lslam in Texas, please read.

20,813 Views | 452 Replies | Last: 21 hrs ago by Aggrad08
dermdoc
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 11:25a, 11/28/25
AG
Sapper Redux said:
Quote:
the founders did not say that rights from from "consensus" or "the people" as a collective act of will. they said - explicitly and repeatedly - that they came from God


And yet the supreme law of the United States makes zero mention of God and grounds rights in the consent of the governed and the structures put in place. You want to treat rhetoric as if it is reality when the liberal turn in philosophy began as an explicit rejection of divine will and dictate as sufficient for establishing a polity. They may eventually recognize a God of some sort, but the structure of rights was based in reason and deduction. God was invoked as a sort of final arbiter, but in the sense that reason dictated this was good and what is good must be pleasing to God. The actual involvement of God in these formulations was minimal or nonexistent.


Disagree. I am not a history prof, but from my reading religion was discussed quite a bit. At that point in time, "God given rights" would have been pretty much assumed considering the belief in God.
https://americanminute.com/blogs/todays-american-minute/pastors-in-politics-during-american-revolution-hugh-williamson-other-preachers-american-minute-with-bill-federer
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Reply Quote
3
2 edits
Sapper Redux
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dermdoc • 12:09p, 11/28/25
One of the things that made Descartes controversial was that he removed a presupposition of God in his philosophy and established his positions logically through his individual perception of the world. Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Montesquieu, Rousseau, etc… all drew on and expounded this approach to philosophy. Montesquieu in particular developed his political theories without particular concern for the religion involved and argued for the benefits of religious toleration in the state. In Enlightenment political thought it was human reason that determined and codified rights while God was removed to the watchmaker role of one who gives men reason to find their natural rights. Sure, there were ministers and religious Christians who took part in the founding. The theories they drew on were not taken from Christianity but from secular exercises that often used deist language or attempted to ground their arguments in the veneer of Christianity to avoid controversy.
Reply Quote
dermdoc
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 12:51p, 11/28/25
AG
Well, you know more than me. So I will defer. But I got you on skin stuff.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Reply Quote
2
swimmerbabe11
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dermdoc • 1:39p, 11/28/25
and yet I don't have a fully customized skin care routine from you. its a shame.
Reply Quote
RAB91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Aggie__11 • 2:14p, 11/28/25
Aggie__11 said:
Muslim attacks in the west too numerous to list all but yeah they totally fit in Western society's . Ever since why it's Muslims coming to the west and not visa versa? I mean image if 100 Christians went to Medina and stated a Christian church what would happen to them? If Islam and being Muslim is so great why don't they stay in their countries?

There's too much common sense in that post for a lot of folks.
Reply Quote
1
dermdoc
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to swimmerbabe11 • 2:27p, 11/28/25
AG
swimmerbabe11 said:
and yet I don't have a fully customized skin care routine from you. its a shame.


You haven't asked me.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Reply Quote
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Aggrad08 • 2:34p, 11/28/25
AG

Quote:
I find value in allowing the people a say in their governance.

so do i, but the problem is you're conflating "rights come from consensus" with this. they're not the same thing.
Quote:
But then suggest how to immunize such a government from the effects of consensus.

not base its authority in consensus, obviously? the romans didn't make this appeal, yet they had a republic. likewise classical democracies.
Quote:
Any system of government that can be said to derive power from its people in a meaningful way is subject to change.

yeah, granted. the problem is you're assuming that is the only way, when again - this is a novelty historically speaking. you can't seem to disconnect "people having a say in government" from "government derives power/authority from its people". those two are not equivalent statements, but you are using them as if they are.
Quote:
The grounding in a creator is a pretense. A fancy. It has no magical power because gods don't come down and tell us what government they want and what rights we should have

you're wrong, because God literally come down and give divine revelation to us, which is where our human rights come from. that's the problem, you think they come from consensus, and they don't. without the divine revelation of God, there is no such thing as human rights. just consensus.
Quote:
A person can believe in a god and not believe the right to life is a fundamental right just as easily as someone can dismiss a god and find that right essential.

fify. and that's the issue.
Reply Quote
5
dermdoc
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 2:35p, 11/28/25
AG
Zobel said:

