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
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14993
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Funny thing, I worked with a moderate Muslim, even though she wore the full regalia every day.

I assumed she was moderate because we used to enjoy a great banter daily, and she cried and hugged a few of us when her work was finished and she had to leave.

Or maybe the Muslim fellow I worked with who had converted to Islam to be marry his Muslim wife. Another lovely person.

Or the Muslim fellow I drank beer with at a function of a dating website.

Billions of people - all just the same - I don't think so. The above post is simply the kind of demonisation and propaganda that people are programmed to embrace during times of war.

What do we do with home grown Muslims who convert from Christianity? Throw them in prison? Kill' em? Negotiate with middle eastern countries to see if any of them want the converts?
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 »

So, John, are you going to take me up on the challenge I set you: to meet some Muslims?

-- Updated Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:38 pm to add the following --

Greta:
Funny thing, I worked with a moderate Muslim, even though she wore the full regalia every day...Billions of people - all just the same - I don't think so.
Quite. Many years ago I worked for a while as a school teacher in a school in the West Midlands of England, an area with a fairly large Muslim population. I didn't last long because I was a terrible teacher. (There is, or was back then, a piece of advice for new teachers that I heard at teacher training college: "don't smile until Christmas". Or, in other words. "give them an inch and they'll take a mile". Unfortunately, I smiled.) But in the brief time that I was teaching it was an interesting chance to meet kids from a variety of different backgrounds and also to meet their parents on parents' evenings. Being in a situation where you have to both praise them and shout at them, congratulate them and physically pull them apart when a fight breaks out, sometimes in the same lesson, seemed to me the quickest way possible to realize how mad this human tendency to lump people together in groups is, and to realize that personal human contact with individuals is the best antidote for this "Fear the stranger. Hate the stranger. Demonize the stranger." attitude that is fueled by the modern information world.

I sympathize with John's apparent inability to make this kind of personal human contact. That's why I suggest that he tries it and stops just reading about people.
User avatar
Scribbler60
Posts: 177
Joined: December 17th, 2015, 11:48 am

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Scribbler60 »

Greta wrote:The above post is simply the kind of demonisation and propaganda that people are programmed to embrace during times of war.
You're right, of course, Greta, that the demonization of an identifiable group - collective guilt, if you will - is abhorrent in the extreme.

That said, there is something about the Muslim faith that has a tendency to give a small percentage but substantial number of adherents/converts supernatural license to do and say the most awful things.

Pew Research released a study in 2013 that looked at Muslim beliefs, specifically Sharia, and found an unsettling number of Muslims who supported such things as stoning for adultery, beheading for apostasy or homosexuality and the like.

See Beliefs About Sharia

And a poll in the UK found that ...more than half of British Muslims believe homosexuality should be illegal and that 39% believe that "wives should always obey their husbands."

Bear in mind, these are people who are considered well-integrated into modern Western society, but still hold views that were developed before the Middle Ages.

Are these the types of beliefs that Western democracies should be welcoming into our midst?

We rightly abhor slavery, child labour, child rape*, throwing homosexuals off rooftops and such as antithetical to modern society. Do we not have a responsibility to our fellow humans to call out these sorts of beliefs as abhorrent and even cruel, despite the fact that we may offend someone in the process?

While I do not agree with the OP that we should ban immigration based on one's religious convictions, I believe that it is incumbent upon us in Western society to have rational conversations about these things with an end to the further progression of the human race. It seems that if we even start to discuss these things, those that are concerned are painted with the brush of racism and bigotry. That, to me, is no way to have a discussion.

And, for the record, I do know two Muslim couples extremely well. Though all four of them were brought up in the Muslim tradition (two from Pakistan, two from Syria), they have all left the faith - and suffered consequences for it. Threats of violence and intimidation were commonplace in their lives for a number of years. Rocks thrown through windows, homes and cars vandalized, that sort of thing. That's not something one generally sees when Christians leave their church, or Hindus or Buddhists leave their temples. But, sadly, in the Muslim sphere, it's commonplace.

