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?"); such homework-help-style questions can be asked and answered on PhiloPedia: The Philosophy Wiki. If your question is not already answered on the appropriate PhiloPedia page, then see How to Request Content on PhiloPedia to see how to ask your informational question using the wiki.
Post Reply
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1479
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Belindi » July 9th, 2018, 3:07 pm

Reply to Dachshund and Spectrum.

The Nazi ideology became so powerful that facts about suffering and normal civilised morality were abandoned to support that ideology. Islam is not an out of control ideology.

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum » July 9th, 2018, 10:00 pm

Greta wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 3:41 am
Spectrum wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 3:00 am
The focus of the Islamic evils should not be directly on the Muslims per se but attention should be directed at its proximate root cause, i.e. the very malignant evil laden verses in the Quran.
I am still not seeing the difference.
It is easy and very common to conflate the people and the ideology, but technically there is very distinct difference between them.
It is obvious ideologies inevitably are believed by humans but for the sake of progress of the well being of humanity, we must differentiate the ideology from the people.

Take for example the evilness from the ideologies of Nazism and fascism. While the tenets and principles of the ideologies are fixed to its constitution, there are loads of variations in how the people adopt the beliefs. Some are hardcore believers, there are the average and there are members who are indifferent but are Nazis or fascists who joined due to peer pressure or coercion.
This is the reason why only the very hardcore Nazis were persecuted and not all the German people who were Nazi members.

If we do not differentiate the ideology from the people, then we are promoting bigotry when it is assumed all believers of an evil ideology are all evil prone people when they are not.
Spectrum wrote:But because Islam is inherently evil
No, the writers of Abrahamic myths were simply wild, simplistic, ignorant and bloodthirsty. The works are unsuitable for modern life without taking much of the work as metaphorical. BTW. "evil" is a silly, magical word, steeped in superstition and in many ways philosophically nonsensical.
We need to differentiate the evilness within Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
Judaism has loads of evil elements in its Torah [worst than the Quran] but somehow it has no leverage on the Jews, thus it is not evident the Jews at present are killing non-Jews like the Muslims are doing.
Christianity [NT] has overriding maxims, e.g. love your enemies; love this and that, which had restraint Christians in killing in the name of Christianity or Jesus.
Islam on the other hand is literally evil and in the texts Allah commands Muslims to kill non-Muslims as a divine duty to be assured of a place in paradise.

I have done extensive research and read loads of books and articles on the topic of 'evil' from the philosophical perspective. The term 'evil' is taking hold in the philosophy community and society in general. This is more so with the evil acts of ISIS and gangs recently.

Note this 'Concept of Evil' from the reputable SEP [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy];
During the past thirty years, moral, political, and legal philosophers have become increasingly interested in the concept of evil.
This interest has been partly motivated by ascriptions of ‘evil’ by laymen, social scientists, journalists, and politicians as they try to understand and respond to various atrocities and horrors of the past eighty years, e.g., the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and killing sprees by serial killers such as Jeffery Dahmer. It seems that we cannot capture the moral significance of these actions and their perpetrators by calling them ‘wrong’ or ‘bad’ or even ‘very very wrong’ or ‘very very bad.’
We need the concept of evil.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concept-evil/
Surely you can agree to the above?
Spectrum wrote:Whilst I will not hate and condemn all or any Muslim/s I have reservations when it come to dealing with Muslims on a large scale.
The optimal strategy for the 'West' at present is not to admit any Muslim into their countries until there are effective strategies to prevent Muslims attacking/killing non-believers as a divine duty.
If Muslims thought the same way about westerners they would assume that we were all evangelist neocons.
Muslims are already thinking the same way about Westerners, i.e. the Quran deemed Westerners non-Muslims as a 'piece-of-sh1t' and are assigned the worst dehumanizing terms [ass, apes, swines, etc.] for non-believers.
  • [Quran 98:6] Those who 'kafaru' (disbelieved) among the people of the book as well as the 'Mushrikeen' (those who committed shirk) will be in the fire of Hell wherein they shall remain. They are the worst creatures.
Many Muslim countries detest any long term presence of non-Muslims in their country, the Quran warned about 'occupation' by infidels.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum » July 9th, 2018, 10:19 pm

