Religious Persecution by the President of the United States

Pommer · Thursday at 11:05 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Are there a lot of them trying to move here from other countries?

As I noted, not really much that can be done about people born here, they're US citizens by birthright.

It'd be like saying "well, since there's a small subset of people born here who end up being communists, that means we have no right to deny entry to communists from other places"

Under Capitalism, not all people are “capitalists”; only those who make money by owning the means-of-production are capitalists. We all live under a capitalist system and are part of that system but we’re not all capitalists.

The people from communist countries who wish to emigrate from their Lands, are only “communists” insofar as the basis for communism is that all workers share in the ownership of the means of production. If they wanted to remain communists…why would they leave their home?

Capitalism is better in every conceivable way except on how human beings are treated under it.

Pommer · Thursday at 11:16 PM

2PhiloVoid said:
No. I didn't say that. I prefer the idea that we should ONLY let in immigrants who will abide by and affirm the central core political values of our Constitution / Bill of Rights, and who even if not yet a citizen, would affirm a set of personal values that reflect the oath of allegiance that naturalized citizens later need to have and promise.

I don't think that's too much to ask, and what's more, I don't think die-hard Communists or those committed to other similarly alternatively inclined political devotions can do so or are willing to do so.

The unspoken part is assuming that there are people who wish to enter our fair Land, that want to “do it dirt”, (as my Father once said).
While there’s always going to be the odd crackpot, (the Boston Marathon Bombers, e.g., (apologies for the unfortunate pun)), the default would be to assume that immigrants want a better life for themselves living under the system(s) we already have in place.

What bad thing might happen if we just let anybody in?
That’s so pessimistic that I can’t even be bothered fully respond. How’s about “we don’t know”? Why is that “bad”?

Pommer · Thursday at 11:25 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Where it's our more liberal party that espouses pro labor immigration talking points, and the conservative party espouses restricting it in the name of not replacing American workers with cheaper foreign-born labor.

The unemployment rate is stuck @4%; we don’t have enough people to fill the jobs.
We desperately NEED immigrants but ~~half~~ a third of the country is against that and has near total control of the government.

If we don’t have enough people, then it’ll choke the economy and growth won’t offset the tax-cuts we’ve given ourselves for the last 44 years.

Hello deflation!

Maine Progressive · Friday at 6:30 AM

RileyG said:
Also, to be fair, the LDS Church hasn’t practiced polygamy in 100+ years. Those who do are offshoots and are not part of the LDS Church. They are various and rather small.

Thanks for the info!

Peace!

It's sad that RG can't recognize that just as the LDS has an extreme sect that seeks a refuge for it's greater misogyny, that Somalis are doing the reverse...seeking a refuge in America from the greater misogyny of their home country. It’s just as wrong to label them with the evils of their home country as it is to label the LDS with all the evils of the FLDS. Especially when he admits these evils are not typical of any other Islamic ethnicity.

Maine Progressive · Friday at 6:51 AM

So let's throw down the gauntlet. The law is 18 U.S. Code § 116. The penalty is 10 years in prison. Many states have matching laws. If this 'vacation' practice is as common as the posters would like us to think, then it is certain that some have been caught and convicted. These convictions are public record.
From the National Library of Medicine “No reliable sources of data exist on the number of U.S. resident women and girls who have undergone FGM/C either in the United States or in their country of origin, or on the number of women and girls who undergo the procedure in a given year.” So odd. Millions of tax dollars spent on preventing this. And no data. I don’t find even a single public record of a conviction. Maybe there is one somewhere. But this regular horror the posters claim? This is their excuse for prejudice? Post a single conviction record from 2026.

Tropical Wilds · Friday at 8:00 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
As I noted, for 5 year olds, "their faith" doesn't enter the equation. It's their parents religion they're following.

Unless anyone is suggesting 5 year olds have deeply considered various realms of theology, the afterlife, and philosophy, and after careful consideration, landed on the religion that aligns with their deeply held viewpoints (and it just so happens to be the same exact one as their parents, what a coincidence)

Ah so then there's no point in teaching Christian ideals or docterine in schools, then, as young kids are only following what their parents do and aren't old enough to have mental automony. It's been awhle since somebody paradded the "children are little idiots" excuse, so this is a refreshing change.

ThatRobGuy said:
As far as why I boiled it down to that, is because that's what is. As I noted before, it's a values system that entails a very one-sided "modesty" framework, that applies very strictly to women.