See For Muslim apostates, giving up their faith can be terrifying, alienating and dangerous

* Mohammed married one of his wives, Aisha, when she was 6, and consummated the marriage when she was 9 - this isn't in dispute even by moderate Islamic scholars, though they make noises about it being "acceptable at the time" and so forth
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 »

Scribbler60:
It seems that if we even start to discuss these things, those that are concerned are painted with the brush of racism and bigotry. That, to me, is no way to have a discussion.
I agree. This, I think, is key. Being able to discuss these things without being painted with any kind of brush. There are people on all sides of this kind of argument who will skim through your words to try to figure out which pigeon hole to put you in, and then throw childish insults at a straw man. It's just another example of that tendency to treat individuals as blocs. When arguing the simple point that the world is complex and people should be treated as individuals, it has been assumed by some that this automatically means I'm some kind of childishly naive liberal who thinks that countries should have no borders. e.g. this, from Dark Matter:
I think Steve drinks the politically correct Kool-Aid that's destroying Europe.
Clearly that's a particularly moronic example, but I think it illustrates that there are blind painters on all sides. Obviously countries need borders and security. But what they don't need is simplistic scapegoating. It's been tried before and it didn't end well.

-- Updated Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:26 pm to add the following --

---

P.S.

John/Dachshund/Sujit Das, your last post, #30, was almost word-for-word identical to this article:

aggressivechristianity.net/islam/modera ... uslims.htm

You added a few things to tailor it to this website. But not many. And you didn't indicate that you were quoting.

Did you read all of the article that you quoted?

-- Updated Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:36 pm to add the following --

OK. I see what you've done. You've added your own preamble in the first two paragraphs, and then from the third paragraph, starting "The truth of the matter..." until the end of your long post "...their overarching goal is to conquer the world for Islam by wiping out the infidels and their civilizations." you've simply copied and pasted the entire article verbatum, and uncredited.

It's not a good way to convince people that you know what you're talking about, or have even read what you're talking about.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14993
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Scribbler60 wrote:While I do not agree with the OP that we should ban immigration based on one's religious convictions, I believe that it is incumbent upon us in Western society to have rational conversations about these things with an end to the further progression of the human race. It seems that if we even start to discuss these things, those that are concerned are painted with the brush of racism and bigotry. That, to me, is no way to have a discussion.
Agreed. It is not racist to have concerns about one's quality of life, especially since the politicians are clearly not concerned, given the reckless rate of migration generally.

I agree that Islam is an especially retrograde ideology and I would prefer zero influence on the west. However, when I look at migration numbers, ours appear to be mostly Chinese (boosted by use of loopholes), then Indians, with Islamic Africans, Arabs and Persians making up a small percentage of newcomers. At present I have more fear of Chinese influence. An example: it's becoming harder to peacefully walk my very gentle, trained and elderly little dog free from a lead around her throat. Why? Because Chinese developers waggled a billion dollars under the council's nose and they allowed some blocks of giant flats to be built in the heart of the suburb. As it turns out, some ignorant Chinese people don't understand dogs and fear them and, rather than learn and grow, they make complaints. Even while having the dog on a leash I see some Chinese passing by shrink away quite astoundingly - you'd think I had a lion on the leash! Then there are the men - it is rare now for me to be able to walk my dog at the shops without some Chinese man glaring at the dog as though I had a turd on a leash. All I want is to live without dealing with the bad attitudes of new residents keen to shape the suburb in their own image. (Note, some very pleasant and affable Chinese newcomers have arrived too so, as with the OP, there's a strong element of the "bad apple" dynamic here).

Of course, since councils (and any government) embrace all chances to tighten up controls, they rolled over immediately, happy to spending our rates on sending rangers out on audits to harass owners of harmless dogs. Our imported Muslims will be no match for organised Chinese lobbying, backed by their big bucks. On the plus side, at least only a small portion of them are religious and this may prove to be an important influence should imported theists start making bother. I'm pretty sure new Chinese Australians won't stand for such breaches of order. Swings and roundabouts.

