Another terrorist attack in France

[*bfine32*]

(07-15-2016, 05:09 PM)Benton Wrote: Eh, I think the words in the article were pretty clear. It was written with erroneous info to say that "...Japan is “a country without Muslims”."

If your take from "...Japan is “a country without Muslims”" or "Japan is practically closed to Muslims" is that the author wasn't saying Japan is a country that excludes Muslims, then I'm not going to try and convince you otherwise.

But to your question, no, I wouldn't agree. As I've said in other posts, there are a lot of reasons why there are few Muslims in Japan. One of the biggest is that they allow few immigrants from anywhere. They do not accept dual citizenship. They do not accept many people who do not have some form of relative already in Japan (so, for many, you're talking about limiting it to people in Asia).

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/11/25/national/politics-diplomacy/japans-immigration-policy-rift-widens-population-decline-forces-need-foreign-workers/



Muslims are no more or less limited than Christians, Buddhists, and others who do not speak the language or have the job qualifications necessary for employment, or the other restrictions (which, from everything I've read and people I've met, don't include anything about being Muslim).

So, no, I wouldn't agree they're restrictive about Muslims, but I would agree Japan is restrictive about all immigrants.

If you consider a quote that includes the modifier "practically" to illustrate exclude (to shut or keep out; prevent the entrance of); that is your choice.

I asked you was immigration of Muslims limited in Japan, you somehow tried to make that a "no" because all immigration is limited. 

Did I ask were they more limited?

You are trying real hard to find a way to say no. You didn't answer the assimilation question so I'll try one last time:

Does Japan restrict (notice I'm not saying exclude nor did the article I quoted) Immigration?

Does Japan require strict assimilation to those they do allow?