View attachment 381411

Hence the reason the boys and men can hang out in adidas track pants, Nike's and regular t-shirts and hoodies, and all of the women have to be covered from head to toe.

Or when you see family swimming/pool events, the men can wear whatever they want and go shirtless, and they've got their wives and daughters out there in swim-hijabs.

Again. modesty is a component, but its not the reason. And the line between "Muslim women interpret the Quran to believe that a hijab is an extension of expressing their faith and showing deference to Allah" to "Catholics wear head coverings to express their faith and deference to God" is nonexistent. Even if we went with just the single,boiled down stereotype that you hang on to (that it's to remove temptation), the line between "women need to wear a hijab to protect men's faith and prevent sexualization" and "that girl in a tank top/crop top/short shorts/low cut top is just asking for trouble/objectification/attention and isn't how Christians should dress." There are plenty of Christians who think girls in dresses is the proper way to be reverent. Yet that doesn't keep you up at night like the hijab does.

ThatRobGuy · Friday at 8:03 AM

Pommer said:
The unemployment rate is stuck @4%; we don’t have enough people to fill the jobs.
We desperately NEED immigrants but ~~half~~ a third of the country is against that and has near total control of the government.

If we don’t have enough people, then it’ll choke the economy and growth won’t offset the tax-cuts we’ve given ourselves for the last 44 years.

Hello deflation!

That's where the other split comes into play.

There's the higher level split on the topic of undocumented workers between the the Democrats and Republicans that I mentioned in the prior post.

Then there's the sub-split within the GOP on the topic of legal migration and H1B Visas. The Elon Musks and Viveks of the world seem to be in favor it to tap into the much cheaper Indian labor market in the tech space, where others reject the idea.

As far as what you're saying about the unemployment rate being stuck at 4%, wouldn't that indicate the opposite problem? Where if 4% of people are looking for work and can't find it, that means there are too many people and not the other way around, correct?

wing2000 · Friday at 8:33 AM

Vambram said:
The POTUS is not attacking kids.

Would you feel the same way if some Leftist president re-tweeted a picture of your daughter singing in a choir claiming the indoctrination she received from your upbringing is a threat to our nation?

2PhiloVoid · Friday at 8:37 AM

Pommer said:
The unspoken part is assuming that there are people who wish to enter our fair Land, that want to “do it dirt”, (as my Father once said).
While there’s always going to be the odd crackpot, (the Boston Marathon Bombers, e.g., (apologies for the unfortunate pun)), the default would be to assume that immigrants want a better life for themselves living under the system(s) we already have in place.

What bad thing might happen if we just let anybody in?
That’s so pessimistic that I can’t even be bothered fully respond. How’s about “we don’t know”? Why is that “bad”?

Your questions seem to attempt to skirt around, dismiss, ignore and otherwise leave unaddressed the previous conditions that I already stated.

Not just anyone should be let in, except those who not only truly wish to be here for reasons beneficial to both themselves and to those already here, but who also will abide by and value both the laws and central political philosophy pertaining to the Rule of Law as traditionally held and represented in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights............... as opposed to Communist Instrumentalism.

Laodicean60 · Friday at 9:22 AM

Pommer said:
The unemployment rate is stuck @4%; we don’t have enough people to fill the jobs.

Your logic is off. We've had deportations last year, and unemployment didn't go up. So I don't believe that the impact of immigrants is as people think.

Pommer said:
Hello deflation!

The true deflation affecting us is global.

Pommer · Friday at 9:32 AM

wing2000 said:
Would you feel the same way if some Leftist president re-tweeted a picture of your daughter singing in a choir claiming the indoctrination she received from your upbringing is a threat to our nation?

Are you trying to elicit empathy?
They’ve already been told that empathy is toxic.

Pommer · Friday at 9:35 AM

Laodicean60 said:
Your logic is off. We've had deportations last year, and unemployment didn't go up. So I don't believe that the impact of immigrants is as people think.

Are the jobs typically filled by undocumented immigrants usually those included in unemployment figures?

Laodicean60 said:
The true deflation affecting us is global.

Uh huh

Pommer · Friday at 9:36 AM

2PhiloVoid said:
Your questions seem to attempt to skirt around, dismiss, ignore and otherwise leave unaddressed the previous conditions that I already stated.