Dachshund wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 8:09 am
Spectrum wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 3:00 am
Even if I am allowed to, it is never rational nor wise to invoke negative emotions on Muslims as the victims themselves and the symptoms. If we hate, condemn or dislike Muslims we are only poisoning our own self with toxic chemicals, e.g. cortisol etc.
In addition I have adopted the Bodhisattva vow to be compassionate and have empathy for all humans.
Morally we have to respect the basic humanity dignity of all regardless of the evil acts they have committed.
I take it that if you could re-write history, Spectrum, then In 1939, it would have been better in your opinion if not Winston Churchill, but rather a British political leader who had genuinely adopted the kind of Bodhisattva vow you refer to, had been placed in power in Number 10 Downing Street ? Such a man would be duty bound, I take it, to demonstrate compassion and empathy for Hitler on behalf of the British nation. He would - if I understand you correctly - sincerely believe that he was obliged to respect the fundamental human dignity ( moral worth) of Hitler and his henchmen regardless of the evil acts of violent tyranny they had already committed in Europe before invading Poland, and regardless of the fact that they had made it crystal clear by September 1939 they were fanatically determined to continue ruthlessly oppressing, subjugating and enslaving the entire continent of Europe? In short, this Bodhisattva Prime Minister of Britain would never contemplate dealing with the problem of Hitler and his rampant war machine by authorizing the use of any kind military of force in defence of his own people or their allies, because to intentionally harm or kill a Nazi aggressor would, of course, be to radically disrespect his fundamental human dignity. I mean, putting a bullet through an invading Nazi's soldier's skull does not exactly demonstrate a great deal of compassion or empathy for one's brother man does it, Spectrum? Best, in short, for this hypothetical Bodhisattva PM of Great Britain to just keep humbly pleading with Hitler not to continue doing what he was doing in the hope that one might be able to reason with him and eventually have him see the terrible error of his ways?

Is that what you are saying ?

Regards
Dachshund
Adopting the Bodhisattva Vow is morally good but the point is one should not do it blindly and stupidly.
There is a difference between blind/stupid compassion & empathy and being intelligent, rational and wise with compassion and empathy.

In that case, one who is compassionate and empathic can and should kill another if the circumstances warrant it. It I have a gun and a mad person is trying to kill me with a gun, I won't be that stupid to let him/her kill me for compassionate and empathic sake. I will try to avoid the danger but will not hesitate to kill if necessary.
What is critical here is to deal with the present circumstances effectively and thereafter after find solutions to prevent evils and threats to life.

If Churchill then had adopted the Bodhisattva vows, he should have Hitler and his henchmen killed where necessary given the circumstances then.

In contrast, note even with the glaring statistics of evil acts by SOME Muslims [see stats below] which is inspired by the evil laden elements in the holy texts of the Quran,
we have the authorities and Muslim apologists who are willing to kiss the a.r.s.e of Islam the religion. If this is compassion and empathy for Islam, it is stupidity at its worst.

Image

Why many are still apologists for Islam [the ideology] is due to cowardice [subliminal] that is going inside their subconscious mind.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum » July 9th, 2018, 10:30 pm

Belindi wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 3:07 pm
Reply to Dachshund and Spectrum.

The Nazi ideology became so powerful that facts about suffering and normal civilised morality were abandoned to support that ideology. Islam is not an out of control ideology.
There are mixed results with Islam but it is nevertheless an 'out of control' ideology because no human on Earth can judge and stop the evil commands of Allah which only Allah can do so. It is a fact, Allah [illusory and an impossibility] will never ever appear to decide who is right or wrong.

In the mean time the existing book of Allah, i.e. the Quran with its terrible evil laden elements is inspiring many evil prone Muslims to kill, maim and oppress non-Muslims around the world. Note the supporting evidence for this point is so glaring.

Because it is impossible for the only controller [i.e. Allah the illusory God] to appear to control the evil laden verses in the Quran, the ideology of Islam is literally an out of control ideology. The proofs that Islam is out of control is very glaring with the terrible evils committed by SOME [300 million potential :shock: ] evil prone Muslims around the world.

Note the terrible evils by SOME evil prone Muslims are not confined to the evils acts of extremists but cover the full range of all sorts of evils by these 'SOME' evil prone Muslims.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

User avatar
baha
New Trial Member
Posts: 6
Joined: June 27th, 2018, 1:16 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by baha » July 9th, 2018, 10:32 pm

westerns should rule the world and kill all mans beside western mans. and take away everything else. such an great people you are. coming from directly heavens.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7229
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Greta » July 9th, 2018, 11:45 pm

baha wrote:
July 9th, 2018, 10:32 pm
westerns should rule the world and kill all mans beside western mans. and take away everything else. such an great people you are. coming from directly heavens.
Actually, I think you'll find that not all of us here are westerners but I take your point that some unfairly imperialist comments are being made here.

I personally find the largest division between people is not between cultures, races or religions but between extremism and moderation.

That is, extremists everywhere seem similar to each other - bloody annoying and sometimes dangerous. Meanwhile, moderates everywhere also share many commonalities, mostly the wish to lead a good life.

Extremists are aggressive and seek domination. In short, they are restless, they seek excitement and provoke unrest. By contrast, moderates everywhere are relatively calm and seek peace and goodwill rather than foment and conflict.

