With Merkel's Foes in Disarray, Germany Defies the Trump Trend

[Dill]

(05-03-2017, 04:29 PM)masterpanthera_t Wrote: As for the quoted part:  I agree with your first statements here (I've argued the same thing over the last year or so and the value of this endeavor would be to clear up this Islamophobia).  However, I do disagree that importing people who harbor views that are antithetical to our core values of "freedom" is itself an affront to our values.  That is not to say that we're importing such people, but in theory, you surely cannot tell me that people who are fundamentally opposed to the foundations of nation (such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech) or certain cultural values that go to our core (women's rights, gay rights, minority rights  -- I realize there are some variances here, that may not be universally held within our country, but overall, I think it's valid), should be imported because that is an expression of "freedom".  It would neither be prudent, nor even in theory consistent with values we hold dear (i.e if we do not tolerate intolerance, doesn't mean that our intolerance is wrong).  This disagreement applies equally to the import of Islamophobes, as to terrorists, to people who denigrate women, to people who perpetrate violence on gays or whatever.  Now, maybe it's possible that you feel that importing such people will not endanger our core values, because you believe in the ability of our nation to impress our values into the newly immigrated population simply by the "greatness" (in quotes as it may mean different things to different people) of our nation.  If this is your argument, maybe it's something to ponder.  I would guess that that's not your argument since you've pointed out parts of the nation's history which will not attest to that greatness.  At the least, I have to wonder what parts of these "polls" in other fairly civilized nations of the West requires further evaluation (if we're discussing the greatness of America being able to overcome antithetical views).  

Agree or disagree, I'm glad we're  having a discussion on the merits of topics and areas which in our opinion needs further scrutiny, re-informing our own understanding etc. instead of lobbing conversation ending insults with little to no substance addressing the merits of the discussion.  

Ha Ha, amen to the last point.

As to the rest, I am still trying to figure out how to express some of these points clearly and succinctly.

1. Let me reaffirm, first, that we already have some laws on the books that everyone has to follow regardless of cultural/religious background. E.g. it is not ok to beat your wife, whatever your religious text says.  And you may not be married to more than one spouse at one time. You may believe whatever you want about husband-wife relations--you still can't break the law.  If people coming into the country understand this, I am satisfied.  I further note that in many countries where homosexuality is punishable by death and the majority Muslim population believes it should be, they still don't kill homosexuals. What people "believe" may still be very different from what they do.

2. Given the massive population of the US, and the miniscule number of Muslims arriving on our shores, it is very unlikely that predominately Christian Americans will very soon be advocating death for Muslim apostates or whatever the big fear is. If you check my post #144 above, you will see a discussion of how minority status affects Jews, Christians and Muslims across the board. If one-hundred million Islamists arrived and were given the vote, we would certainly have something to worry about. (Are there even 100 million Islamists?)   Two Muslims in Oklahoma city who think polygamy is ok just are no threat to Oklahoman values.

3. And finally, you bring up an issue I did not, but which I think should definitely be in the mix.  People who arrive in the US are influenced by our culture and values. Not parents necessarily. But the children usually grow up "American." Sometimes US culture seems alien and immoral, so parents try to protect their children from it (just as our own fundamentalists do). But this is another reason why I am little worried about "them" changing "us" beyond introducing us to new foods or jewelry or clothing accessories.

4. There is one threat that I do see from communities of new Muslim immigrants, and that is the one created by alienation, by the refusal of the dominant society to welcome and integrate them. Forcing a 100,000 people to feel unwelcome because of their faith while on the internet people are calling their children to fight for that faith is not a good situation. Out of that 100,000, expect 5 or 6 to snap and "defend the faith" in the manner prescribed by ISIS or Al Qaeda.  We don't address that problem by demanding they sign loyalty pledges and by "outlawing Sharia."