Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
Post Reply
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Fooloso4 »

As cited in Wiki, Islam in the United States:
In a 2007 survey titled Muslim Americans: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream, the Pew Research Center found Muslim Americans to be "largely integrated, happy with their lives, and moderate with respect to many of the issues that have divided Muslims and Westerners around the world."
Here is an instructive piece from The Nation: “What’s Life Like in America’s First City With a Muslim-Majority City Council?” (www.thenation.com/article/whats-life-li ... y-council/)

In short, it has much in common with other immigrant communities - people are interested in peace and prosperity, and both can be found. Contrary to worries of the imposition of Sharia Law many fled to the United States to escape from it.

As is also the case with Judaism there is a long tradition of scriptural interpretation. In both cases we find changes in belief and practices that reflect changes in values and understanding. In both cases there are laws and practices that even the most devout do not obey or approve.

Christianity may be thought of as the religion of love, but there is a long history of Holy Wars between Catholics and Protestants for the glory of God, King, and Country. There is a hatred that is manifest in the New Testament that, as Nietzsche suggests, turns inward because the early Christians were powerless to exercise outward power. It is a hatred of the Jew and of the self. Christianity’s persecution of the Jews rivals whatever can be found in Islam or elsewhere for depravity and ruthlessness. Self hatred comes largely from Paul’s teachings about the sinful nature of the body. The psychological warfare waged by Paul is so insidious that many are not aware of it. If Christianity were not the prevailing religion of the West there would be may who would be all too ready to tell us why Christian immigration must be banned.

If we look at this from an historical perspective it becomes clear that the problem of immigration is not a “Muslim problem”. The same thing has occurred whenever there has been a large influx of foreigners, Irish, Italian, Jews, and others. Even Trump’s beloved blonde haired blue eyed Norwegians and other noble races would become a problem if millions attempted to immigrate.
Dlaw
Posts: 474
Joined: January 7th, 2014, 1:56 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Dlaw »

The rise of the anti-immigrant Far Right in America has been breathtaking. It's like every American racist simultaneously found an issue they can agree on and agree to spout as if there's some validity to it.

That's why I use this "just let the women in" argument. It instantly shows them to be liars.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14995
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Littlemoon wrote: January 15th, 2018, 6:22 pm
Greta wrote: January 15th, 2018, 4:57 pmI do not see this as simply as you do. Terrorists are an excuse. The main reason is that Europe is already groaning under the pressure of overpopulation. Are governments - chosen by the people to represent them - right to allow in so many extra migrants that it significantly and permanently reduces people's standards of living? How many refugees would each of us be prepared to permanently take into our homes - sacrificing our comfort to save lives?

The situation has been caused by corrupt governments in the Middle East exploiting and dominating, rather than representing, the people. Their gross negligence and corruption have shunted the responsibility for the safety of millions on to European governments, who are now forced to choose between the happiness and wellbeing of existing residence and the security and safety of refugees.

This is a wicked problem without any satisfactory solution.
I understand what you are saying but answer me this: What is a million diluted by 27 countries that constitutes the UE?
I think we are actually going into another route which I share. I think the problem here is culture. The problem that I see with this "en masse" immigration is the slow input, almost rubbing the forced but not quite, of their customs in our culture. For example, I don't agree with us shifting our way of life (and culture in the bottom row) to fit with their comfort zone. I know this is hypocritical but they are "guests" in the countries and they should respect the culture, as much as we do when we visit their countries, or visited.

As much as I dislike to agree with this, the problem of all this was America to mess around in those governments under the false pretense that they were saving the people, when in overall, all they wanted was their petroleum.
I agree. While the rest of Europe bears the brunt of the US's, England's, Poland's and Australia's destructive invasion of Iraq, those countries are generally amongst the most red-hot about limiting refugee intake, passing their responsibilities, expenses and trouble on to others. However, the responsibility, as in Africa, also lies in the culture's inability to adapt to the modern world, falling ever further behind as their "leaders" waste inordinate resources and human capital on corruption, nepotism, and ancient superstitions and traditions, which renders the cultures uncompetitive, resulting in appalling living standards and understandable discord.

This century, our brave new world will be increasingly pared down by pressures of population, resources and climate. Some nations and cultures will make it, and others will fall by the wayside, become "extinct", as has always been the case.
Littlemoon
Posts: 51
Joined: December 13th, 2017, 2:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Littlemoon »

As much as it pains me to say which can be considered hypocritical... I wonder how much dictatorships are required to keep the peace "balanced". Speaking about facts, and strictly facts, if we take a look at the dictators in the Arabic countries (Kadafi, Hussein and many others) that got taken down, terrorists groups like ISIS and other conflicting groups emerged. So in a way, these dictatorships kept these groups on a leash.
So I wonder if some times dictatorships are a necessary evil. Although it is conflicting because western countries (Europe mainly) have a sense of high morality in terms of helping the others in need, which is very difficult to chose the lesser evil.