Quote:
I find value in allowing the people a say in their governance.

so do i, but the problem is you're conflating "rights come from consensus" with this. they're not the same thing.
Quote:
But then suggest how to immunize such a government from the effects of consensus.

not base its authority in consensus, obviously? the romans didn't make this appeal, yet they had a republic. likewise classical democracies.
Quote:
Any system of government that can be said to derive power from its people in a meaningful way is subject to change.

yeah, granted. the problem is you're assuming that is the only way, when again - this is a novelty historically speaking. you can't seem to disconnect "people having a say in government" from "government derives power/authority from its people". those two are not equivalent statements, but you are using them as if they are.
Quote:
The grounding in a creator is a pretense. A fancy. It has no magical power because gods don't come down and tell us what government they want and what rights we should have

you're wrong, because God literally come down and give divine revelation to us, which is where our human rights come from. that's the problem, you think they come from consensus, and they don't. without the divine revelation of God, there is no such thing as human rights. just consensus.
Quote:
A person can believe in a god and not believe the right to life is a fundamental right just as easily as someone can dismiss a god and find that right essential.

fify. and that's the issue.


Well stated.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Reply Quote
1
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 2:44p, 11/28/25
AG
Quote:
And yet the supreme law of the United States makes zero mention of God and grounds rights in the consent of the governed and the structures put in place. You want to treat rhetoric as if it is reality when the liberal turn in philosophy began as an explicit rejection of divine will and dictate as sufficient for establishing a polity. They may eventually recognize a God of some sort, but the structure of rights was based in reason and deduction. God was invoked as a sort of final arbiter, but in the sense that reason dictated this was good and what is good must be pleasing to God. The actual involvement of God in these formulations was minimal or nonexistent.

ok, the supreme law of the US makes zero mention of a right to life or property. do we not have those? of course not. so this is 1) ignoring the declaration as a philosophical foundation - which grounds rights in natural law, endowment from the Creator - not consent and 2) an argument from silence.

and NONE of the rights in the USC or its amendments are conferred by consensus or by consent of the governed or by the law. nowhere does the constitution ground the rights of the people in the power or authority of the people or of the government.

the constitution itself is silent on the source of rights - it neither affirms nor denies natural rights - but the framers repeatedly state in ratification debates in their writings that the rights pre-exist government. the constitution protects assumed rights by limiting government, not conferring them through consent or law. the rights are assumed to be pre-political and preexisting, which is the exact opposites of being the product of consensus.

in the mind of the framers the consent of the governed legitimizes the authority of the government, not the existence of rights themselves.

the whole crux of the issue is the mistaken blending of the two, and each of the three of you are doing it in different ways.
Reply Quote
6
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 2:58p, 11/28/25
AG

Quote:
Enlightenment political thought it was human reason that determined and codified rights while God was removed to the watchmaker role of one who gives men reason to find their natural rights.

youre inverting the actual historical sequence and core arguments of enlightenment thoughts.

the primary sources show the rights as God-given. Locke himself said "The rules that legislators make for other men's actions must conform to the law of nature, which is a declaration of the will of God." reason allows us to perceive self-evident pre-existing natural rights given by God, or nature's God. reason doesn't determine them or create them. removing the Creator from the picture would destroy the objective foundation of those rights. even radical deism still keeps God as the source of the rights because the universe came from a Creator who built those rights into the fabric of nature. so rights still come from a divine moral law, even if the Lawgiver is less immanent.

which is why this theory of philosophy only arose in the wake of broad christendom. no other society has had the philosophical imaginative framework to create it.
Reply Quote
2
RAB91
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:24a, 11/30/25
Reason #1,256,587

Reply Quote
4
dermdoc
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to RAB91 • 10:39a, 11/30/25
AG
RAB91 said:
Reason #1,256,587


Just a bunch of Christians, right? There is such a huge difference in behavior between Christians and Muslims one almost has to be blind not to see it.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
bigtruckguy3500
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to one MEEN Ag • 10:57a, 11/30/25
one MEEN Ag said:
Do muslims residing in America even celebrate thanksgiving? Or is it like Jews getting Christmas day off and going to eat Chinese


There is actually a pretty sizeable market for halal turkey. I see signs posted outside many of the Muslim markets I drive by. I don't think it's exactly the same in a Muslim household as it is in a Christian household, but it would seem they are at least getting into the turkey aspect of it.
Reply Quote
kurt vonnegut
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to one MEEN Ag • 7:27a, 12/1/25
AG
one MEEN Ag said:
This thread is full of atheist secularists who are embracing Islam while Islam would absolutely line you up against the wall and shoot you for not embracing their religion.

