Donald Trump Calls for Barring Muslims From Entering U.S

[pnewton]

I wasn’t aware there were plans to incarcerate people, …

And I am not aware that I ever said there were plans to incarcerate people. If that is what you got out of that post, then I guess explaining it won’t help. Besides, I cannot think of simpler words to use.

 

[Tony_Micelli]

Hard to know for sure. Trump isn’t a stupid man. For one thing, he’s getting a lot of free publicity out of these statements, millions of dollars’ worth. And one wonders how well anybody will remember exactly what he said months from now.

i agree and think people tend to overreact to his bombastic statements, and predictably the establishment love to get self righteous and indignant over this stuff for thier own self interests.

i wouldn’t count him out just yet.

 

[Confiteor_Deo]

That’s bunk. They are Muslims. Your use is pejorative.

Would you appreciate it is someone called us Romanists…or papists? Then , as Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ tells us, “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” (Luke 6:31 and Matthew 7:12)

I wouldn’t mind a term someone used against me since all they are saying is that I am Catholic. If they intend offense, it really doesn’t matter what term they use since they are going to be trying to offend me, regardless of how many euphemisms and political correctness they sprinkle on it. It is like how saying transsexual is offensive yet transgender isn’t, I am always surprised at how sensitive some people can be. I can assure you that I am not intending to be pejorative in my use of the term “Mohammedan”; two of my closest friends are Mohammedans.

 

[Brendan_64]

i agree and think people tend to overreact to his bombastic statements

And this is a man who many people would like to see as the president of the USA? Coming out with over the top statements that are impossible to implement are hardly the actions of a credible potential president.

 

[JimmyG88]

I wouldn’t mind a term someone used against me since all they are saying is that I am Catholic. If they intend offense, it really doesn’t matter what term they use since they are going to be trying to offend me, regardless of how many euphemisms and political correctness they sprinkle on it. It is like how saying transsexual is offensive yet transgender isn’t, I am always surprised at how sensitive some people can be. I can assure you that I am not intending to be pejorative in my use of the term “Mohammedan”; two of my closest friends are Mohammedans.

Well it’s regarded as perjorative so how about stop using it.

 

[Path_Finder]

Well it’s regarded as perjorative so how about stop using it.

Kindly prove it.

 

[JimmyG88]

Kindly prove it.

I think you know it is don’t you

 

[HolyCrusader007]

There have been a few points brought up by folks who are pro ban…those points are as follows

-The Japanese were interned during WW2.

-The Iranians were banned from coming to the USA during 1979.

Neither of those decisions are the same as a possible ban of all Muslims from traveling to the USA. During WW2 we were at war with the Empire of Japan in other words the Japanese people whom fought for the EOJ. BTW during WW2 Americans were not treated to 5 star hotels in Japan. During 1979 there was a crisis which pitted the Iranian gov against the American gov, thankfully those hostages got out and RIP to the American servicemen who tried to rescue the hostages.

Today we are at war with ISIL, which is made up of White Americans, Black Americans, white and black Euros, Arabs, Kurds and other types of people. The problem is not Muslims, most of ISIL is not Japanese and most of ISIL probably is not Arab.ISIL is made up of numerous types of so called races. It doesnt make sense to ban all Muslims from traveling to the USA , folks should remember that 97% of those that ISIL have killed are Muslims. In addition to the US led coalition there is a joint coalition of 37 Muslim majority countries which are working against ISIL, ISIL has burned alive a Jordanian Pilot, is Jordan banning all Muslims?? No they are not. Jordan is a Holy country which Pope Francis has visited and shown respect toward. The thought of Muslims from Jordan being banned from traveling to the USA is something the Church would be against. I think we can all appreciate the peaceful tolerate Muslims whom are either speaking against, or fighting against ISIL.

 

[Murmurs]

I wouldn’t mind a term someone used against me since all they are saying is that I am Catholic. If they intend offense, it really doesn’t matter what term they use since they are going to be trying to offend me, regardless of how many euphemisms and political correctness they sprinkle on it. It is like how saying transsexual is offensive yet transgender isn’t, I am always surprised at how sensitive some people can be. I can assure you that I am not intending to be pejorative in my use of the term “Mohammedan”; two of my closest friends are Mohammedans.

