Printable View
You spent time thinking about it and this is what you came up with? You are further off the tracks than I had previously thought. Clearly you lack the cognitive capacity to understand it. Either that or you do know and are purposely being deceitful to try to further the evil cause. Which is it, are you just stupid or are you evil?Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
ad hominem (again)Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
ad hom and false choiceQuote:
Either that or you do know and are purposely being deceitful to try to further the evil cause. Which is it, are you just stupid or are you evil?
I dont think you're stupid, nor evil. And I think it's pretty cool you decided to run for office. I admire that.
But for a discussion on an issue as intricate as immigration to have any substance, it going have to consist of more than informal logical fallacies. Even the assertion that part of the group did evil things, therefore the whole group is evil, is itself a generalization fallacy. Our republic, indeed our western civilization, is built on better reasoning than this. You know it, and I know you it.
I'm seriously willing to set aside the Champ967 alter-ego for the purpose of a real conservation on this thread, because the immigration issue is important to me. But if calling me stupid and/or evil is how you're going to reply to counter-examples, I'll go back to making twss's in the football forum.
I agree as it is an important discussion and it would be great to discuss without resorting to logical fallacies. You do recognize that this statement:Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
"Even the assertion that part of the group did evil things, therefore the whole group is evil, is itself a generalization fallacy."
is itself a logical fallacy right?
I don't know what the answer is. For immigration in general and issues of terrorism. My general ideas are:
It should be less financially burdensome to enter the country legally.
It should be much more difficult to enter the country illegally.
We need to find a better way to determine if people coming to the country mean to do us harm.
I have no problem with placing extra scrutiny on immigrants from countries that have a large population of radical religious adherents.
Like most religions, Islam has some troubling components. It also seems to have a higher than average rate of exported terror events (maybe this view is affected by media bias in what is reported or my own biases on what I pay attention to). While Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists do bad things and are certainly capable of evil, Islam seems over represented in religiously motivated acts of terrorism (particularly when filtered by acts that occur outside the home country of the perpetrator). Again, maybe this is my own bias.
lolz -- true. noted.Quote:
Originally Posted by detltu
Your points are well made and well taken.Quote:
I don't know what the answer is. For immigration in general and issues of terrorism. My general ideas are:
It should be less financially burdensome to enter the country legally.
It should be much more difficult to enter the country illegally.
We need to find a better way to determine if people coming to the country mean to do us harm.
I have no problem with placing extra scrutiny on immigrants from countries that have a large population of radical religious adherents.
Like most religions, Islam has some troubling components. It also seems to have a higher than average rate of exported terror events (maybe this view is affected by media bias in what is reported or my own biases on what I pay attention to). While Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists do bad things and are certainly capable of evil, Islam seems over represented in religiously motivated acts of terrorism (particularly when filtered by acts that occur outside the home country of the perpetrator). Again, maybe this is my own bias.
It may very well be that adherence to Islam corresponds to an increased risk of violence acts. But baldly asserting it (with perhaps a smattering of anecdotal evidence) is, to me at least, insufficient grounds for policy-making. Especially policy that's contrary to our society's longstanding prohibition on making distinctions between persons with respect to their faith.
"I read the Koran and found it troubling" is pretty weak sauce. "I found 100 articles about Muslims behaving badly" is something, but still not enough to shape my thinking about the roughly 1 billion other Muslims who dont have articles them."
I agree. I don't think we should base policy on religion in general. I am not sure how to differentiate radical sects from the religion in general and I do think radical components of a religion would be a useful tool for identifying dangerous traits. I think it is a dangerous thing to try to predict future behavior. The only decent compromise I know of is to impose restrictions based on past illegal behavior and perhaps extra scrutiny for people coming from countries with lacking records or significantly different laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
Does Islam consider themselves a religion? Pretty sure they consider it as a way of life and/or a race.Quote:
Originally Posted by detltu
That may be a distinction without a difference. Like folks who say keto is a lifestyle, not a diet. Or that Star Wars is a religion.Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Changing the label doesnt change the substance.
Its not changing a label its defining the tenets. What are the tenets of the black Israelites? The Jews?Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
Gonna try this...
Definitons:
Good = when someone does no harm to others. That everything they believe follows the "turn the other cheek" philosophy. That forgive and forget is their mantra.
Bad = if you don't do as I want you to, I will kill you.
In Islam following the teachings of the religion requires one to be "bad." As a Muslim, you are only a "good" person when you go against the philosophy of your religion.
In all other religions, if you don't adhere to the definition of good (as defined here) you are acting outside the philosophy of that religion.
So, we have people who were raised as Christians or Jews, and maybe some other religions, who reject the teachings of those religions and engage in bad acts. You have to REJECT the religion, and its teachings, to be "bad." In Islam, you have to adhere to the teachings to be "bad."
Islam is rooted in the initial philosophy of Muhammad who schooled his followers to force everyone to convert to his "religion" or they must be killed. And this is not just some rhetoric, it is historic fact. And this is not just some fanatic rantings of a madman 1200 years ago, it has been practiced ever since. My God! do you know what ISIS did, and does, under the name of that philosophy? Barbaric, disgusting acts of violence!
For any so-called reasoned person to try to draw parallels between Islam and other religions conveys they are either stupid. i.e. cannot seem to learn the truth, or knows the truth and supports it (evil).
I'm not sure that your interpretation of the tenants of Islam is going to line up with either its most common teachings or practice.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
ISIS is kind of an extreme outlier. I mean, a lot of those people they killed were also practicing Muslims.
I like your definitions. Looks like they struck again in New Jersey today. I like the way Thomas Jefferson handled them at Tripoli when they were robbing and stealing our ships. That's the only way they can be defeated is by death. This is not going to be over anytime soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
All anyone has to do is study a little history.Quote:
Originally Posted by DONW
Just ordered a book on the period when Islam was almost erased from the face of the Earth. Occurred in the 13th Century. Well, I'm very curious to see exactly how close it really was. It's hard to imagine erasing it completely. Surely even pockets of Muslims would have remained. But, that's the premise of the book according to the summary.
Beyond salvation then?Quote:
Originally Posted by DONW
Did the One whose birth we'll soon commemorate not die for them? Was His sacrifice insufficient for Muslims? Or does the profession of Islamic faith so irrevocably corrupt one's soul as to make them unsavable? Are all the former Muslims who profess Gospel conversion ... insincere?
Don doesn't buy into all that stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Champ967
this. I think universalizing this description of Islam is roughly equivalent to saying all Christians are Amish.Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu