Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

Abelysk · 2015-12-18 01:14:25

Trump wants Muslims to not be able to enter the U.S. Do you support?

ISIS isn't even Muslim. They're Islam.

Zoey2070 · 2015-12-18 01:16:49

Kefka wrote:

ISIS isn't even Muslim. They're Islam.

someone who is islamic is a muslim. it's literally a synonym.

edit: as for the actual debate, hell no! our very first amendment is freedom of religion

XxAtillaxX · 2015-12-18 01:21:38

The followers of ISIS are Muslim, specifically Wahhabi.
Donald Trump is an idiot for attempting to prevent muslims and mexicans from entering. It's a slippery slope for discrimination.

Pyromaniac, sthegreat

Abelysk · 2015-12-18 01:22:19

Oh. I always get mixed up on that. ISIS is a certain type of Muslim people though. Whatever Atilla said.

Pyromaniac · 2015-12-18 02:52:51

*looks at jawapa, donald trump supporter*

They should absolutely not be barred from coming into the US. I dont even feel the need to explain myself.

mrjawapa · 2015-12-18 03:28:42

My stance: No, they should not be banned. They should be allowed to enter the United States freely (legally of course). We have the freedom of religion in the United States, and I stand by that as long as your religion doesn't promote harmful behavior. Islam does not support harmful behavior. Followers of Islam are not terrorists. I look at religion as an idea, you can't ban an idea.

Depending on how bad things get in the Middle East, banning the entry of people from certain countries could possibly beneficial. It would stop many refugees from entering, yes, but it would also stop many terrorists from entering. Our homeland needs to be protected as a priority.

Bobithan · 2015-12-18 04:18:46

JaWapa wrote:

Depending on how bad things get in the Middle East, banning the entry of people from certain countries could possibly beneficial. It would stop many refugees from entering, yes, but it would also stop many terrorists from entering. Our homeland needs to be protected as a priority.

Didn't a policy like that just get passed?

hummerz5 · 2015-12-18 05:03:35

Why do we assume countries are OK and the religion is not? Is it not true that you're going to get radical fighters from both pools?

If you want to efficiently dampen the flow of these activists, you need to take reasonable action. Stopping half of these, as opposed to aiming for 90% (random numbers, please don't hate), what's wrong with that?

Sure, it's discrimination. BUT, it's also temporary, no? Given time to do reasonable checks on people, they could be allowed in.

Illegal immigrants from Mexico, on the other hand, I can't really weigh in on. I know many folk from my state complain (strong republicans), but I'd probably agree. If they're here illegally, there's some reason they didn't care to follow through our system. Whatever quality they have, it's a reason for them to not be here. If they want to come in on visa or whatever, that seems perfectly reasonable.

Onjit · 2015-12-18 05:49:29

JaWapa wrote:

but it would also stop many terrorists from entering

implying that a) terrorists are muslims and b) that they are not already in US

Insanity · 2015-12-18 06:13:17

what's sad is that this is something that's actually being considered

Master1, Xfrogman43, Pingohits, NegaStrife, Kirby

!nb4 · 2015-12-18 06:38:38

No, they shouldn't be banned.
trump is a walking idiot.

mrjawapa · 2015-12-18 13:04:54

Onjit wrote:

implying that a) terrorists are muslims and b) that they are not already in US

Where in my post did I say all terrorists were Muslim? Oh wait, I didn't.

You're right, we do have terrorists here, doesn't mean we should just open the gates up for more.

In case you didn't know, the Middle East is a war ground, filled with people that want to kill all Americans. So yes, I said the Middle East. You responded as a typical American being offended by everything, and you completely overlooked half my post.

TaskManager · 2015-12-18 16:40:59

No.
It's not every muslim being a terrorist and blowing up everything that was made by humans
It's just some of them that believe they fight for their religion and allah although theyre wrong.