Islam will not embrace secularism. It is just another religion to them that has to submit to Islam. Play all the word games you want about 'it can't be religion' like life is some comedian bit.

Idiots bringing about your own demise pointing to the 'non religiousness' of founding father secularism.

You think a bunch of fresh off the boat Muslims give two ****s about thanksgiving? Our anything about America?

Y'all are only going to learn once it's too late.



I'd like to offer a recap of this thread of the discussion:

The Christians on this thread: "Islam is not compatible with Western Culture."

The atheists on this thread: "We should absolutely be concerned with immigrants who do not share our Constitutional values and be wary of allowing in residents who intend to undermine those values. But, we should also be careful not to blacklist entire populations because of a prejudice. And we feel we should discuss what is meant by 'Western Culture' as we do not agree with the a position that says that our foundational values exclude non-Christians from participation.

The Christians on this thread: "Why do you love Islam so much?"

The atheists on this thread:

Reply Quote
6
dermdoc
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:11a, 12/1/25
AG
Christians on this board
Look at recent history of Muslim violence, persecution of Christians, murders, terrorism, refusal to assimilate, etc.

Atheists on this board
Christians are just as bad because of their attitude towards Muslims.

Christians on this board
Huh?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Reply Quote
9
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to kurt vonnegut • 10:56a, 12/1/25
AG

Quote:
We should absolutely be concerned with immigrants who do not share our Constitutional values and be wary of allowing in residents who intend to undermine those values. But, we should also be careful not to blacklist entire populations because of a prejudice.

you don't see the absolute cognitive dissonance here? public policy doesn't happen at an individual level, it happens at population scale. how do you filter / be "wary" for people who don't share our values without "prejudice"?

this is like wishing for a pony from the tooth fairy.


Quote:
And we feel we should discuss what is meant by 'Western Culture' as we do not agree with the a position that says that our foundational values exclude non-Christians from participation.

we had the discussion. your answer was western culture is defined by consensus. well, if you let in the third world, consensus will change. you stopped replying after that.
Reply Quote
6
CrackerJackAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 11:16a, 12/1/25
AG
Sapper Redux said:
There's around 400,000 Muslims in Texas. Thats maybe 1% of the population. The xenophobia is just a touch ridiculous.


Name calling means nothing to me. I will flat out say what it is that you are trying to accuse me of at this point.

I don't want to live anywhere near a Muslim

I think Muslims are generally gross people who do not share the same culture or ideals that I do. I find rape, slavery, Islamic law and theocracy, pedophilia and the way they dress and smell disgusting.

I want to live around people that share the same culture and religion as me

I repeat I do not want to live around any Muslims and I think we should deport them all.

Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Sapper Redux
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CrackerJackAg • 11:20a, 12/1/25
CrackerJackAg said:
Sapper Redux said:
There's around 400,000 Muslims in Texas. Thats maybe 1% of the population. The xenophobia is just a touch ridiculous.


Name calling means nothing to me. I will flat out say what it is that you are trying to accuse me of at this point.

I don't want to live anywhere near a Muslim

I think Muslims are generally gross people who do not share the same culture or ideals that I do. I find rape, slavery, Islamic law and theocracy, pedophilia and the way they dress and smell disgusting.

I want to live around people that share the same culture and religion as me

I repeat I do not want to live around any Muslims and I think we should deport them all.



It's not name calling when you are just flat out embracing bigotry.
Reply Quote
5
CrackerJackAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 11:22a, 12/1/25
AG
Sapper Redux said:
CrackerJackAg said:
Sapper Redux said:
There's around 400,000 Muslims in Texas. Thats maybe 1% of the population. The xenophobia is just a touch ridiculous.


