Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We can ban anyone desiring to come to this country for any reason,
including their religion.
The freedom to exercise religion only applies to American citizens.
They are not American citizens.
Do you understand that ?
We also have the right to discriminate against all foreign nations
and ethnic groups which the people of the United States deem
unfit for immigration to the U.S.
Our laws are not such that we are forced to commit political and ideological suicide. Our laws are to protect not only American citizens, but our Constitutional Republic and our way of life from destruction, even if from within. The problem we have here is that too many people, even people within our own government, have been propagandized (and lied to ... it's called "taqiyya") by the Islamists within our country into believing that they "only want the same things we want" (how often have you heard Obama say that?), and that they are "good people," and "Islam is a religion of peace." Nothing could be further from the truth.
And screening potential immigrants based on their religious beliefs is a de facto way to make sure they never get here. But hey, so what? Who cares about a silly principle like freedom of religion. Stupid Founding Fathers!
You need a Constitution course. We are under no obligation to accept anyone into this country. No matter what religion.
However, since you brought it up:
The First Amendment, in historical context, was written because the original settlers to this "new world" came here to escape religious persecution. Nearly all were Christians of various sects. The Church of England was the only recognized church. The Framers did not want a similar situation to exist in this country.
The predominant world view at the time of our founding was Judaeo-Christian. They did not have in mind any and all other world religions. They were concerned with protecting those of various Christian sects. In fact, many of the legislatures made it a requirement in order to hold public office to profess faith in Jesus Christ. That certainly would preclude non-Christians from holding public office, and also undermines your view of the meaning of the First Amendment.
We are not at war with Islam. We cannot be at war with a religion. You cannot defeat a religion. Especially a religion that has over a billion followers. And all of the people who say we are at war with Islam are giving comfort to our enemies, the religious extremists. Because that's their narrative. That's the story they are telling in order to recruit supporters. That's their rationale for attacking us.
Islam is not at war with the United States. We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with Islamic extremists who have twisted and perverted their religion, and if they didn't have religion, they would find another "cause" to rationalize their hatred, anger and frustration. These are bitter, emotionally stunted people who revel in hatred and anger, and who are looking for excuses for that hatred and anger. We don't need to help them find those excuses.
You also need to update your knowledge. You have no understanding of Islam. Islam is not a 'religion.' It is a religeopolitical system. Islam is the State, and the State is Islam. The goal of Muslims is world domination, and the Qur'an teaches that they must "kill the infidel wherever you find them." That is anyone not Muslim.
The so-called "Islamic extremists" are practicing Islam perfectly, according to the Qur'an.
Yeah, a man whose son died in service to America is questionable while a candidate with many business ties to Saudi Arabia is a real 'Murican. And so it goes with the American right.............................
I don't know many on the "American right" that think of Hillary as a "real 'Murican(sic)"
I'm sorry that you feel this way. I'm not a fan of Islam, but I am a fan of the Constitution, and of the principles that are the foundation of our nation. I understand that when you undermine the protections for those principles, that you imperil those principles. Across the board. Freedom of religion doesn't exist when you start making up special rules for one religion. Once you set the precedent that you can ban a specific religion from immigrating, that you can pass laws against a specific religion, then you've set the precedent that any and all religions can be targeted.
We have laws in place that are secular and that protect us. We can bar an immigrant who has associations with terrorist groups. We can prosecute someone in this country who commits an honor crime. We have laws.
What you've failed to do is show how a ban on Muslim immigration limits or prohibits the free exercise of religion by U.S. Muslims. Would a ban stop Muslims from going to a mosque of their choice, praying 5 times a day, buying and reading the Quran, wearing the clothes and eating the food they prefer, celebrating holidays, etc. ?
You being a fan of the Constitution is less important to you than opposition to a policy of banning Muslim immigration.
Trump surrogate decides Khan family deserves to be attacked again!
Quote:
“All right, I don’t care if he’s a Gold Star parent," he continued. "He certainly doesn’t deserve that title, OK, if he’s as anti-American as he’s illustrated in his speeches and in his discussion. I mean, if he’s a member of the Muslim Brotherhood or supporting, you know, the ISIS-type of attitude against America, there’s no reason for Donald Trump to have to honor this man.”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.