janus : It has been happening for years way before 2011. They close off streets between about 2 & 4 p.m. -42nd St & Madison Ave, there is another, even larger group, at 94th St & 3rd Ave and many more. I am unsure if they still continue to close these streets after so much negativity from Americans- I did research but could not find anything recent pertaining to these specifically. However, I did find the most recent public prayer was just in September in a baseball park it seemed in Brooklyn. They even have a calendar labeled NYC USA Time Prayers and they extend for hours almost daily. I'm just giving facts there not trying to say I am disgusted by it at all- my main point in this matter still stands with equality, you cannot allow one religion to be publicly praying yet suspend teachers and students for doing a simple Christian prayer in a classroom which is a public place- which I would argue is less public than an open baseball field.

I see why the government does it though, they have political interests that would be affected if they in any way "offended" Muslims and well it may sound harsh but, that would be a very easy vote to win over in a political campaign much like the minority/latino vote was back a few years ago- people vote for whom best protect their interests and minority votes including African Americans and latinos has evolved in the last few years as they have become somewhat more empowered yet somewhat segregated by not necessarily voting for someone just on promises, example, many African Americans did not vote for Obama same with latinos. So, as someone running for presidency, I would look at more options for votes and Muslim is quite controversial at this moment so I would see it as a more vulnerable community and would somewhat see it as an easier vote due to the negativity in the media about them as a whole rather than specific individuals making bad choices and threatening our lives.

So, I can see why these idiots running for presidency debate this manner so strongly and why the mixed feelings about it. I will agree that by giving Muslims more privileges than other religions we are losing our essence as a nation- we should equally embrace everyone after all it is what we are "best know for"  Equal rights and all those vague promises of equality although we all know better than that- but, just pointing out how the government tells you equality this and equality that yet, they don't enforce it in their own practices or actions but, wants us to still believe it and by it be more considerate and understanding with practices like this and see it as equality when in reality is oppression.

In my opinion, immigration is not the problem. The problem is how this government is treating it and going about it. They are pulling for different reasons that only benefit them at this moment in time without considering long term effects on the country and all its people.

janus :
SWTerra :

People are inherently selfish. You give anyone power and they abuse it almost instantly. People are not inherently good. People don't automatically strive for the good of others, instead they strive for what they think is good for themselves.

Banning Muslims from coming into the country AT ALL would be about the most un-american thing you can do. Considering almost ALL of our ancestors were immigrants (unless you are native american) it would be pretty hypocritical to ban a whole section of the population out of fear.

The Conservatives and Conservative media want to sell fear to people, and pointing the finger at a whole race of people, is not only fascist, it's ignorant.

I created another monster... cool!

Zlinqx : Correct me if I am wrong, but Sweden is (used to be) a very homogeneous country. Maybe not like Japan, but when thinking of Swedes a blond-hair, blue-eyed person usually comes to mind. Compare that to the US or Canada, countries that were built on massive immigration. This unavoidably creates tensions and violence (humans are humans, wherever they are). Also, relying solely on the police is, in my view, a poor way to assure your own defense. Chicago has the most stringent gun laws of the country and, incidentally, the most crimes committed by guns since criminals do not care about laws.

jlove92 : Then this is completely wrong. In a country where church and state are separated, such accommodation is immoral. And we share pretty much the same opinion on government being the main problem

Txgangsta : Of COURSE we are selfish; all sane humans pursue their selfish interest. This is how you can eat, drink, clothe yourself, etc. The problem stems when someone's interest interferes with your life and / or property.

Jordanv78 : Indeed. But Conservatives usually use the excuse that "the former immigrants were White, European, etc."

janus : Right, seems like these days they don't even try to hide their racial biases. Kinda like the same people aren't rushing to call the "ranchers" in Oregon "Terrorists" When if the majority of them weren't white...you can probably already imagine what would happen.

Meanwhile these are the same type of people that try to say that racism doesn't exist...LoL

janus : While that might've been true once upon a time that is far from the truth today. Maybe centuries ago but today we take in more people proportionally to how large our total population is than any other country in the world, we have done the same during the whole Syrian conflict and refugees fleeing due to ISIS. I've lived my life among people of all different backgrounds. Blonde and blue eyed people are surprisingly rare to come by around here.  