Name calling means nothing to me. I will flat out say what it is that you are trying to accuse me of at this point.

I don't want to live anywhere near a Muslim

I think Muslims are generally gross people who do not share the same culture or ideals that I do. I find rape, slavery, Islamic law and theocracy, pedophilia and the way they dress and smell disgusting.

I want to live around people that share the same culture and religion as me

I repeat I do not want to live around any Muslims and I think we should deport them all.



It's not name calling when you are just flat out embracing bigotry.


Correct. Like a warm hug.



Reply Quote
2
kurt vonnegut
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dermdoc • 11:27a, 12/1/25
AG
dermdoc said:
Christians on this board
Look at recent history of Muslim violence, persecution of Christians, murders, terrorism, refusal to assimilate, etc.

Atheists on this board
Christians are just as bad because of their attitude towards Muslims.

Christians on this board
Huh?


I think there has been pretty open acknowledgement that Islam is currently more violent that Christianity. But, you can continue to ignore it, if you'd like.

This discussion started as a warning that a sufficient Islamic population could result in those persons utilizing political and economic power to change things. I assume that the 'just as bad' comment is a reference to me pointing out that this is a page from an old playbook used for thousands of years to manipulate foreign populations - especially by Christians.

This reminds me of the saying you see here in Texas now in light of the number of people moving here from California: "Don't California My Texas". Basically, Christians don't want Muslims coming here and "Muslim-ing their country."

And because you aren't a hypocrite, I assume that you respect other countries that don't want Christians "Christian-ing their country". Right?
Reply Quote
3
Sapper Redux
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CrackerJackAg • 11:28a, 12/1/25
CrackerJackAg said:
Sapper Redux said:
CrackerJackAg said:
Sapper Redux said:
There's around 400,000 Muslims in Texas. Thats maybe 1% of the population. The xenophobia is just a touch ridiculous.


Name calling means nothing to me. I will flat out say what it is that you are trying to accuse me of at this point.

I don't want to live anywhere near a Muslim

I think Muslims are generally gross people who do not share the same culture or ideals that I do. I find rape, slavery, Islamic law and theocracy, pedophilia and the way they dress and smell disgusting.

I want to live around people that share the same culture and religion as me

I repeat I do not want to live around any Muslims and I think we should deport them all.



It's not name calling when you are just flat out embracing bigotry.


Correct. Like a warm hug.





Taking pride in your pathetic hatred is certainly a choice. One made by the worst people imaginable over and over again. But if that's who you want to associate with, go for it.
Reply Quote
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to kurt vonnegut • 11:30a, 12/1/25
AG
Quote:
Basically, Christians don't want Muslims coming here and "Muslim-ing their country."

correct.

Quote:
And because you aren't a hypocrite, I assume that you respect other countries that don't want Christians "Christian-ing their country". Right?

absolutely not, because the world is not a neutral place and all cultures and moral systems are not equal. the values Christianity brings are good, and their absence is evil.
Reply Quote
6
Sapper Redux
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 11:33a, 12/1/25
Zobel said:
Quote:
Basically, Christians don't want Muslims coming here and "Muslim-ing their country."

correct.

Quote:
And because you aren't a hypocrite, I assume that you respect other countries that don't want Christians "Christian-ing their country". Right?

absolutely not, because the world is not a neutral place and all cultures and moral systems are not equal. the values Christianity brings are good, and their absence is evil.


You realize rights like protecting life and liberty are not exclusive to Christianity? Or are you only speaking of unprovable metaphysical claims?
Reply Quote
1
swimmerbabe11
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to kurt vonnegut • 11:33a, 12/1/25
kurt vonnegut said:

And because you aren't a hypocrite, I assume that you respect other countries that don't want Christians "Christian-ing their country". Right?


Theoretically, yes. I think they have the right to protect their countries the way they see fit.

Practically? No, because everyone should be Christian. Because Christianity is better than Islam.

If I didn't think that, I'd be muslim. And generally, muslim countries definitely make sure Christians are unwelcome in their countries...violently. In ways that I find abhorrent and objectively wrong. In ways that nullify my first statement.