Personally, I would immediately halt all immigration to Australia, aside from certain professional and humanitarian cases, and not import more people until we have enough infrastructure to properly cater for our rapidly boosted population. There is a huge infrastructure deficit, made worse by irresponsible immigration policies pushed by big business. This is creating social tensions between groups, as is increasingly evidenced in my suburb as locals watching everything they liked about their suburb - space, freedom, natural spaces and especially parking spaces - disappear.

I accept that in an overpopulated world we all must cram in more. At least leave us some parking space or, in lieu of that, give us buses that run more than once every hour during business hours, and not cater to the LCD at the drop of a hat.

I doubt that either the migration rate reduction or infrastructure boost will eventuate. In the unlikely case that those things did happen did, I would want migrant numbers to be very evenly spread - people from everywhere, but not too many from any one place or culture. The only way for multiculturalism to work satisfactorily for residents is 1) for it to be gradual, to allow less damage en route to acceptable assimilation and 2) for migrants to be diverse enough not to form major enclaves.

Unfortunately, the companies pushing for higher immigration levels have no care for residents, as long as they are buying their products.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 »

I guess the lesson is that we all have our own immigration concerns. Where I live it used to be Polish people. Then it was eastern European people generally. I'm not sure what it is now. Bulgarians possibly. Obviously, before all that it was Indians and Pakistanis. Before that West Indians (The Windrush generation). Before that Huguenots. Before that Normans. Before that the beaker folk. etc.
User avatar
Atreyu
Posts: 1737
Joined: June 17th, 2014, 3:11 am
Favorite Philosopher: P.D. Ouspensky
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Atreyu »

Spectrum wrote:
[b]Atreyu[/b] wrote:My reason for banning them is simply that it's too difficult for them to assimilate en mass, and that eventually, if the current trend continues, their presence will ultimately lead to the destruction of all Western civilization and the principles on which it was founded.

In other words, multiculturalism does not work at all, and, in fact, is simply a fancy word for decay....
Root cause analysis is one critical solution to Problem Solving.
So why and what are the root cause, they have problem assimilating.

If you do not trace the root causes and deal with them effectively, it would appear the ban would be a permanent one which is not beneficial in the long run.

I did not mention in the above, one of the proximate cause is theism.
These extremists believe a real God exists who promise them salvation and eternal life in paradise and if they commit 'evils' [to them is Good] and violence on non-Muslims [as a divine duty] they will get greater assurance and rewards from God as promised.
When it is proven 'God is an Impossibility' and illusory then the extremists will not have any legs to stand on to commit their evils, terrors and violence.
It's ludicrous to blame 'theism' in general. Perhaps you could blame their specific theism, but not theism as a general principle. A mass wave of Christian theist immigrants would not lead to the kind of problems we will have if muslim immigration continues at the current rate.

It's a question of culture, not theism....
User avatar
Scribbler60
Posts: 177
Joined: December 17th, 2015, 11:48 am

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Scribbler60 »

Greta wrote:[I would immediately halt all immigration to Australia, aside from certain professional and humanitarian cases, and not import more people until we have enough infrastructure to properly cater for our rapidly boosted population.
I'm in Canada and our government has decided, for reasons which aren't entirely clear, to boost immigration numbers to unheard-of levels; something like a million over the next three years alone.

Canada to admit nearly 1 million immigrants over next 3 years

The reason, ostensibly, is to fund Canada's state pension system (the CPP - Canada Pension Plan). Our Canadian-born population is aging, and the hypothesis is that massive immigration will generate taxes to help fund the system.

What the government doesn't say is:
  1. Many of these immigrants will bring over elderly (that is, beyond working-age) parents, grandparents, and other relatives who will not contribute to the system but will be eligible for governent payments
  2. CPP is secure for the next 75 years without massive immigration
  3. Though government communications shows that immigration does not affect crime levels or depress wages, actual stats say otherwise, at least in the short term
  4. Many say, "Canada is a HUGE country, we have lots of room!" and, geographically, they are correct. But the vast majority of immigrants congregate in our large cities - Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver - which are already suffering from unaffordable housing, overburdened transit, extremely (sometimes lethal) long waits in hospital emergency rooms, and social services are stretched beyond the breaking point.
How adding a million people over the next three years will improve things given the above facts is a mystery.