I live in the third biggest city in the country with one of the highest percentages of immigrants living there and 40% of our population consists of immigrants, 50% if you count people with foreign born parents but that were born here. A big portion of which are Muslims coming from countries like Irak (and to take myself as an example, my dad immigrated from Egypt) just under half  of the people I went to school with 6-9th grade were Muslim. While it might differ to some extent in certain parts of country (I know that they take in less in the northernmost parts of the country) It is if anything the opposite of an homogeneous country today.

Like I said it in large part depends on the country, the US is an exception because guns have such a large presence in society, enacting an immediate ban on guns there would likely not help the situation much but I think stricter gun control laws could. There have been many problems in regards to our immigration policies here yet there is ban on carrying guns in public and we still have low crime rates compared to most European countries and states in the US (and it is notable that the police force in my city is considered one of the weaker ones in the country due to being understaffed even then). 

So no I do not think guns are needed to ensure your safety. Of course I'm also aware police in US handle things a lot differently than the Swedish police does since our police has what I would consider a much less violent and in my personal opinion a more effective approach here, and if I'm not mistaken Chicago in particular has had a lot of problems with its police force likely contributing to its high statistics. 

Most criminal's guns originally come from stores who do in fact sell them legally, even if they may not have been the original buyer all the time. Like I said also I think it brings a lot of different problems with it. For example you hear stories about school massacres in the US all the time, things like that are made easier because of how easily available guns are in the US. We had our first school attack a few months ago by a Swedish man which wasn't even with a gun but with a sword, hence resulting in the person doing it causing far less injury than he would've had he had the ease of access to guns prominent in the US. I feel the topic of gun control in general is better suited for another thread.

Jordanv78 : When I actually read up on the Oregon incident, I was disgusted as to how horribly misled I was by what I had read prior of articles actually posted on social media. When I saw a full-length article on it, I was legitimately upset at myself for being that off the mark the whole time. I can't believe they would say it's a peaceful protest. I don't think that word means what they think it means!

Racism only doesn't exist when they say it, but try to say one thing that even slightly resembles racism (seriously, calling black people, well, black, or African, both of those terms), and see how much backlash you get from saying such a ludicrous statement.

This goes back to my hate of hyper-sensitivity, though, which is a discussion for another time.

Yes, racism still exists, and I really hope most people still know this fact. Honestly, though, these sorts of claims are why I can't stand to even talk about politics most of the time, even though, at the same time, I know too much about most situations to stay quiet about them. Case in point, this very post, even.

SWTerra : I totally understand what you are saying. Not to get off topic, but honestly the only people that say racism doesn't exist are either clueless to the world around them, or they are in fact racist themselves.

Jordanv78 : Both "mainstream" political ideologies in the U.S. hate particular groups. Conservatives hate minorities, "liberals" hate "privileged" people and basically anyone white, male and successful. I also find their apology of islam... troubling. By apology I mean siding with them for "hate" speech and wanting to censor basically anything that criticizes Islam.

Zlinqx : the stricter the regulations, the worse it gets for the majority of the population. Switzerland has about 50 percent gun ownership and virtually no shooting problems. Also, if true this meme shows the importance of having a gun https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSvRwmU_rpbsoSgV2OCSrS_CHQlL2lV77d8x6Vxaipk7bn3Zb5-Qg

To somewhat get back on topic: the mayor of Cologne (Germany) and a (female) Norwegian minister both pleaded for female to... look modest in order to avoid being raped. This is EXACTLY what I am denouncing: rape in the Western world is the AGGRESSOR's fault. If she did not consent it is rape and the perpetrator needs to be jailed, WHATEVER his culture or religion is.

Txgangsta :   People ARE inherently good, but their surroundings and the way they grow up change that.  That is why you teach your child respect even though your parents may not have taught you that.  If you call yourself a christian in any sense, than you should know no hatred or fear

janus : False. Switzerland actually has a high rate of fire arm related deaths highest out of all the rich European countries and worldwide in that regard is as far as I'm aware only second to the US which generally also has very liberal gun laws compared to most countries. But it isn't as talked about likely due to how it's a small country that in other regards generally does pretty well.