But if we look to the other side, dictatorships won't let those societies evolve and keep up with the evolution in a sense. It is a really difficult thing to do.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Burning ghost wrote: January 15th, 2018, 3:39 am Spectrum -

Well, you know we disagree on the later part of that. Even if your rational has produced a conservative estimate, I am not willing to punish 80% of people because 20% of them have completely different views and moral values (which they must if they are not willing to act upon them.)
The problem is -at present - we cannot identify the 20% who are evil prone. In addition those who are not at present evil prone, can also be turned to be evil prone upon various conditions, e.g. supposedly goody-two-shoes turned to jihadists out of the blue.

The theory is for 100% of Muslims, there will be a natural 20% of evil prone Muslims.
It is a fact there are loads of evil laden elements in the Quran.
It is also a fact, those evil laden elements has triggered those natural evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils.

This is like if you have plant-X which is very poisonous and can cause death.
If 20% of X is mixed [difficult to separate out thereafter] into some other food Y, would you consume food Y because there are ONLY 20% of X. Rationally, No. Then most effective solution is to avoid it 100% or throw it away.

It is the same with Islam and Muslims. It would be safer not to take in any Muslims given the choice.
The solution in the longer run is deal with the root cause, i.e. the ideology. Just like Nazism, fascism, and the likes, these ideologies must be neutralized.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Burning ghost wrote: January 15th, 2018, 2:32 pm Dlaw -

There is literally no moral grounding for openly discriminating against an entire group of people by association when the proportion committing crimes are so minute. Such nonsense leads to calling all Caucasians "white supremacists" and all people of African decent "criminal."

If that is the kind of "rationality" you favour I would suggest you take a long hard look in the mirror before you start saying taller and stronger men are more dangerous and should therefore be put behind bars so women feel more protected and safe.

Radical feminism is still radicalism. It is a slippery slope to violence.
The basis is we are not discriminating against an entire group of people on the basis as people.

The critical point is this group of people are led by an ideology that has very malignant elements, e.g. like Nazism.

The point to drive at is, it you want to emigrate to the West, do not believe in that religion that has an ideology with very malignant elements.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Littlemoon wrote: January 15th, 2018, 5:43 pm What I'm seeing here in Europe is a scandal to be quite honest. You see this movement of extremists from left and right saying no to immigration. Some governments shut down their frontiers (Hungary for example) to prevent people coming to Europe. And the arguments they use are absurd. They fundamentally accentuate xenophobia by instilling fear into the population. While some of the terrorists, undoubtedly, pick this moment to spread (it's impossible to keep track with the millions that came to europe) and disseminate in europe, we are speaking of a minority.
I'm appalled these governments can be so cruel by denying these people safe passage when everything was taken from them. Even children flee from the horror. How can you look into a child's eyes and deny him refugee? But of course of these "governments" it is far easier to dictate and instill xenophobia behind a thick curtain that sees no people but numbers.
It is shameful! No better word can describe this.
I believe you got it wrong.

I believe the resistance to taking in refugee is the fact that the majority of refugees are Muslims, i.e. Islam the ideology has an inherent potential to destroy existing society and their cultural, i.e. cultural genocides.

Note there are refugees everywhere, but wherever there are Muslim refugees the social problems and terrorists attacks [like in Europe] and the West increased significantly. Why?

Note my argument on why we need to deal with Islam and Muslims as a specific problem which should be different from problems of refugees in general.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Fooloso4 wrote: January 15th, 2018, 6:43 pm If we look at this from an historical perspective it becomes clear that the problem of immigration is not a “Muslim problem”. The same thing has occurred whenever there has been a large influx of foreigners, Irish, Italian, Jews, and others. Even Trump’s beloved blonde haired blue eyed Norwegians and other noble races would become a problem if millions attempted to immigrate.
There has been immigration and refugees historically and everywhere. Generally, in the initial stages there will be problems but eventually most ethnics and tribalistic differences will meld together because there are no absolute laws to separate them.

But with Islam and Muslims it is different.
The God within the religion of Islam do not permit genuine integration between Muslims [pure] and non-Muslims [impure, dirty, sinful, inferior and the likes]. Anyone who contravene this will go to HELL!!!

The ultimate purpose for each Muslim in accordance to the Quran is to conquer the World and dominate the rest of non-believers [impure, dirty, sinful, inferior and the likes].