Just because you don’t mean to be offensive doesn’t mean it might be, and generally where possible we should avoid giving needless offense. There are men and women of my grandparents’ generation who would readily refer to people of colour by a particular two-syllable word, without meaning it to be the least bit perjorative and who have a fairly diverse array of friends, only they have generally learned not to use that word because most people to whom it is applied do find it offensive. The same goes for “Mohammedan”.

While we, as Christians, are happy to be referred to after He who founded our Church, the same doesn’t particularly go for Muslims. I am quite sure you mean no offence but it’s hardly a massive imposition to suggest one should maybe consider alternatives.

(On the transgender/sexual issue, I think it’s less to do with offense, and more to do with the idea that while sex is biologically defined (chromosomes), gender is about personal identity. Thus transgender is probably just more correct - biological women identifying as men and vice versa).

 

[philipl]

In 1942 we incarcerated Americans with Japanese ancestry. Just because something has happened in the past does not necessarily make it moral.

I do not believe in combating the uncivilized by abandoning our civility, or the inhumane by suspending our humanity.

So immigrants are just undocumented citizens? Those we incarcerated in 1942 were citizens.

 

[philipl]

And this is a man who many people would like to see as the president of the USA? Coming out with over the top statements that are impossible to implement are hardly the actions of a credible potential president.

What makes you qualified to decide a “credible potential president”? According to the Consitution:

Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

• No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.Term limit amendment - US Constitution, Amendment XXII, Section 1 - ratified February 27, 1951
• No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

No where do I see “over the top statements that are impossible to implement” in those two parts of the document.

But then again I am not a liberal so for all I knew it’s in there. After all every person alive on this earth is now an Undocumented citizen of the usa so they can all run for the office.

 

[philipl]

There are a couple of motivations:

1. Trump’s base of support is, shall we say, not overly concerned with the practicalities or logic of his statement. They want Muslims banned now, dammit! The impossibility of doing so is irrelevant in the face of their paranoia. A Mencken quote is especially germane to this situation: “No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have researched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”
2. Making outrageous statements keeps Trump in the forefront of the media coverage; in a closely contested primary such as this, free publicity is worth its weight in gold. It effectively chokes off the competition, whilst getting his ideas widely and freely distributed. The viability of his statements are irrelevant; as long as the focus is on Trump, then who cares if his plans are practicable or not?

I am going to tell you why Trump is doing so well. There is a large group of Americans mainly in the middle class that are tired of being ignored, always being on the bottom, and being blamed for all the ills of the world.

They are tired of politicians writing laws that punish the middle class. They are tired of being told we need to open the boarders because these people will do the jobs Americans just wont do. They are tired of being told we need to let an unlimited number of High Tech workers come from India because Americans just aren’t qualified for those positions. Yet the same Americans have to train those high tech workers. They are tired of politicians negotiating “treaties” with foreign government that are not in the best interest of the USA. They are tired of being told by elected officials that if you don’t agree with them you don’t have a heart or your IQ is too low to understand the complexities of the world.

 

[Tbrightson]

I fully support goods and services to their native countries to help ease the suffering. I fully support Christians in the war torn areas to enter the United States. I do not support people with an incompatible political ideology that is hostile to Western Culture and Christianity to enter the country.

My thoughts exactly. Thank you

 

[Path_Finder]

There have been a few points brought up by folks who are pro ban…those points are as follows

-The Japanese were interned during WW2.

-The Iranians were banned from coming to the USA during 1979.

Neither of those decisions are the same as a possible ban of all Muslims from traveling to the USA. During WW2 we were at war with the Empire of Japan in other words the Japanese people whom fought for the EOJ. BTW during WW2 Americans were not treated to 5 star hotels in Japan. During 1979 there was a crisis which pitted the Iranian gov against the American gov, thankfully those hostages got out and RIP to the American servicemen who tried to rescue the hostages.

Today we are at war with ISIL, which is made up of White Americans, Black Americans, white and black Euros, Arabs, Kurds and other types of people. The problem is not Muslims, most of ISIL is not Japanese and most of ISIL probably is not Arab.ISIL is made up of numerous types of so called races. It doesnt make sense to ban all Muslims from traveling to the USA , folks should remember that 97% of those that ISIL have killed are Muslims. In addition to the US led coalition there is a joint coalition of 37 Muslim majority countries which are working against ISIL, ISIL has burned alive a Jordanian Pilot, is Jordan banning all Muslims?? No they are not. Jordan is a Holy country which Pope Francis has visited and shown respect toward. The thought of Muslims from Jordan being banned from traveling to the USA is something the Church would be against. I think we can all appreciate the peaceful tolerate Muslims whom are either speaking against, or fighting against ISIL.