And we have not even started discussion the social issues that come with 20%+ foreign-born immigrants.

A European study indicated that when the foreign-born population reaches about 22%, right-wing nationalism and its attendant violence starts to spike.* In Canada, we're currently at 21.9%. And guess what? Right-wing nationalism is on the rise.** But even discussing these things is considered taboo.

I cannot, in good conscience, evade my responsibility as a member of the human race and suggest that all immigration be stopped, especially in the cases of extreme hardship or violence/threat of violence. And in order to give those immigrants who are already in our country the best possible chance of success, I also believe we have to have a very serious look at the sheer numbers of people we are welcoming, where they are from, the values that they bring with them and how well they will integrate into a modern Western democracy.

* https://www.hindawi.com/journals/comple ... 7/1580526/
** http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/far-right- ... -1.3546672

-- Updated November 21st, 2017, 10:46 pm to add the following --
Atreyu wrote:
Spectrum wrote: I did not mention in the above, one of the proximate cause is theism.
These extremists believe a real God exists who promise them salvation and eternal life in paradise and if they commit 'evils' [to them is Good] and violence on non-Muslims [as a divine duty] they will get greater assurance and rewards from God as promised.
It's ludicrous to blame 'theism' in general. Perhaps you could blame their specific theism, but not theism as a general principle. A mass wave of Christian theist immigrants would not lead to the kind of problems we will have if muslim immigration continues at the current rate.

It's a question of culture, not theism....
Note that Spectrum noted that theism was only one of the proximate causes, and makes a rational argument about it. Whether it's a primary cause is another argument entirely. Personally, I think not, but am willing to be swayed by data.
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 »

Steve3007 wrote:Spectrum,

I guess if we were being scientific about it, as you've suggested, we need to establish whether there is a long term correlation between proposed cause and effect. We need lots of points on a nice straight-line graph with "acts of evil per unit time" on one axis and "religious affiliation" on the other, so that we can demonstrate that the more exhortations to evil in your religion, the more evil you will do.

You've suggested that the root cause is evil-laden verses in the Quran. You say that the Quran differs from the holy texts of other religions in the extent to which it explicitly exhorts its readers to do things that we would consider to be evil and which it considers to be good. And it promises heavenly rewards for those who obey and punishment for those who don't.

If we take that as true, then we have to find the correlation, with Muslims doing evil (as we see it) more than adherents of other reigions. It has to be long term and global, not just recent and local, in order to average out the effect of other cultural differences.

If we do that, looking at the behaviour of people who claim to be Muslim and people who claim to be, say, Christian, over several hundred years, do we find that the former tend to do more evil than the latter? Do we find a much greater tendency to refuse to assimilate with local customs, to conquer, to kill and exploit? As I've said, with my limited knowledge of history, it seems to me that the answer is "no", although perhaps you can show me to be wrong.

Regarding the first one: assimilation with the locals. You may have noticed that all of the Americas, Australia and much of Africa is Christian. It wasn't always that way. Christianity didn't arise in the Americas, Africa or Australia. So that in itself seems to me to answer that question, from a long-term global perspective. From that perspective, the relative peacefulness of the message of Christianity, compared to Islam, doesn't seem to me to have made much difference. "Each to their own" or "It takes all sorts to make a world" doesn't seem, historically, to have been the motto of the Christian people of Europe when they spread out into the world.

If I'm right in saying this (and please tell me if I'm mistaken) then the conclusion would have to be that there is no particularly strong correlation between the words in the holy texts and the way people actually behave in practice, over the long term.
Evolutionarily, the concept of Tribalism has very significant survival values and this is why it is so prevalent in every aspects of humanity throughout history and even now.
Since tribalism is instinctual, the primal impulse of "us versus them" will be active within groups and this generate 'good' [survival values] but unfortunately also has the side effects 'evil' consequences.

These evil consequences arose from the formula - 'tribalism' + evil laden elements.
This is evident in gangsterism around the World, political and ideological groups.