And while Switzerland is still doing much better than the US and pretty much most other countries that allows people to own guns in this regard you also still have to consider a lot of factors.

The amount of people who own a gun is considerably less (about 47% compared to 88% in the US). Most Swiss people are much more prepared and fit to handle a firearm considering military conscription is mandatory for men and the vast majority have therefore received extensive training in the use of a firearm compared to the average American or people from most other countries. You also need to consider that they usually only keep their guns at home. You need a specific permit to carry any type of loaded firearm in public which are only issued under certain conditions such as if you're working in specific branches of security and need to as part of you're job. Compare that to concealed carry in the US.

The reason most people there have a gun is to protect their home in the event of a burglary or an invasion since Switzerland has a relatively poor defense and is very much dependant on other countries helping it in the event of a war and it also has a weak police force that is very understaffed which is why a lot of people view it as necessary and are also often doing it as part of a strong tradition and nationalism.

Take all this into consideration and then also realize that they in fact have stricter gun laws than most parts of the US as far as I'm aware, with the restrictions they place on gun ownership and also requiring citizens to get their gun license renewed each year often several times and they still do have a high rate of firearm related deaths and it doesn't seem like something that would support more liberal gun laws to me.

- Last post I'm making on this topic if you want to discuss this further either PM me about it or make/use a more appropriate thread -

Edit: In response to what you said about rape. I generally agree, I do think the definition of rape we have here or maybe a more similar one should be adapted by more countries. A person shouldn't have to worry about getting raped just because of wearing what they want, that's absurd. That said I feel being able to convict people for it even when the victim never explicitly was against the act or was affected by something else like alcohol leaves a gray area that shouldn't be there and could allow a woman to frame someone and likely get away with it.

janus : I don't think that "liberals" really hate anyone. it's more of the archaic thinking regarding a lot of subjects. Mainly due to either class, race, or sex discrimination.

The majority of my country's population is Muslim and if someone suggested a ban on Christians entering here we would all laugh. Just saying . The fact that "should Muslim immigration be banned?" is a question that actually needs to be asked hits me in different ways. Sometimes I'm offended and other times I fall over laughing because it sounds like a lame joke. I don't know about you guys, but we really don't give a single crap here about what people believe in as long as they you know, don't kill or steal. Kinda strikes me as the most reasonable way to go. But yeesh. To each their own, I guess.

Jordanv78 : Most Democrats can not help themselves but talk against "the rich", "the" gun owners, etc. It may pass well in the media but I find it as despicable. They too divide and conquer.

NintendoFanKimmy : I was merely asking the question because the topic is so hot in the U.S. In my mind country borders are an artificial construct that, like religion, simply divide humans in arbitrary categories. And unfortunately, people who talk about that ban are dead serious about it, and I find it horrifying.

Listen, People....

This is not a matter of Racism. It is a matter of common logic, and national security.

I say common logic, and I have a simple analogy to justify this statement.  If you own a house... and there is a gas leak... What is the first thing that you do? The obvious answer, is to go down to the basement (Or wherever your valve is), and shut the gas off until you find out what the hell the problem is and where the leak that can potentially jeopardize your health is coming from.  After you fully identify, and repair the leak, you go back down to the basement, and turn the gas back on again.  Similarly.. If one of your water pipes is leaking, you go to the water valve, and you shut the water off so your home does not become flooded, until you identify the problem.  After identifying the issue, you repair the leak, and then you go back to the water valve, and turn the water on again.

Here, it is the exact same situation.  We KNOW that there is a problem with immigrants that come from these Islamic nations, nations that keep in mind, teach their children in their schools to hate us, and our principles as a nation.  The only thing to do at this point, is seal off immigration from these nations, until the problem is identified, and corrected.  After that point, when we have found a way to identify, and correct the problem, open up immigration once again for those who we know will move to our country and embrace the law of the land as the supreme law.