(and Californians really shouldn't California my Texas)
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
CrackerJackAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 11:35a, 12/1/25
AG
Sapper Redux said:
CrackerJackAg said:
Sapper Redux said:
CrackerJackAg said:
Sapper Redux said:
There's around 400,000 Muslims in Texas. Thats maybe 1% of the population. The xenophobia is just a touch ridiculous.


Name calling means nothing to me. I will flat out say what it is that you are trying to accuse me of at this point.

I don't want to live anywhere near a Muslim

I think Muslims are generally gross people who do not share the same culture or ideals that I do. I find rape, slavery, Islamic law and theocracy, pedophilia and the way they dress and smell disgusting.

I want to live around people that share the same culture and religion as me

I repeat I do not want to live around any Muslims and I think we should deport them all.



It's not name calling when you are just flat out embracing bigotry.


Correct. Like a warm hug.





Taking pride in your pathetic hatred is certainly a choice. One made by the worst people imaginable over and over again. But if that's who you want to associate with, go for it.


Thanks!! My social group is awesome. Christian, well to do and living in clean neighborhoods without Pakistani dudes running around trying to rape our daughters.

In fact, I don't even have a single Islamic apologist like you in my circle.

I have no obligation to not hate a false religion and evil.

I am Orthodox. There are so many Arab and Persian people that I think are absolutely wonderful and good friends with.

It's funny that you use the term bigotry, considering that Islam has bigotry coded into its belief system. Then someone like you tries to then claim that somebody's being bigoted because you don't accept their bigoted belief system.







Reply Quote
3
kurt vonnegut
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 11:36a, 12/1/25
AG
Zobel said:

Quote:
We should absolutely be concerned with immigrants who do not share our Constitutional values and be wary of allowing in residents who intend to undermine those values. But, we should also be careful not to blacklist entire populations because of a prejudice.

you don't see the absolute cognitive dissonance here? public policy doesn't happen at an individual level, it happens at population scale. how do you filter / be "wary" for people who don't share our values without "prejudice"?

this is like wishing for a pony from the tooth fairy.


Quote:
And we feel we should discuss what is meant by 'Western Culture' as we do not agree with the a position that says that our foundational values exclude non-Christians from participation.

we had the discussion. your answer was western culture is defined by consensus. well, if you let in the third world, consensus will change. you stopped replying after that.


Other than arguing that religious affiliation should not be a disqualifier from entering this country, what public policy have I endorsed.?

You seem to be arguing against the idea of unmitigated large scale immigration from Muslim countries. Cool . . . where I have I taken an opposing stand?
Reply Quote
1
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 11:37a, 12/1/25
AG
you realize asking a question isn't making a point?
Reply Quote
2
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to kurt vonnegut • 11:37a, 12/1/25
AG
answer the question. how do you filter for people who don't share our values without prejudice?
Reply Quote
5
one MEEN Ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to kurt vonnegut • 11:47a, 12/1/25
AG
Derm and Zobel about covered it but the reality is you're cheering on your own suicide. The idea of blacklisting entire countries is such an overriding moral appeal that you'll let basically any worldview in. Even worldviews that will seek to destroy you. And you go, 'since we can't definitively agree on what american and western culture is (because you reject christianity as its foundation) that we are frozen with inaction and must allow everyone in.'

Its the ultimate left leaning irony. The desire to virtue signal fairness and anti-bigotry you are blinded to your own inability to see a more foundational good vs evil here. And who are you even proving this point to? You're an atheist, there is no moral accounting, no right, no wrong. Why ruin your own country and livelihood ultimately?

And here is the truth, you'll advocate for these things and then hide behind your nice neighborhood, your high fences and high costs of living that filter any of the undesirables out of sight. In your mind, why not have unchecked muslim migration from around the globe come in? They'll never cause unrest in your own neighborhood.

So why not import 100x muslims than we currently are? Would you support that? So whats your address? Where would you like me to send the next 10,000 muslim somolian immigrants to be relocated to your neighborhood?

Like a normal reddit atheist over here, you've got your star trek memes on deck and you offer no solution to the problem. Tell me, how many muslims should america import per year? What the max number you'd be okay with and why? You reject my answer, provide your own.

