are not currently banning Muslims. Why did the Boston marathon thing happen? Why are people leaving the u.s. To join Isis?

I think want you want to say is this: we want to say it is a factor but have no way to quantify it. Since it helps bash the opponent les run with it. If enough people repeat it, it becomes fact eventually.

Here is a fact: Isis wants to kill and will.

True. But all the anti-Islam rhetoric spewed by the right is helping to recruit ordinary Muslims who would otherwise sit this fight out.

 

[Huey Grey]

Let me count the ways.....

But only take the time to mention the tip of the iceberg, more would require depth of thought and be wasted on you.

The radicals in the Muslim world believe and blather that the West (US!) hates them for their religious belief. Ergo, they are part of a holy war going back 1500 years to Medina.

Radicals say the West (US!) claims to be for religious freedom and liberty, but are lying. If Trump's and your view is policy they are correct. After all, if Trump's and your view is policy, we stand for religious freedom for all except Muslims, and for liberty for all except Muslims.

The fundamental dispute is then, in their (and probably your) misguided world view, whose God is paramount. That is the radicals fundamental recruiting tool, do you love your God and if so you must be willing to fight and die for your God.

Just like Westboro Baptist and Planned Parenthood shooters who claim to act in the name of God DO NOT stand for your Christian views (I assume), actions of radical Islamists DO NOT stand for most Muslim's views.

Put it one other way, suppose briefly that Florida decided to deport and ban all Christians due to the horrific actions of Westboro and Planned Parenthood shooters in the name of Christianity. Would you have feelings (to the point of considering taking up arms) about a government that so treated all your congregation despite what you know to be their true beliefs and actions?

Of course you would, and of course the ignorant views of Trump significantly help radicals recruitment and loyalty in the Muslim world.

Sigh.

And to make things perfectly clear, the vast majority of Muslims are not radicals. They are peaceful people wanting to live their own lives. They do not want to kill. Now, if the US treats them with respect and says that our fight is with ISIS and not them, these peaceful Muslims will stay out of ISIS. But if we condemn Islam itself, and even go so far as to ban it or its people, as Trump is suggesting, then suddenly we will have turned these people against us. We will have radicalized them by threatening who they as a people. Worse yet, we will have given ISIS access to a huge new population of people to recruit from that ISIS wouldn't otherwise be able to tap.

The moral of the story? Republicans need to stop condemning Islam. All you're doing is proving ISIS correct. All you're doing is pushing peaceful Muslims into action by threatening their way of life. What we need to be doing is to celebrate Islam. Let Muslims know that we respect their religion and will fight to uphold it. If we do this, ISIS will be unable to recruit these people. And if we simultaneously kill as many ISIS members as we can, with the goal of killing more than they can recruit to replace, eventually their forces will be decimated and they will lose power and perhaps even collapse entirely.

 

[unIowa]

Just sit back and enjoy the entertainment folks, we have front row seats to the start of the Culture Wars!

 

[The Tradition]

And to make things perfectly clear, the vast majority of Muslims are not radicals. They are peaceful people wanting to live their own lives. They do not want to kill. Now, if the US treats them with respect and says that our fight is with ISIS and not them, these peaceful Muslims will stay out of ISIS. But if we condemn Islam itself, and even go so far as to ban it or its people, as Trump is suggesting, then suddenly we will have turned these people against us. We will have radicalized them by threatening who they as a people. Worse yet, we will have given ISIS access to a huge new population of people to recruit from that ISIS wouldn't otherwise be able to tap.

The moral of the story? Republicans need to stop condemning Islam. All you're doing is proving ISIS correct. All you're doing is pushing peaceful Muslims into action by threatening their way of life. What we need to be doing is to celebrate Islam. Let Muslims know that we respect their religion and will fight to uphold it. If we do this, ISIS will be unable to recruit these people. And if we simultaneously kill as many ISIS members as we can, with the goal of killing more than they can recruit to replace, eventually their forces will be decimated and they will lose power and perhaps even collapse entirely.

If ISIS causes inconvenience in the lives of ordinary Muslims, why wouldn't they hate ISIS even more for that, instead of joining them over that?

Seriously, if the federal government was persecuting me for something the British (my nationality) was doing, I'd be sending strongly-worded letters to the British government telling them to knock it off! It wouldn't make me want to join Britain and fight the U.S.

 

[naturalmwa]

If ISIS causes inconvenience in the lives of ordinary Muslims, why wouldn't they hate ISIS even more for that, instead of joining them over that?

Seriously, if the federal government was persecuting me for something the British (my nationality) was doing, I'd be sending strongly-worded letters to the British government telling them to knock it off! It wouldn't make me want to join Britain and fight the U.S.

Oh I bet it would for many reasonable people.

 

[unIowa]

If ISIS causes inconvenience in the lives of ordinary Muslims, why wouldn't they hate ISIS even more for that, instead of joining them over that?

Seriously, if the federal government was persecuting me for something the British (my nationality) was doing, I'd be sending strongly-worded letters to the British government telling them to knock it off! It wouldn't make me want to join Britain and fight the U.S.

But overly religious people don't use Real people type logic...tHey so crazy.

 

[IACub]

If ISIS causes inconvenience in the lives of ordinary Muslims, why wouldn't they hate ISIS even more for that, instead of joining them over that?

Seriously, if the federal government was persecuting me for something the British (my nationality) was doing, I'd be sending strongly-worded letters to the British government telling them to knock it off! It wouldn't make me want to join Britain and fight the U.S.

Except that the analogy should be if you were British and we wanted to deport all Europeans because a portion from Italy and Norway committed a crime.

And good luck writing a strongly-worded letter to Assad and/or ISIS. I'm sure that will work.

 

[Huey Grey]

ISIS has the same basic problems all organizations have for recruiting. Who can they actually get? Generally, recruiters, whether they are ISIS or any other organization, break the population into three groups:

1. The group that wants to join
2. The groups that might join, but has to be persuaded first
3. And the groups that will never join and can't be persuaded

ISIS has probably already picked off most of the 1st group. These are people who wanted to become radicalized and so needed very little prompting to join. But this group has a problem. Namely, that they are dying off. Whether being killed from the constant US attacks, French attacks, Russian attacks, any other attacks, this group is constantly losing members. And at a certain point, all of the original members of group 1 who wanted to become radicalized will have been killed off. So ISIS has to replace them. But who do they replace them with?

The 3rd group probably isn't a good bet. These people abhor radicalization and will resist joining at all costs. But group number 2 is a possibility. These are the people who might not otherwise join ISIS, but can be persuaded. And where does that persuasion come from? From the United States attacking Islam itself. Then, suddenly, ISIS has a legitimate "in" to persuade group 2 into joining.

So how do we defeat ISIS? Don't allow them access to group 2. Show group 2 that we respect them and will uphold their rights. If we do this, eventually group 1 will be killed off enough that ISIS will be crippled. Then things will spin out of control for ISIS. With dying members and few new recruits, their power will evaporate away, and with the power will go all the free press they've been getting. Their money will evaporate away. Their infrastructure will erode. And we even have the added bonus of giving the few remaining people in group 1 a disincentive from joining up. Because who wants to join a movement in decline and in shambles?

But what does all of this hinge on? Not turning ordinary Muslims against us by attacking their way of life. It cannot be understated how important it is for all Americans, including conservative ones, to support Muslims during this whole mess. It is drastically important to show the Muslim world that we support them and that ISIS is wrong. If we can't do that, it doesn't matter how many troops we send in. ISIS will just recruit more people since we will have then turned this into a holy war instead of an extremist one.