If Muslims are the minority, they must PRETEND to be seen to integrate superficially but they should never let their religious soul to integrate with non-believers [impure, dirty, sinful, inferior and the likes].
The above are stated in immmutable commands from their God, thus this absolute law of non-integration is eternal.

If you do not believe me, read the Quran thoroughly [not an easy task] at least 50 times.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14995
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Then again, Christians are also supposed to distance themselves from the mainstream but, like Muslims, they don't obey every passage of their holy book either:

2 Corinthians 6:14-15 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?

Deuteronomy 7:3 Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons.

Ezra 10:11 Now honour the LORD, the God of your ancestors, and do his will. Separate yourselves from the peoples around you and from your foreign wives.

Proverbs 22:25 or you will learn to be like them and endanger your soul.

Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum »

Greta wrote: January 15th, 2018, 11:53 pm Then again, Christians are also supposed to distance themselves from the mainstream but, like Muslims, they don't obey every passage of their holy book either:

2 Corinthians 6:14-15 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?

Deuteronomy 7:3 Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons.

Ezra 10:11 Now honour the LORD, the God of your ancestors, and do his will. Separate yourselves from the peoples around you and from your foreign wives.

Proverbs 22:25 or you will learn to be like them and endanger your soul.

Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
The verses in the OT are overriden by those in the NT.
Note the overriding maxim from NT, Love your enemies, love your neighbors, give the other cheek.

As for "2 Corinthians 6:14-15 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers." there are various interpretations that do not point to avoiding non-believers absolutely. Here is one;
In 2 Corinthians 6:14–18 Paul takes up the question of being mismatched (literally “unequally yoked”) with non-Christians. This has implications for both marriage (which is outside our scope here) and working relationships. Up to this point, Paul has vividly portrayed the importance of good relationships with the people with whom we live and work. Paul says in 1 Cor. 5:9–10 that we should work with non-Christians, and he discusses how to do so in 1 Cor. 10:25–33.
...
...
Finally, we must be careful to not turn Paul’s words into an us-versus-them mentality against nonbelievers.
We cannot judge or condemn nonbelievers as inherently unethical because Paul himself refused to do so. “For what have I to do with judging those outside? Is it not those who are inside that you are to judge? God will judge those outside” (1 Cor. 5:12–13).
The truth is that we ourselves need Christ’s grace every day to keep us from leading others astray by our own sin. We are called not to judge, but to discern whether our work is fulfilling the purposes and ways of Christ.

https://www.theologyofwork.org/new-test ... ans-614-18
Christianity has its negatives as a religion and its attitude to non-believers but as evident such "us versus them" is not as evil as that in the ethos Islam.

In the case of Islam, the commands and its evil ethos against non-believers are very clear and specific.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Burning ghost »

Spectrum -

Of course there has to be some form of reasonable "damage control." A blanket ban doesn't seem like it would help much long term. Of course no matter what system is in place some will slip through the net, and some will just be bad people (people are people.) We see with immigrants that it usually takes a generation or two to integrate properly. I am not quite sure how societies can quicken integration into the local culture, and I do not believe any country should be expected to accept cultural/religious/traditional attitudes that go against their own.

As usual it seems to come down simple human instincts. People like to be around people they can relate to, so we find that immigrants do wish to spend time with fellow immigrants because they can relate to each others circumstances. This is probably one area which could be used to benefit integration into a country. If the immigrants are mixed up, rather than grouped together in relation to ethnicity, religion or nationality, then they are probably much more likely to learn to adapt to new cultures being exposed to a large variety of differing views; the problem is then the opposite effect of this leading to further isolation due to being bombarded by so many contrary ideas all at once.

Another problem is in many countries the idea of freedom of speech and such can be used against them. We either have to accept certain limits to our freedom or expose ourselves to more danger. Sadly people view "danger" through the lens of "fear." Where there is danger there can be great gains if the situation is managed well. At the moment modern societies are still, and likely will always, struggle with these conflicting positions.

Tit for tat shows us that sometimes we need to allow people the space to make mistakes and be willing to forgive them, yet if the mistakes are repeated over and over there has to be a counteraction against such offenses (intentional or not.)

Life is as delightful as it is confusing :)
AKA badgerjelly
Fooloso4
Posts: 3601
Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Fooloso4 »

Spectrum:
There has been immigration and refugees historically and everywhere. Generally, in the initial stages there will be problems but eventually most ethnics and tribalistic differences will meld together because there are no absolute laws to separate them.