Not just anyone should be let in, except those who not only truly wish to be here for reasons beneficial to both themselves and to those already here, but who also will abide by and value both the laws and central political philosophy pertaining to the Rule of Law as traditionally held and represented in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights............... as opposed to Communist Instrumentalism.

There’s no “loyalty test” for birthright citizens, wouldn’t your restrictions violate the 14th Amendment?

Hans Blaster · Friday at 9:44 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
As far as what you're saying about the unemployment rate being stuck at 4%, wouldn't that indicate the opposite problem? Where if 4% of people are looking for work and can't find it, that means there are too many people and not the other way around, correct?

Or the damage being done to the economy which would drive unemployment increases are being countered by the reduction in available employable people because they have been deported. (And the deportations are causing some of the damage. Others come from cancelling construction projects in green energy, tarrifs, etc.) Just matching economic speculation with the like.

High Fidelity · Friday at 9:49 AM

Nothing wrong with being critical of Islam.

If you want a glimpse at what happens when Islam grows then feel free to look at Europe. Lots of examples where you can look at individual countries as well as the broader European impact.

TLDR, it's not good, they're not compatible with our values or way of life, and are generally a net negative that are ultimately the biggest factor in the deterioration of national identity, culture, security and social cohesion.

If you want a particularly depressing read, have a look at the rape gangs in the UK and, if you're brave enough, some of the testimonies of their victims. Or the huge increase in rapes and sexual assaults in Sweden which has recently been overtaken by the UK. Or France and the absolute cesspool that Paris in particular has become.

I know good people that happen to be Muslim, but overall I'd much prefer Islam not be a part of my society or those around me. At all.

High Fidelity · Friday at 9:55 AM

Maine Progressive said:
It's sad that RG can't recognize that just as the LDS has an extreme sect that seeks a refuge for it's greater misogyny, that Somalis are doing the reverse...seeking a refuge in America from the greater misogyny of their home country. It’s just as wrong to label them with the evils of their home country as it is to label the LDS with all the evils of the FLDS. Especially when he admits these evils are not typical of any other Islamic ethnicity.

The problem is that those 'escaping' somewhere almost always bring the fundamental beliefs and values that created the problem in the first place with them.

People point to fundamentalist Islam as being an issue but the clue is in the name... fundamentals. A more extreme version of something inherently vile doesn't make the 'normal' version any less repugnant.

Somalis did the same in Sweden. Came in droves, congregated and isolated themselves with no attempt at integrated, and the same mindset and values that caused problems in their home country were brought with them. Now there are issues with drugs, gangs, murders, sexual assaults, rapes, you name it.

High Fidelity · Friday at 9:57 AM

Hans Blaster said:
Or the damage being done to the economy which would drive unemployment increases are being countered by the reduction in available employable people because they have been deported. (And the deportations are causing some of the damage. Others come from cancelling construction projects in green energy, tarrifs, etc.) Just matching economic speculation with the like.

It was always going to happen when the economy under successive governments has enabled a large pool of cheap, exploitative labour into the American economy.

There will need to be adjustments.

2PhiloVoid · Friday at 11:01 AM

Pommer said:
There’s no “loyalty test” for birthright citizens, wouldn’t your restrictions violate the 14th Amendment?

That's a Red Herring and has very little or nothing really to do with my statements. I think you're mistaking me as being an advocate of Hard Right politics.

As a rejoinder, I'd point out that in line with my previous statements about immigrants, Naturalized Citizens DO have a loyalty test involved in their becoming U.S. citizens.

Say it aint so · Friday at 11:39 AM

Pretty consistent with a POTUS who brought us the Muslim ban.
In fact the same president who brought us "whites only" asylum.

Vambram · Friday at 12:27 PM

wing2000 said:
Would you feel the same way if some Leftist president re-tweeted a picture of your daughter singing in a choir claiming the indoctrination she received from your upbringing is a threat to our nation?

Islamists are incompatible with Western culture.

Religious Persecution by the President of the United States

Future History Slab Carver

Future History Slab Carver

Future History Slab Carver

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

The war bow. God uses metaphors.

Queen of Cups

Part of the IT crowd

E pluribus unum

Mama said to knock you OUT !!!

Well-Known Member

Future History Slab Carver

Future History Slab Carver

Future History Slab Carver

Your turn, Atlanta!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Mama said to knock you OUT !!!

Well-Known Member

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Similar threads