Religions [organized and in groups] are driven by
  • 1. a very desperate existential crisis
    2. tribalism - us versus them
    3. its specific ideology
What is very significant and critical [need to emphasize this] here is religion is driven by a very desperate existential crisis, where believers will show no hesitation in killing their only son if God command them to do so, e.g. Abraham. Thus they are easily driven to do all other evils [to them is good as a divine duty] to please their God and gain favor to enter Paradise.
The motivation and drives for religion is so desperate and fundamental. I have placed it relatively below the most lowest of Maslow's Hierachy of Needs.

I assert with evidence, Islam is the only religion that has explicit evil laden elements in its holy texts that compel and inspire Muslims to comply with such evil acts [relatively good to them]. These evil elements combined with that desperate existential crisis and a natural % [20% est.] of evil prone Muslims inevitably generate evils, terrors and violence that is directly related to the religion of Islam.

Thus you will note the resistance to assimilation within the Muslim community is driven and reinforced by two addition elements, i.e. the very desperate existential crisis and the specific evil laden elements in contrast to natural resistance to assimilation by others which is merely driven by tribalism which is soften over time.

As I had stated the resistance to assimilation by Muslims as reinforced by the above element is also deemed to be immutable as proclaimed by Allah. In addition if they assimilate and co-operate with non-believers, they will go to Hell.

Based on my own observations, experience and readings from reported evidences, it is obvious the inherent resistance to assimilation compelled by Islamic dogma is very evident in all societies where there are Muslims.

The initial observation of tribalism is there are Chinatowns, Greek, Indians, Italians, etc. communities in most great cities and people of various ethnics tend to flock together.
But on deeper analysis, most of these groups even if they are violent are not inspired to evils and violence based on evil laden verses in their holy texts. The only group that do this are those who are Muslims. It is only Muslim groups who demand Sharia Laws and resist compliance with secular Constitutional Laws.

One point is where there is an effect of resistance to assimilation, tribalism is very obvious and normally it is due to ethnic basis. But a religion like Islam can comprise people from different ethnic groups. So Muslims flock together as driven by their religion and a specific very intense and desperate existential crisis. Believers of other religions also flock together on the same basis, but it is only Islam that compel their believers to commit evil as inspired by evil laden verses in their holy texts.

On further analysis there are many distinct reasons why Muslims are not assimilating and these are traceable to the Quran, thus a strong correlation between Muslims not assimilating and the religion itself.

To prove the above, humanity must embark on a project to list all the evil acts [of all degrees] committed by all humans to date and trace them to their ultimate and proximate root cause. I am certain there will be a categories of evils committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone and inspired by identified/verified evil laden in the Quran and Ahadith.

As a footnote: It's a funny irony to me that a US president who claims to make this kind of assimilation a core issue is so anti-assimilation when it comes to the country that his European ancestors adopted.
In general, Trump is not fit as President of the USA. I am agreeable only with his negative attention on Islam which is at least something. Any President who does that will be fine with me.

-- Updated Tue Nov 21, 2017 11:16 pm to add the following --
[b]Atreyu[/b] wrote:It's ludicrous to blame 'theism' in general. Perhaps you could blame their specific theism, but not theism as a general principle. A mass wave of Christian theist immigrants would not lead to the kind of problems we will have if muslim immigration continues at the current rate.

It's a question of culture, not theism....
I have shown Islam is the only active theistic religion which has immutable doctrines containing evil laden elements which inspire SOME Muslims who are evil prone to commit terrible evils [including resistance to assimilation] and violence in God's name.

One of the critical elements that promote the above resistance to assimilation is 'in God's name' i.e. that is leverage on the existence of a God, i.e. theism. The point is it is theism in general that provide the general moral support to sustain theistic Islam.

In this case, I am blaming theism in general, because without theism, then there will be no Islam, thus no Muslims' resistance to assimilation.

Note my signature below.
Whilst I am blaming theism in general for all theistic related evils, I recognize theism is a critical psychological necessity for the majority to deal with psychological angst at present as there are no efficient alternatives. Thus it would be inhumane for me to expect theism to disappear immediately without any alternative foolproof replacements to deal with those natural psychological angst.