But with Islam and Muslims it is different.
You might think so but the facts do not bear this out. See the article I linked to above. In addition, there is also an absolute Law in Judaism that separates and distinguishes the People of God from all others. Christianity is evangelical and from the beginning has sought to share the good news, that is, convert nonbelievers. From its early stages it was catholic, but this served to be both inclusive and exclusive. This included the exclusion of those Christians who followed their own inspiration rather than the Church doctrine and practice. They were labelled heretics, slandered, and persecuted. Then, of course, was the inquisition.
The verses in the OT are overriden by those in the NT.
That may be true for Christians but certainly not for Jews. There is nothing the overrides the Law. This is the reason why the disciples of Jesus banished Paul.
… there are various interpretations …
The same is true of the Quran and Islam, including legal, esoteric, historical, and philosophical interpretations.
If you do not believe me, read the Quran thoroughly [not an easy task] at least 50 times.
Perhaps instead of feeding your confirmation bias you might look more closely at Sufism (the poems of Rumi are well known and well loved in the West), and the works of the philosophers Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and Ibn Rushd (Averroes) whose works on Plato and Aristotle rival anything produced in the West.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 »

Spectrum wrote:If Muslims are the minority, they must PRETEND to be seen to integrate superficially but they should never let their religious soul to integrate with non-believers [impure, dirty, sinful, inferior and the likes]. The above are stated in immmutable commands from their God, thus this absolute law of non-integration is eternal.
In reply to Greta's point about similar sentiments in the Old Testament:
Spectrum wrote:As for "2 Corinthians 6:14-15 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers." there are various interpretations that do not point to avoiding non-believers absolutely.
As Fooloso4 said, there also appear to be various interpretations of the Quran. This concept of "Taqiya" appears to be interpreted differently by different people. The Wikipedia entry for it appears to state that at least one interpretation is that it was, historically, a defense in the face of persecution. Some excerpts from the article are as follows:

"Yarden Mariuma, sociologist at Columbia University, writes: "Taqiyya is an Islamic juridical term whose shifting meaning relates to when a Muslim is allowed, under Sharia law, to lie. A concept whose meaning has varied significantly among Islamic sects, scholars, countries, and political regimes, it nevertheless is one of the key terms used by recent anti-Muslim polemicists." Islamic scholars state that taqiyya is only permissible under duress, and that the inflationary use of the term qualifies as "a staple of right-wing Islamophobia in North America" (Mohammad Fadel 2013)"

"The doctrine of taqiyya was developed at the time of Ja'far al-Sadiq (d. 148 AH/765 AD), the sixth Imamiya Imam. It served to protect Shias when Al-Mansur, the Abbasid caliph, conducted a brutal and oppressive campaign against Alids and their supporters. Religious dissimulation or Taqiyya while maintaining mental reservation is considered lawful in Shi'ism "in situations where there is overwhelming danger of loss of life or property and where no danger to religion would occur thereby". Shi'is lived mostly as a minority among a frequently-hostile Sunni majority until the rise of Safavid dynasty. This condition made taqiyya doctrine important to Shias."

Not being an authority on Islam, I don't know whether this Wikipedia entry on "Taqiyya" is accurate. But if it is accurate, it seems reasonable to me to suppose that the vast majority of Muslims are no more likely to use "Taqiyya" as a divine commandment to secretly plot against the unbelievers than Christians are to take those passages from the Old Testament as literal commandments applicable in the modern world.
Dlaw
Posts: 474
Joined: January 7th, 2014, 1:56 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Dlaw »

Spectrum wrote: January 15th, 2018, 11:17 pm
Burning ghost wrote: January 15th, 2018, 2:32 pm Dlaw -

There is literally no moral grounding for openly discriminating against an entire group of people by association when the proportion committing crimes are so minute. Such nonsense leads to calling all Caucasians "white supremacists" and all people of African decent "criminal."

If that is the kind of "rationality" you favour I would suggest you take a long hard look in the mirror before you start saying taller and stronger men are more dangerous and should therefore be put behind bars so women feel more protected and safe.

Radical feminism is still radicalism. It is a slippery slope to violence.
The basis is we are not discriminating against an entire group of people on the basis as people.

The critical point is this group of people are led by an ideology that has very malignant elements, e.g. like Nazism.

The point to drive at is, it you want to emigrate to the West, do not believe in that religion that has an ideology with very malignant elements.
The problem is that the ideology does not have a negative effect on the vast majority of Muslims, but at the same time, virtually all the Muslims who cause trouble because they suffer this ill effect are men.

I think it's pretty obvious that men must be the "carriers" of jihadism because women

1) Rarely participate in the worst behaviors.

2) Cannot be in the leadership of jihadist groups, by definition.

So, again, the most logical thing to do would be to ban MEN from Muslim countries - in fact banning only men of a certain age range would almost certainly be enough.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Burning ghost »

No. Single parents children fair far worse. Maybe you're not considering that you're talking about breaking up families.
AKA badgerjelly
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021