On the other hand, Jordan has contributed radicals clearly to ISIS, so one may wonder where that leaves us, if a son of a member of Parliament joins ISIS, that in itself is worrisome and could indicate widespread extremism:

Jordan MP’s son joins Islamic State, becomes suicide bomber
timesofisrael.com/jordan-mps-son-joins-islamic-state-becomes-suicide-bomber/

If one of the more Moderate Middle Eastern Countries is reported to have the most recruits to ISIS, that being Tunisia, what does this tell us? I believe Tunisia also has been in the news for closing 80 Mosques that they alleged spread extremist views.

**
Why are so many Tunisians joining IS?**
#Tunisia

While Tunisia is managing its democratic transition,* it is also the number-one supplier for recruits for IS*

• See more at: middleeasteye.net/news/why-are-so-many-tunisians-joining-748811153#sthash.u7zL6KzF.K876tCfO.dpuf

I don’t know if I agree with the notion that Tunisia contributes the most ISIS recruits or fighters but anyway, they must be up there. I’m not sure if the “study” cited is solidly accurate, it appears to be a difficult topic to research actually.

 

[Ridgerunner]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammedan

Mohammedans was in common usage until the mid-'60s; I’d say assuming one is using it as a pejorative is not an easy call to make.

Some criticisms are really political correctness and the thought police run amok.

Seems that in the 19th Century and before, “Mahometan” was the preferred usage. I don’t know when or why that was changed to “Mohammedan” or “Muslim”. Likely the latter was the expressed preference of Muslims themselves. But if one hears a Middle Easterner say it, it sounds like “Mahomet” to me.

 

[Path_Finder]

Seems that in the 19th Century and before, “Mahometan” was the preferred usage. I don’t know when or why that was changed to “Mohammedan” or “Muslim”. Likely the latter was the expressed preference of Muslims themselves. But if one hears a Middle Easterner say it, it sounds like “Mahomet” to me.

I have some book, old book which has selections of all of the major religions in it. I forget what it is called but it may refer to Mohammedism in it versus Islam. It’s a common book with citations from the Bible, Torah, Zoroastrian holy books, Buddhism and so on.

 

[Brendan_64]

What makes you qualified to decide a “credible potential president”?

I’m not passing any judgement on his right to stand as a potential presidential candidate, just suggesting that perhaps people might want more from a president than hot air which is impossible to implement in reality, let alone provide protection from terrorists. Sounding ‘tough’ will not do anything to protect anyone, it is policies that can be realistically put into practice that will have a chance of protecting people from terrorism.

Issuing statements that are impossible to implement in reality is either naivety or worse still, using the genuine and understandable fear of terrorist acts as a platform to gain personal publicity.

I doubt very much that ISIS heard his remarks and thought, “On boy, we better watch out because this guy means business, he’s going to ban all Muslims from entering the USA”. More likely they thought, “See what a mess the USA is in, potential presidential candidates are proposing to protect the American people from us by putting forward a proposal that is clearly impossible. All that decadent Western corruption seems to have rotted their brain-cells.”

 

[meltzerboy]

I have some book, old book which has selections of all of the major religions in it. I forget what it is called but it may refer to Mohammedism in it versus Islam. It’s a common book with citations from the Bible, Torah, Zoroastrian holy books, Buddhism and so on.

Do you mean there is a distinction between Muhammadism and Islam? I thought Muhammad was just an older term for Muslim. In common usage, Muslim is preferred today just as people do not say Negro but rather people of color to include a broader group. I might be offended if someone called me Hebrew instead of Jewish unless I was sure they simply did not know the appropriate term.

 

[Path_Finder]

Do you mean there is a distinction between Muhammadism and Islam? I thought Muhammad was just an older term for Muslim. In common usage, Muslim is preferred today just as people do not say Negro but rather people of color to include a broader group. I might be offended if someone called me Hebrew instead of Jewish unless I was sure they simply did not know the appropriate term.

True on the above; however, I’m not sure if any of these are in the area of being called a “pejorative”.

 

[JimmyG88]

It seems that despite knowing that followers of Islam prefer to call themselves Muslim some people will just insist on using a different word just to stoke the fire of prejudice. They seemingly also spend an inordinate amount of time looking things up which they think will justify their opinions. Frankly I find the overt display of xenophobia and jingoism rather nauseating