Now that I have pointed out God is an impossibility, I am hoping humanity will work toward replacing [voluntarily] theism with foolproof alternatives to deal with the natural unavoidable psychological angst in the future.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14993
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Sy Borg »

Scribbler60 wrote:I cannot, in good conscience, evade my responsibility as a member of the human race and suggest that all immigration be stopped, especially in the cases of extreme hardship or violence/threat of violence. And in order to give those immigrants who are already in our country the best possible chance of success, I also believe we have to have a very serious look at the sheer numbers of people we are welcoming, where they are from, the values that they bring with them and how well they will integrate into a modern Western democracy.
It seems Canada is doing the same as Australia. Some years ago politicians lauded the idea of Big Australia as they boosted immigration numbers, saying that 50 million would be desirable. It went down like a lead balloon so the politicians shut up about it, talked tough talk, while quietly continually increasing the numbers.

Your post is well balanced. A generation of young migrants will not vote to pay pensions for old white people who failed to prepare for old age (so the argument always goes). Further, in 30 years nearly all jobs will be performed by technology and AI. The stated rationales for increasing immigration levels so dramatically are lies.

So, aside from humanitarian refugee intakes, why would we need all these extra people so much that it's okay to greatly diminish the population's lifestyles?

1) to boost GDP for electoral purposes, creating an illusion of growth. Do you notice that news outlets at election time never talk about GDP per capita only national GDP?

2) influential actors (such as developers) pay huge sums to political parties because they want more paying customers.

I think #2 must be hugely significant unless there is some other agenda, because almost NOBODY here wants an increase in immigration numbers, yet for 20 years both Labor and Liberal governments have determinedly increased the migrant numbers to record levels, and they point blank refuse to allow public debate. They always resort to false allegations of racism, usually helped by a sensationalist media gleefully depicting the rise of fascism.

I am a strong lifelong lefty yet even I am tempted to vote for the fringe right next election! I probably won't because they are so ignorant and odious, but the majors at this stage have no hope of gaining my vote unless they come clean on immigration. There must be many millions of dirty money involved in what is essentially a scam of the people by politicians for them to cling to this deception so keenly.
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 »

Germany, Austria: Imams Warn Muslims Not to Integrate,
https://wentworthreport.com/2017/11/20/ ... integrate/
"Time and again, such as in the Al-Furqan mosque [a Sunni Arab mosque in Berlin] Muslims seemed committed to the idea that they are some sort of a community with a shared destiny: 'You are a diaspora! We are a diaspora! ... They [Germans] resembles a torrent that annihilates you, which obliterates you, and takes away your values and replaces them with its own values'."
As stated in many verses in the Quran, Muslims are brainwashed with a false arrogance that they are the greatest of all people and non-believers are dehumanized as dirty animals and beasts.

The resulting message of the Quran is if Muslims assimilate or co-operate with non-Muslims they are condemned to Hell.

Some Muslims are genuinely friendly to non-Muslims and they are doing that naturally and innocently as human beings but they are not good Muslims in terms of the verses of the Quran and Allah.

When those Muslims who are ignorant of their divine duty not to befriend non-Muslims are shown such the verses in the Quran as commanded by Allah, they will be faced with a dilemma. To ensure of a more secured place in paradise, they will have no choice but to comply to be unfriendly with non-Muslims otherwise they will have to be apostate.
But the risk of being an apostate is the threat of being killed.

These are the forces in the Quran that cornered most Muslims not be friendly with non-believers and resist assimilating in foreign lands and culture.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 »

Spectrum:
...To prove the above, humanity must embark on a project to list all the evil acts [of all degrees] committed by all humans to date and trace them to their ultimate and proximate root cause. I am certain there will be a categories of evils committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone and inspired by identified/verified evil laden in the Quran and Ahadith.
If we wanted to do some kind of scientific study of the extent to which, over the long term (hundreds of years), the actions of the people are influenced by the words of their holy book and we wanted to average out other factors like relatively short-term geopolitical influences then yes, something like that needs to be done.

