Another Vox article, written by Zack Beauchamp and also published yesterday, calls attention to a poll by the Public Religion Research Institute that asked respondents if they agreed with the statement “The values of Islam are at odds with American values and way of life.”
Vox’s headline announces the results for Republicans, 76% of whom agree. But the view is shared by a majority of all respondents (56%) and independents (57%) and a substantial minority of Democrats (43%). Blacks and Hispanics are evenly divided, and majorities of every Christian subpopulation, including black Protestants, agree.
Our own view of the question is complicated. Certainly Islam and the American way of life are compatible inasmuch as America is capable of welcoming Muslims who are not Islamic supremacists. On the other hand, it’s always struck us that categorical statements to the effect that Islam is “a religion of peace” are far more hortatory than empirical–which is to say that there is a gap between Islam as it actually exists and Islam as President Bush or President Obama would like it to be. How wide that gap is, and how dangerous, we do not know.
Thus Trump’s proposal for a pause in Muslim immigration “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on” strikes this columnist as entirely reasonable. That’s not to say it’s necessarily a good idea. There are potential costs in American-Muslim relations both internationally and domestically, and humanitarian costs as well. There are practical questions about how it would be implemented. The religious-freedom argument, although legally empty, is not without moral force.
Instead of debating the proposal in a reasoned way, the political class–both parties–and many in the media are treating it as a thoughtcrime. Yet the PRRI poll suggests a large majority of Americans are thinking along similar lines.
As the effectiveness of “Shut up”, they argued is fading with every passing news cycle.
Gun Buyers Rush to Stock Up After “fill in city name here” Shooting.
There, that should make the MSM’s job a little easier in the future.
As per Trump’s views, I am really only troubled by this recent addition….
“until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on”
That’s pure bullshit, except to make it more palatable to Dems. Trump, like the rest of us that have our eyes open, know exactly “what is going on”. Get enough Muslims in a democratic country(plumb full of PC types)and they will change the laws to suit their particular brand of bizarre bullshit.
I must say, I have thoroughly enjoyed watching the media being forced to follow Trump’s narrative instead of their own.
What did St. Thomas of Aquinus say about immigration?
mmigration should have as its goal integration, not disintegration or segregation. The immigrant should not only desire to assume the benefits but the responsibilities of joining into the full fellowship of the nation. By becoming a citizen, a person becomes part of a broad family over the long term and not a shareholder in a joint stock company seeking only short-term self-interest – See more at: http://lesfemmes-thetruth.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-bishops-need-to-read-st-thomas.html#.dpuf
http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/catholic-perspective/what-does-saint-thomas-say-about-immigration.html
Sharia Law is opposed to the U.S. Constitution it forces everyone to live under one reln and the Constitution prophibits having established religion but theres no separation of Church & State
lets send this Poll some love, http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2015/12/donald-trump-petition-vancouver/
Yeah that Vancouver media lead musing about removing Trump from his own real estate project is typical liberal thinking. The only kind of thought that is allowed is liberal. Anything else is just unacceptable. We must not allow anyone at anytime to disagree with liberal ideology and if they do they must be prosecuted, fired, shunned, boycotted, and ostracized. I think Trump is Americans pushing back and saying STOP IT.
Not really a Trump supporter (would have preffered Walker or Cruz now) but he makes the people I dont like (Liberals) very angry. I guess he can’t be all that bad.
So … To sum up we can state with confidence that most Americans (Canadians too) think Muslims suck in a very large way and WE DO NOT WANT ANYMORE OF THEM COMING HERE … PERIOD.
They need to clean up the mess in their own cesspool countries and stay there ….
… They have proven time and again that they are unable to coexist with any other culture … Including variations of their own sick culture.
The post WW2 introduction of multiculturalism as the unquestionable political dogma of the day, a political philosophy that argues all cultures and people are equally nice and benign still rules the liberal mind.
It will take some truly massive mass terrorist attack by some nice multiculti jihadis before the deep psychosis gets broken.
Think of a dirty bomb attack on the children’s hospital in Toronto level of terrorism and even something as gruesome as that would not be enough shock to cure a lot of progressives.
But the jihadis will get ever more desperate as time goes on . . . wait for it . . .
President Carter had banned all Iranians from entering the USA, something the hateful left conveniently pretends never happened.
but here is something related,
NY Daily News Sinks To New Low, COVER DEPICTS TRUMP BEHEADING STATUE OF LIBERTY
http://tammybruce.com/2015/12/ny-daily-news-sinks-to-new-low-cover-depicts-trump-beheading-statue-of-liberty.html
Thinking about this immigration stuff.
The old Trudeau, changed waiting time for assuming Canadian citizenship from 5 years to 3 years.
Your agent waited 5 years before the changes.
Now think about the coming four years. Over that period there will be coming some 100K to 200K or perhaps more “refugees” from third world countries.
This will translate to very close to the number of voters that will add to the Liberal count.
This is one and perhaps the only reason the airhead in Ottawa is doing what he is doing, on advice of dark power behind him.
Yes, those that don’t learn the lessons of history, including their own, are doomed to repeat them. So how well did the invasions of Rome work out for the empire?
And unlike in Canada, where our stupid, corrupt courts wouldn’t permit the banning the hijab at a citizenship ceremony, I don’t think our friends to south will be as stupid.
Go Trump!