Anak · 2015-12-18 19:42:20

Donald Trump sounds a lot like Hitler to me

Ratburntro44 · 2015-12-18 20:27:01

Terrorism isn't nearly as huge of a problem for the US right now as some people make it out to be. Even in September of 2001 (by far the worst year for terrorism in recent US history, nothing else is even anywhere close) a random US citizen would be more likely to die in a car accident than terrorism. Car accidents themselves aren't even anywhere close to the top cause of death. Banning either Muslims or Middle Easterners from entering the US would probably do barely anything, particularly if any effort devoted to it could be used on, say, fighting heart disease.

hummerz5 · 2015-12-19 00:52:39

Ratburntro44 wrote:

Terrorism isn't nearly as huge of a problem for the US right now as some people make it out to be. Even in September of 2001 (by far the worst year for terrorism in recent US history, nothing else is even anywhere close) a random US citizen would be more likely to die in a car accident than terrorism. Car accidents themselves aren't even anywhere close to the top cause of death. Banning either Muslims or Middle Easterners from entering the US would probably do barely anything, particularly if any effort devoted to it could be used on, say, fighting heart disease.

Just because the chances are unlikely doesn't mean it's justified. Car accidents are accidental. We shy away from those because we take those risks when we travel. "Accident" writes it off, linguistically, as something we take in stride. "Shoot, they died in an accident, which is justified because it wasn't meant to happen, it just did." On the other hand, heart disease isn't so great. You probably could have driven a point home with "curing cancer" because a lot of heart disease comes down to people improperly treating their bodies through smoking, drinking, eating poorly, no exercise. That's really on them. Cure laziness then.

You claim that banning those two groups from the U.S. will achieve little. Since we argue without statistics, I'll assume it's true. But, many people claim that all lives matter. Aren't we better off assuming that one foiled terrorist plot is a win? I think the idea should be evaluated completely for its merit before compared to the detrimental effects of discrimination.

Ratburntro44 · 2015-12-19 06:21:11

One foiled terrorist plot at the cost of what, millions or billions of dollars put toward anti-terrorism efforts that could be better used making fewer people die in hospitals?

Moreover, if all lives matter, then the lives of refugees must be considered. Around 80,000 civilians (possibly significantly more) have died in the Syrian Civil War. I'm not going to go try to find a source for it right now, but I'm willing to bet more people would die as a result of not allowing refugees than of allowing them.

Tako · 2015-12-19 06:28:19

Bobithan wrote:

JaWapa wrote:
Depending on how bad things get in the Middle East, banning the entry of people from certain countries could possibly beneficial. It would stop many refugees from entering, yes, but it would also stop many terrorists from entering. Our homeland needs to be protected as a priority.
Didn't a policy like that just get passed?

How to evade this policy:
1. Send terrorist to Canada
2. Cross the border in Montana, because there are like 5 people in Montana.

Anak · 2015-12-19 15:57:37

Ratburntro44 wrote:

One foiled terrorist plot at the cost of what, millions or billions of dollars put toward anti-terrorism efforts that could be better used making fewer people die in hospitals?
Moreover, if all lives matter, then the lives of refugees must be considered. Around 80,000 civilians (possibly significantly more) have died in the Syrian Civil War. I'm not going to go try to find a source for it right now, but I'm willing to bet more people would die as a result of not allowing refugees than of allowing them.

Exactly. I find the all lives matter "movement" reall just means white lives matter.

shadowda · 2015-12-19 17:41:12

its not a matter of should they be banned. they cant be banned. its discrimination against religion.

mrjawapa · 2015-12-19 17:52:29

Million dollars to save 3000 people? Yeah, I think it's worth it.

hummerz5 · 2015-12-19 21:47:36

Ratburntro44 wrote:

One foiled terrorist plot at the cost of what, millions or billions of dollars put toward anti-terrorism efforts that could be better used making fewer people die in hospitals?
Moreover, if all lives matter, then the lives of refugees must be considered. Around 80,000 civilians (possibly significantly more) have died in the Syrian Civil War. I'm not going to go try to find a source for it right now, but I'm willing to bet more people would die as a result of not allowing refugees than of allowing them.

Admittedly, I'm not 100% behind the "a life is worth any amount of money" but that's come up multiple times on these young debate forums, so I figure I'd toss it in the fire here. So yeah, I'm not about to defend that.

When it comes to tackling the cause versus the symptoms, most people argue that we should take out the cause. That's an oversimplification and generality, sure. But the idea of terrorism is terror. If you pull funding from keeping people feeling safe, you're making this country a very different place to live in. "Oh, yeah, terrorist plots are everywhere now. But *** that. If you live long enough to reach the hospital, we'll save you for sure!" Again, a bit of a strawman. But how do you justify that?

Ok, I'll put one point: You probably can't get a realistic statistic for the amount of refugees we let in causing havoc(?) because we haven't done the research -- the main argument (imo) for temporarily barring access. Not stepping into a dark alley.