Reply Quote
5
1 edit
one MEEN Ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 11:50a, 12/1/25
AG
Zobel said:
answer the question. how do you filter for people who don't share our values without prejudice?

We sort by equifax credit score.

There are no US equivalent credit scores in the third world, so no third worlders.
Reply Quote
3
kurt vonnegut
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Zobel • 11:50a, 12/1/25
AG
Zobel said:
answer the question. how do you filter for people who don't share our values without prejudice?


Oaths to the Constitution, required civics classes, interviews to determine willingness to conform to standards / values, orientation programs about rights and responsibilities.

The prejudice should be placed against those values incompatible with our Constitutional values, not the God they worship. And if wish to draw no distinction between those, you go ahead. The fact remains though, that I am not advocating open borders or open immigration from the Muslim world. If Muslims, on average, tend to be less willing to conform to American values, then I would expect an immigrant rate from Muslims that should be lower.
Reply Quote
1
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to kurt vonnegut • 11:55a, 12/1/25
AG

Quote:
The prejudice should be placed against those values incompatible with our Constitutional values, not the God they worship.

these are fundamentally related. lived values are downstream of moral / faith / philosophical claims.

people who worship death-gods aren't going to have the same understanding of the right to life as you are.



Quote:
Oaths to the Constitution, required civics classes, interviews to determine willingness to conform to standards / values, orientation programs about rights and responsibilities...If Muslims, on average, tend to be less willing to conform to American values, then I would expect an immigrant rate from Muslims that should be lower.

this will result in a disparate impact, as you note. that is legally considered discrimination. sorry, but that doesn't meet your own criteria.
Reply Quote
3
kurt vonnegut
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to one MEEN Ag • 11:55a, 12/1/25
AG
one MEEN Ag said:
Derm and Zobel about covered it but the reality is you're cheering on your own suicide. The idea of blacklisting entire countries is such an overriding moral appeal that you'll let basically any worldview in. Even worldviews that will seek to destroy you. And you go, 'since we can't definitively agree on what american and western culture is (because you reject christianity as its foundation) that we are frozen with inaction and must allow everyone in.'

Its the ultimate left leaning irony. The desire to virtue signal fairness and anti-bigotry you are blinded to your own inability to see a more foundational good vs evil here. And who are you even proving this point to? You're an atheist, there is no moral accounting, no right, no wrong. Why ruin your own country and livelihood ultimately?

And here is the truth, you'll advocate for these things and then hide behind your nice neighborhood, your high fences and high costs of living that filter any of the undesirables out of sight. In your mind, why not have unchecked muslim migration from around the globe come in? They'll never cause unrest in your own neighborhood.

So why no important 100x muslims than we currently are? Would you support that? So whats your address? Where would you like me to send the next 10,000 muslim somolian immigrants to be relocated to your neighborhood?

Like a normal reddit atheist over here, you've got your star trek memes on deck and you offer no solution to the problem. Tell me, how many muslims should america import per year? What the max number you'd be okay with and why? You reject my answer, provide your own.


Me: We shouldn't let people in if they don't share Constitutional values.

You: Why do you want to open borders to Muslim countries?

Me: WTF are you talking about?
Reply Quote
1
kurt vonnegut
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to swimmerbabe11 • 11:56a, 12/1/25
AG
swimmerbabe11 said:
kurt vonnegut said:

And because you aren't a hypocrite, I assume that you respect other countries that don't want Christians "Christian-ing their country". Right?


Theoretically, yes. I think they have the right to protect their countries the way they see fit.

Practically? No, because everyone should be Christian. Because Christianity is better than Islam.

If I didn't think that, I'd be muslim. And generally, muslim countries definitely make sure Christians are unwelcome in their countries...violently. In ways that I find abhorrent and objectively wrong. In ways that nullify my first statement.


(and Californians really shouldn't California my Texas)


Ah yes . . . our values are better and so its okay when we invade your society, undermine its foundations, and try to bend it to our views. But, when you do it, its wrong.

Swimmer, with all due respect, I think you said the quiet part out loud on this one.

Reply Quote
1
Zobel
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to kurt vonnegut • 11:56a, 12/1/25
AG
what oath to the constitution have you made? just curious
Reply Quote
4
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.