Why I jumped ship to the left

[BrianJK]

I've always been one of those weirdos who didn't follow one party or another on every issue, even the majority of issues. But being an Evangelical who grew up in Georgia, I always felt pressure to lean right. In some of the most important issues I still hold a right-leaving viewpoint. In fact, in every major election since I came of age, I voted Republican. I voted for Bush (campaigned like heck for him actually) and McCain and Romney in their respective years.
One of the issues on which I have always disagreed with Republicans is that of immigration. Unfortunately, nativism, and to some extent isolationism, has become one of the biggest issues for Republicans in this election, and the frontrunners are all taking done of the furthest right stances I've ever seen on these issues.
I also appreciate true freedom of religion and understand that if we discriminate against any one religion, Islam for example, that sets a dangerous precedent and opens the door for future iterations of government to do the same to Christianity or whomever else they choose.
These are stupid of the nation reasons why I stepped back and strongly considered, and ultimately decided on, voting on the Democratic side this year.

 

[dogs4thewin]

I do not like people disliking Muslims either; though I also cannot stand the PC today.

 

[Thursday]

I've always been one of those weirdos who didn't follow one party or another on every issue, even the majority of issues. But being an Evangelical who grew up in Georgia, I always felt pressure to lean right. In some of the most important issues I still hold a right-leaving viewpoint. In fact, in every major election since I came of age, I voted Republican. I voted for Bush (campaigned like heck for him actually) and McCain and Romney in their respective years.
One of the issues on which I have always disagreed with Republicans is that of immigration. Unfortunately, nativism, and to some extent isolationism, has become one of the biggest issues for Republicans in this election, and the frontrunners are all taking done of the furthest right stances I've ever seen on these issues.
I also appreciate true freedom of religion and understand that if we discriminate against any one religion, Islam for example, that sets a dangerous precedent and opens the door for future iterations of government to do the same to Christianity or whomever else they choose.
These are stupid of the nation reasons why I stepped back and strongly considered, and ultimately decided on, voting on the Democratic side this year.

Do you believe that we should be allowing Syrian muslims into America but blocking Syrian Christians? That's what the democrats are doing right now.

 

[BrianJK]

Do you believe that we should be allowing Syrian muslims into America but blocking Syrian Christians? That's what the democrats are doing right now.

I don't believe we should block any refugee on the basis of nationality or religion. I don't believe my particular religion should get preferential treatment either.

 

[BrianJK]

I do not like people disliking Muslims either; though I also cannot stand the PC today.

What sort of PC do you mean, may I ask?

 

[Thursday]

I don't believe we should block any refugee on the basis of nationality or religion. I don't believe my particular religion should get preferential treatment either.

If certain nation had an ebola outbreak, should we let those citizens migrate freely to the US?

Why should we allow potentially deadly radical Islamists to migrate here if we can't tell who is a danger?

 

[dogs4thewin]

What sort of PC do you mean, may I ask?

People of faith who seem to think that there is only one faith and expect people to bend to their faith. For example, I have heard of Muslims trying to flat out boycott places or otherwise make it hard for them to do business in a given area based almost solely on the fact that they serve bacon.

 

[dogs4thewin]

If certain nation had an ebola outbreak, should we let those citizens migrate freely to the US?

Why should we allow potentially deadly radical Islamists to migrate here if we can't tell who is a danger?

On the one hand that is right. On the other just about any group ( faith based or otherwise could cause problems).

 

[Thursday]

On the one hand that is right. On the other just about any group ( faith based or otherwise could cause problems).

That's not the case in the world today. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.

They have a worldwide agenda of destruction and conquest.

 

[BrianJK]

People of faith who seem to think that there is only one faith and expect people to bend to their faith. For example, I have heard of Muslims trying to flat out boycott places or otherwise make it hard for them to do business in a given area based almost solely on the fact that they serve bacon.

That's fair, though it works just as much when Christians try to boycott a product or service they believe has too much Muslim involvement.

 

[dogs4thewin]

That's not the case in the world today. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.

They have a worldwide agenda of destruction and conquest.

I did not say that that was the ONLY problem that could be caused. For example, we do not want any one here who will be so pushy with their belief system in any way shape or form.

 

[dogs4thewin]

That's fair, though it works just as much when Christians try to boycott a product or service they believe has too much Muslim involvement.

And I do not like that. If you do not want to support or do business with such people then do not do business with them.

 

[Thursday]

I did not say that that was the ONLY problem that could be caused. For example, we do not want any one here who will be so pushy with their belief system in any way shape or form.

I don't know of any other group doing that with violence.

 

[Thursday]

That's fair, though it works just as much when Christians try to boycott a product or service they believe has too much Muslim involvement.

A boycott is a legitimate form of protest. A suicide bomber is not.

 

[BrianJK]

If certain nation had an ebola outbreak, should we let those citizens migrate freely to the US?

Why should we allow potentially deadly radical Islamists to migrate here if we can't tell who is a danger?

There's already a very long delay before any refugee enters American society. Free migration is a misnomer if you're talking about refugees. Regarding people suspected of having contagious health issues, there's already a system in place to verify the health of immigrants, and especially refugees, before integration. There are quarantine procedures as well in case of positive testing. There's plenty of information online.

As far as "deadly radical Islamists", that's a nice idea, but hardly proven to the point of international religious discrimination. It's especially not proven to the point of nationality discrimination, that is, refusing to provide aid to refugees solely based on their nationality (Syrian, for example), which is in direct violation of international law, which we as a nation have agreed to follow.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Not all humans are terrorists but all terrorists are human.

No religion or ethnicity holds a monopoly on terrorism.

 

[Thursday]

There's already a very long delay before any refugee enters American society.

The delay doesn't matter. The killer in San Bernadino was a new mother!! We don't know who the nut cases are and we shouldn't be gambling with the lives of Americans.

Would you feel differently if one of your family members had been killed by a Muslim radical?

 

[JustOneWay]

A boycott is a legitimate form of protest. A suicide bomber is not.

Nobody was describing terror. Why do you feel the need to post that irrelevant bit of information?

 

[Thursday]

Not all humans are terrorists but all terrorists are human.

No religion or ethnicity holds a monopoly on terrorism.

Islam dominates the market, however.

 

[BrianJK]

That's not the case in the world today. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims.

They have a worldwide agenda of destruction and conquest.

A small minority with bad intentions, in my opinion, do not justify the discrimination against nor the vilification of all people who share any one category with that small minority. You're of course entitled to disagree.