Anak wrote:

Exactly. I find the all lives matter "movement" reall just means white lives matter.

I'm not sure what you're referring to by "movement." If we put an effort into preventing terrorist action, I expect it would be distributed across races as it normally is. That's not a good thing to say, but an "average" thing. I agree, we haven't reached a form of quality. But the likelihood of a plot targeting a certain demographic in some area... and then being ignored by whomever is in charge because they're racist... is small. Not impossible, but subject to the same levels of discrimination that exist throughout the country and all issues. My conclusion: racism is a blanket issue. It applies to many aspects of life; if it permeates this issue, I don't see it as a reason to prevent the action of stopping terrorist plots. Instead, it's a reason to tackle the cause: racism.

Rambling, sorry.

JaWapa wrote:

Million dollars to save 3000 people? Yeah, I think it's worth it.

I feel like you're being sarcastic. That's $333 a person. I imagine you'd find that a good deal of those 3k people would be willing to spend $333 to live.

shadowda wrote:

its not a matter of should they be banned. they cant be banned. its discrimination against religion.

Right, and we have a freedom for religion. I think there's some exception in the constitution somewhere for public defense.
loophole: what if we don't filter "Religion" but simply "refugee from country X"?
It's being semi-dishonest, but it fits your proposed filter.

mrjawapa · 2015-12-19 21:56:52

hummerz5 wrote:

I feel like you're being sarcastic. That's $333 a person. I imagine you'd find that a good deal of those 3k people would be willing to spend $333 to live.

No, I was being serious.

Anak · 2015-12-19 22:33:14

hummerz5 wrote:

Anak wrote:
Exactly. I find the all lives matter "movement" reall just means white lives matter.
I'm not sure what you're referring to by "movement." If we put an effort into preventing terrorist action, I expect it would be distributed across races as it normally is. That's not a good thing to say, but an "average" thing. I agree, we haven't reached a form of quality. But the likelihood of a plot targeting a certain demographic in some area... and then being ignored by whomever is in charge because they're racist... is small. Not impossible, but subject to the same levels of discrimination that exist throughout the country and all issues. My conclusion: racism is a blanket issue. It applies to many aspects of life; if it permeates this issue, I don't see it as a reason to prevent the action of stopping terrorist plots. Instead, it's a reason to tackle the cause: racism.
Rambling, sorry.

"Movement" because #AllLivesMatter isn't a movement, activist, or anything. #BlackLivesMatter is a movement, #AllLivesMatter (well, #WhiteLivesMatter) isn't.

KingFudge · 2015-12-19 22:57:22

Trump sounds a bit like the Dutch Geert Wilders. Geert wants to kick out all Muslim people because they are taking Dutch peoples' jobs. What the press thought: this man is nuts.

In an interview he said that if he wanted to kick out all Syrians, there would be nobody complaining.

Muslims shouldn't be banned from countries as they can legally request asylum and it's rascist to only do it for one religion. (Rascist --> Religionist?)

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#1 2015-12-18 01:14:25

Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#2 2015-12-18 01:16:49, last edited by Zoey2070 (2015-12-18 01:17:35)

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#3 2015-12-18 01:21:38

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#4 2015-12-18 01:22:19, last edited by Abelysk (2015-12-18 01:23:03)

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#5 2015-12-18 02:52:51

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#6 2015-12-18 03:28:42

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#7 2015-12-18 04:18:46

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#8 2015-12-18 05:03:35

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#9 2015-12-18 05:49:29

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#10 2015-12-18 06:13:17

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#11 2015-12-18 06:38:38

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#12 2015-12-18 13:04:54

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#13 2015-12-18 16:40:59

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#14 2015-12-18 19:42:20

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#15 2015-12-18 20:27:01

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#16 2015-12-19 00:52:39

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#17 2015-12-19 06:21:11

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#18 2015-12-19 06:28:19

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#19 2015-12-19 15:57:37

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#20 2015-12-19 17:41:12

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#21 2015-12-19 17:52:29

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#22 2015-12-19 21:47:36, last edited by hummerz5 (2015-12-19 21:50:29)

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#23 2015-12-19 21:56:52

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#24 2015-12-19 22:33:14

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

#25 2015-12-19 22:57:22

Re: Should Muslims be banned from the U.S.?

Board footer