Difficult to do quantitatively though. As I said earlier, my general impression was that the European Christian world has done more than its fair share of imposing itself on the rest of the world, regardless of what it says in the Bible. Forcing them to get hooked on opium and play cricket. But that is just a vague qualitative impression.

Atreyu:
A mass wave of Christian theist immigrants would not lead to the kind of problems we will have if muslim immigration continues at the current rate.
Absolutely. Christian immigration to other countries has never been known to cause any problems for the indiginous populations, has it? (That was sarcasm. Sorry. Lowest form of wit, I know.)

-- Updated Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:02 am to add the following --

Greta and Scribbler60 have talked a bit about the current immigration issues in Australia and Canada respectively. In the UK right now, if there is an issue with the cultural background of the incoming peoples it is a Catholic rather than a Muslim issue, due to the relatively recent influx of people from Eastern Europe, particularly Poland.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7935
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by LuckyR »

Does anyone with an ounce of life experience think that someone so far gone as to do some sort of atrocity, would not be above lying when asked "are you a Muslim?" by the Immigration guy?
"As usual... it depends."
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 »

Lucky, if you're looking for problems with the practicality of banning people of a particular religious or philosophical persuasion from entering or being in a country, then I think it's obvious that you won't have to look far. I guess that's why when Trump got into office and asked "ok, guys, so how do I do live up to my promise to ban all Muslims until we find out what the hell is going in?" his advisers presumably said "sorry, Mr President, but that's not really possible. How about we pick some Muslim-majority countries and ban everybody coming from those?"

But I guess the idea of a place like this is that we don't have to worry to much about practicalities.

-- Updated Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:28 pm to add the following --

It would be interesting to try to ban people of other philosophical persuasions. If you wanted to ban solipsists, I wonder what you'd ask them at customs.

"Am I really asking you this question or am I just a series of sensory perceptions that you regard as representing an external physical world only for the sake of convenience?", "Er, the second one.". "Go home."
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 »

Spectrum:
...To prove the above, humanity must embark on a project to list all the evil acts [of all degrees] committed by all humans to date and trace them to their ultimate and proximate root cause. I am certain there will be a categories of evils committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone and inspired by identified/verified evil laden in the Quran and Ahadith.
Steve3007 wrote:If we wanted to do some kind of scientific study of the extent to which, over the long term (hundreds of years), the actions of the people are influenced by the words of their holy book and we wanted to average out other factors like relatively short-term geopolitical influences then yes, something like that needs to be done.

Difficult to do quantitatively though. As I said earlier, my general impression was that the European Christian world has done more than its fair share of imposing itself on the rest of the world, regardless of what it says in the Bible. Forcing them to get hooked on opium and play cricket. But that is just a vague qualitative impression.
The fact that there are drastically lesser evils and violence by Christians since from 2000 -500 years ago to the present is a good indication such are not based on its immutable doctrine. This show that the inquisitions, genocides, Salem witch hunts, and all other evils committed by Christians are not driven by God's command in the NT. A more detailed research and analysis will confirm the terrible evils committed by Christians especially in the past are not directly inspired by the words of God and Jesus in the NT which overrides the OT.
If there are any command to commit evils on non-Christians in the NT, then this will definitely be ongoing at the present because God's words is immutable and no Christians would dare to go against God's command.

Similarly no Muslims will dare to change or invent their own views and act on behalf of Allah, i.e. kill and commit evil in the name of Allah and shout Allahu Akbar.
A detailed reading, scrutiny and analysis of the Quran and the Ahadith will reveal Allah does sanction, permit and exhort Muslims to commit evils on non-Muslims merely because they do not believe in Allah and Muhammad as Allah's messenger.
Evil prone Muslims are human beings who will commit all sorts of evil as triggered by various types of reasons.
However when we analyze and filter all evil acts by Muslims, there will be evil acts by evil prone Muslims who are inspired by the words of Allah in the Quran and Ahadith, especially when they explicitly shout 'Allahu Akbar' and quoting references from the Quran to justify their heinous evil acts [to them is a divine duty to do good].
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
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