It's sad to say it, but many parts of the United Kingdom are now being overrun by radical Islamic immigrants to the point where Sharia Law Courts have been established (in direct conflict with national policies), and police will NOT enforce the national law in certain areas in fear of retaliation by the masses of Islamic people.. If the United States is to be protected from such a threat, then it NEEDS to be sure that the people we are allowing into the country are going to be abiding by the law of the US, and no other entity.

The only way to be sure that the United States maintains its security, is to shut out those who wish to compromise it.  The United States does NOT have an obligation to allow citizens of other countries to be welcomed into its boarders. The United States does, however, have an obligation to protect the lives, liberties, and pursuits of happiness of the 300 million citizens living within its boarders. To allow persons to enter the US while there is no proper method of screening, and without making sure they will be peaceful and contribute to the sovereignty of the Nation, is just as much of a heinous crime as the one perpetuated by those who commit these disgusting acts of Terror.

It's time for us to wake up before it is too late, and shut off the source of the problem until it can be identified, and corrected. Close off immigration to those Islamic countries, until we figure out what is going on, and fix the problem.

andrew4loans :  

I disagree with your statement. I find you analogy to be flawed. We don't have much problems with immigrants from Islamic nations. The issue is ISIS in some parts of the Middle East. If the American government prohibits Muslims from entering the country, that will just cause more tension with Islamic nations and ISIS will be even more inspired to kill. I am not Muslim, but how can you deny someone entry into the country because of their religion. That contradicts the whole principle that America was founded upon: that all men and women are created equal and everyone should be given an opportunity to start a new life. If the person wanting to enter the country has ties with ISIS, then by all means stop him/her from entering the country. But if their record is clean, there is no reason to stop them from entering the country. Preventing Muslims from entering the country is an illusion of a fix to many people, while in reality, will make matters much worse. If we are going to ban Muslims from entering the country, why not ban everyone from entering the country and tell everyone to get out, as every race, religion, or group has its fair share of good and bad people. All in all, I think that the statement you made was not using common logic, like you said you did, because if you thought about it for a good bit, then you would see that banning Muslims from entering the country harms America, and the world, more than helping it. 

I personally believe that America should streamline the entire immigration process not just for Muslims but for everyone. Now I'm not saying we just let everyone especially if they are coming from places with heavy ISIS influence but I think from those areas especially America should offer a safe place between their home country and actually being in America. Along with that America should do an extensive background check if their is no ties to any terrorist organization or record of horrible crimes than we should let them in and treat them as any other citizen. But if they do have ties to ISIS than we either keep them in the safe in-between area or we send them back depending on how strong the ties are and if we find any proof that they intend to do harm to American citizens. In short I'm all up for helping anyone that needs help as long as keeping America safe is our first priority.

andrew4loans: and would this hatred not be fuelled by the fact that drone strikes mostly hurt civilians that have nothing to do with the intended target?

Your analogy is faulty. In countries without multiculturalism there is NO problem with Muslim extremism, or at least it is a fringe movement. The problem in the UK, as you pointed out, is that authorities have basically abandoned the rule of law from the Magna Carta and let ruffians establish their own rules. The U.S. can still let refugees in AND protect the life and liberty of its citizens... by letting them own guns.

RDay13 : While I disagree with systematic barring of anyone emigrating, I do not believe it would increase tensions with Muslim countries. Has the deportation of "illegal" immigrants south of the Rio Grande increased tensions with the concerned countries to an "unsustainable" level?

In other news, it seems that some feminists (who usually clamor about our supposed "rape culture") are blaming women or some obscure conspiracy force for the reported rapes in Cologne, Germany. How ironic...

janus : Extreme feminists and their claims hurt my brain.

Are you talking about the same ones who also will try to push for "equality," giving women more rights than men are given? Because that's totally what equality is always about. You know, inequality.

SWTerra : yes, these are the exact ones. In my native Quebec (Canada) feminist organizations LOVE to shout about imagined inequalities, patriarchy, yada, yada, yada. And yet they have never ever uttered a word about the various veils Muslim women HAVE to wear...