Steve3007
Posts: 5397
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes
Location: UK

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 » July 9th, 2018, 11:55 pm

If we divide the world down the International Date Line then I suspect people living on the east coast of Australia are among the least western people here. My niece, who is currently studying in Greenwich, is the most neutral person I know. If there is no such division, then I guess we all get to choose whether we're western or eastern or somewhere in between.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7229
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Greta » July 10th, 2018, 12:08 am

Then I'm a westerner in the east.

Let's face it, no one is going on to a forum to say we need more Muslims, Indians, Chinese, Sudanese, Irish, Martians or whomever. People tend to take the good for granted and mostly just speak up when they have an issue.

That's why companies have special departments to handle complaints but don't need extra staff to handle compliments. I suppose that's why so many hold the view that staying silence is a virtue. A person who is just doing and not speaking is obviously not a complainer. Then again, machines just do and don't complain ...

Whatever, nature is messy. Life is messy. Humanity is messy. Lionel is Messi. Enjoy them while they are still around, I say.

Steve3007
Posts: 5397
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes
Location: UK

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 » July 10th, 2018, 12:14 am

Greta wrote:Whatever, nature is messy. Life is messy. Humanity is messy. Lionel is Messi. Enjoy them while they are still around, I say.
I notice you changed this to explicitly mention Lionel. Were you concerned that the philosophy forum might not contain enough soccer fans to get the joke? :D

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7229
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Greta » July 10th, 2018, 12:26 am

Steve3007 wrote:
July 10th, 2018, 12:14 am
Greta wrote:Whatever, nature is messy. Life is messy. Humanity is messy. Lionel is Messi. Enjoy them while they are still around, I say.
I notice you changed this to explicitly mention Lionel. Were you concerned that the philosophy forum might not contain enough soccer fans to get the joke? :D
Joke? I was speaking from the heart :)

I feel sorry him. He's always unfairly being picked on by the press! And he's only worth abut 80 million. Poor kid.

Steve3007
Posts: 5397
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Eratosthenes
Location: UK

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Steve3007 » July 10th, 2018, 12:32 am

That's why companies have special departments to handle complaints but don't need extra staff to handle compliments.
And that's why the News rarely leads with the headline "7 billion people didn't get murdered, tortured, robbed or trapped in caves today".

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1479
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Belindi » July 10th, 2018, 2:13 am

Greta wrote and I agree that the largest division is not between cultures, races or religions but between extremism and moderation.

Spectrum's view of Islam is immoderate:
Because it is impossible for the only controller [i.e. Allah the illusory God] to appear to control the evil laden verses in the Quran, the ideology of Islam is literally an out of control ideology. The proofs that Islam is out of control is very glaring with the terrible evils committed by SOME [300 million potential :shock: ] evil prone Muslims around the world.
The event of Islam becoming an out of control ideology will not happen unless a significant proportion of Muslims are immoderate believers.The total number of Muslims in any given community is not the right statistic.

Spectrum
Posts: 5160
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Spectrum » July 10th, 2018, 2:46 am

Belindi wrote:
July 10th, 2018, 2:13 am
Greta wrote and I agree that the largest division is not between cultures, races or religions but between extremism and moderation.

Spectrum's view of Islam is immoderate:
Because it is impossible for the only controller [i.e. Allah the illusory God] to appear to control the evil laden verses in the Quran, the ideology of Islam is literally an out of control ideology. The proofs that Islam is out of control is very glaring with the terrible evils committed by SOME [300 million potential :shock: ] evil prone Muslims around the world.
The event of Islam becoming an out of control ideology will not happen unless a significant proportion of Muslims are immoderate believers.The total number of Muslims in any given community is not the right statistic.
My views on Islam is factual and if Islam is evil then it is evil.

It is surprising you are not mindful of the facts;
  • 1. The Quran, i.e. the core texts of Islam is loaded with terrible evil laden verses.
    2. Based on the threat of Hell, Muslims had been inspired and many compelled to commit the worst evils, violence and atrocities on non-Muslims. The evidence to support these evils are so glaring.
Just like the Nazis and other ideologies there is no need for a significant proportion of believers to be immoderate to generate terrible evils.
What is effective is only a small numbers of hardcore believers influencing the average believers to get the evil machine going. Note even if a very realistic 1% of hardcore Islamists is evil prone, it is 15 million of them around the world.

There is no doubts that the Islamists inspired by the evil texts in the Quran has been terrorizing humanity since 1400 years ago with its imperialism and committing the whole range of evils.
The core ethos of Islam is world domination and subjugation of non-believers and Allah has sanction whatever it takes to do that, i.e. do evil if necessary to achieve the objective.

Look at India which beside the terrible evils was torn apart because of Islam.
Lebanon was once a Christian majority but with Islamists political maneuvering, Lebonon is now a Muslim majority country and the Christians were killed and made to suffer.
Look at UK and Europe, with the increasing numbers of Muslims in contrast to 30 years ago, there is a corresponding increase in evil acts and violence on the non-Muslims.
Note Southern Thailand, Southern Philippines where the majority are Muslims.
There are terrible evils in Africa with Boko Haram and other Muslims terrorizing non-Muslims.
All the above are driven by the inherent evil ethos of Islam per se and Muslims has to do it [as a divine duty] for fear of going to hell and be assured of a passage to Paradise with eternal life.

Just in case,
nb, ALL other evil acts must be addressed but this OP is related to Islam only.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.

Iapetus
Posts: 400
Joined: January 5th, 2015, 6:41 pm
Location: Strasbourg, France

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Iapetus » July 10th, 2018, 5:36 am

Reply to Spectrum:

Note the terrible evils by SOME evil prone Muslims are not confined to the evils acts of extremists but cover the full range of all sorts of evils by these 'SOME' evil prone Muslims.


I think this encapsulates your bigotry quite nicely.

I, personally, dislike the use of the term, ‘evil’ for a number of reasons which I won’t go into now. I accept, however, that many people use it as a form of shorthand for motives and actions which need to be strongly resisted. I have no problem with this, as long as they are prepared to explain and develop the reasons for such resistance.

There are, however, dangers associated with over-use of such terms. As an example, there is a ‘pro-life’ poster on abortion issues who seems incapable of addressing those who advocate abortion in certain circumstances without adding the adjective, ‘murderous’. It is not enough to simplify the argument into a single word; ‘abortionist’, which is bad enough. She has to add ‘murderous’ in front. Almost every time. Instead of dealing directly with the arguments, she has made a pre-judgement. In a discussion on relative positions with regard to the issue, she has declared that her mind is made up regardless. Abortionists are murderers. She is prejudiced.

As, it seems to me, are you with the term, ‘evil-prone’. You use it so frequently that it is difficult to discern any real meaning. Thus we end up with your sentence above. It is very confusing on a number of levels. It appears that you are trying to separate out some muslims from others with a big, capital-lettered SOME. I have to assume that you are trying to separate out ‘Muslims’ from ‘evil prone Muslims’ as a defence against accusations of bigotry but it may be that you want to separate some ‘evil prone Muslims’ from other ‘evil prone Muslims’. If it is the first case, then I have no idea about what basis you are using to define them as ‘evil prone’. Is it adherence to the Quran? If so, then what distinguishes them from other Muslims? This is a very significant question if we want to instigate border controls but it is certainly not resolved by repeated reference to ‘evil prone’. What is even more confusing is that you don’t appear to be refering simply to the ‘evil acts of extremists’. You include also the “full range of all sorts of evils”. What on earth do you mean by this? What on earth could you mean, if you you not refering the the evil acts of extremists? This sounds like bigotry. After all, the ‘evil prone Muslims’ are not self-identifying. Are you talking about thought crime? Thinking bad things?

You quoted an extract from the Stanford Encyclopaedia about the use of the term, ‘evil’. It was, by the way, an unattributed essay. You declined to mention the sections which outlined problems with use of the term. You cherry-picked.

Moreover, ‘evil-prone’ could be applied to any group. I am sure that we could address the problem of ‘evil-prone quiltmakers’. The difficulty here would be in associating the activity of quiltmaking with motivations and actions of evil. The quiltmaking may turn out to be quite incidental. I know that you have stated, “we must differentiate the ideology from the people”, but that is precisely what you seem incapable of doing. You have determined that “Islam is inherently evil” – an opinion, not a demonstrable fact. This seems to be why you are so free with adding ‘evil prone’ to its followers even though you have admitted, “even now the majority of Muslims do not take their religion seriously”. Could that statement not be applied equally to followers of all other religions?

The really sad thing about all this is that there is an argument to be had. Religious fundamentalism is a real issue in the world today. You cloud this argument by your confusion of vague opinion with facts and of unreasoned prejudice with objectiveness.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1479
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Why the West must ban Muslim immigration

Post by Belindi » July 10th, 2018, 10:13 am

Spectrum wrote:
Just like the Nazis and other ideologies there is no need for a significant proportion of believers to be immoderate to generate terrible evils.
What is effective is only a small numbers of hardcore believers influencing the average believers to get the evil machine going. Note even if a very realistic 1% of hardcore Islamists is evil prone, it is 15 million of them around the world.
True, it takes agitators to enrage moderate believers. However agitators are not enough to enrage moderates. Moderates also have to be amenable to the agitators who in order to succeed must engage with a field that is already sown with discontent.

Post Reply