Not sure if anyone else has seen this, but it just goes to show you how stupid the global warming fraud artists can be. People this stupid should be shamed off the stage.
http://calgaryherald.com/entertainment/celebrity/that-awkward-moment-when-you-have-to-explain-a-chinook-to-leo-dicaprio
This so utterly astonishing that I am virtually speechless.
Could it be the Liberals are left stymied because Trump is talking about what the majority agree with but dare not say? On the issue of Muslim immigration he appears to have them all by the short and curlies, rendering them impotent no matter which side they take. There’s more to Trump than his shock of hair, too much for the PC crowd and those who shy away from the obvious, the big elephant in the room will stomp them good if they ignore it.
Ending “Muslim” immigration (whatever that’s supposed to mean anyway) isn’t going to stop Islamic extremists. The key weakness with such a silly idea is this: Islam is a religion, not an ethnicity.
The Islamic State could infiltrate:
1. Pakistanis as Indian Hindus or Christians;
2. Arabs as Christians (or even Jews);
3. Asians as, well, Asians; and/or
4. Europeans (it would not be that challenging to disguise an Albanian, Bosniac or even someone from the Caucasus as a German, Greek, Italian or Russian).*
The other key weakness here is the homegrown terrorist, either a convert or a Muslim by birth. Immigration controls won’t help deal with this.
* Heck, a German convert could probably slip in fairly smoothly with a well-crafted cover. The cover only has to hold up long enough to get the job done.
Charles Krauthammer said that he had heard how to solve the problem…..have them eat a ham sandwich at the border.
Once again Donald Trump shows; YES- “When the chuckle-heads of CNN-ask if he really thinks he is smarter than the Washington Political Establishment Class”.
Regarding sharia law and the US Constitution (and the Canadian one, for that matter), the imposition of any such law would be wholly unconstitutional. I seriously doubt it could even be accomplished by constitutional amendment either since such amendments generally can’t be antithetical to the spirit of the constitution.
You’d essentially be talking about scrapping the constitution and writing a new one. Good luck with that.
Muslims are free in the US and Canada to voluntarily observe sharia law amongst themselves. They cannot impose it on non-Muslims any more than Amish people can force you to drive a horse and buggy or Orthodox Jews force you to observe their Shabbat.
What always has me scratching my head is that non Muslims who know little or nothing about Islam other than the nonsense spouted by Obama, Bush and the legacy media, keep wanting to tell actual Muslims what they believe and inform those of us who are keen on and have read history (perhaps even the Koran itself) that we know nothing about the religion and what we know and witness with our own lying eyes is wrong. People like Robert Spencer, an expert on the subject and someone who can read the original texts in Arabic, are shunned as haters. The left is insane. They see the last thirty years or so as an aberration and a hijacking of a great, peaceful religion. In reality, after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and Ataturk dissolving the Caliphate, the period between that and the Iranian revolution and the re-awakening of Islamic jihad was the real aberration.
“The values of Islam are at odds with American values and way of life.”
That statement is as obviously true as the nose on your face yet people still do not see it. Is it because they don’t understand or because they chose not to believe it?? Probably a little of column A and a little of column B is the truth.
The poll cited is just a poll. I don’t put much faith in polls. They generally reflect the current situation and rarely capture core beliefs.
I do know that Vox and Zack Beauchamp, both notoriously “progressive”, are in column B, they chose not to believe there is a contradiction. They refuse to admit that they would be the first to be repressed, if not killed, for their progressive views under Islam. Talk about disconnect! And so they pretend outrage and go for spin. Beuchamp has already Twitted that Trump would exclude American citizens of muslim faith from returning from overseas…… a falsehood to whip up the faithful.
Oh, and the gun buying. Finding ammo is becoming more and more expensive and difficult. It’s the perfect solution to gun control. Don’t for a moment think that it is not intentional.
“Charles Krauthammer said that he had heard how to solve the problem…..have them eat a ham sandwich at the border.”
So he’s saying Jews aren’t welcome either then?
Meh…it’s always been a logistical thing for me – Why have people travel thousands of miles to be placed in a country whose culture is obviously at odds with their theology when they could damn near walk to a country with the identical mindset.
Makes about as much sense as placing an Inuit in the Caribbean.
Me: “Muslims are free in the US and Canada to voluntarily observe sharia law amongst themselves.”
Not all sharia law of course. They can’t stone people.
“Muslims are free in the US and Canada to voluntarily observe sharia law amongst themselves.” I don’t think so. Have you investigated the nature of Sharia? It includes things like stoning women for infidelity. I am guessing that you know very little about Muslim beliefs. Suggest you check out Robert Spencer.
“Regarding sharia law and the Constitution”
Not a word need be changed to institute Sharia law under the US or Canadian Constitution. The law bears no relationship to how it reads. It is about what the Supreme Court says it means. The day we have 5 Muslim Supreme Court judges is the day we have Sharia law.
Saudi Arabia hasn’t allowed Jews in their country for years and were rewarded with a seat on the U.N’s Human Rights Council.
Did you know this is “Muslim Heritage Month”?
I didn’t.
Luckily, Toronto Police do:
http://torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/33532
“Have you investigated the nature of Sharia? It includes things like stoning women for infidelity.”
Can you please provide citation from the Quran about stoning women for infidelity?
“I am guessing that you know very little about Muslim beliefs.”
I know at least as much as you do.
“Have you investigated the nature of Sharia? It includes things like stoning women for infidelity.”
You obviously didn’t read the posting above yours. Stoning women for adultery isn’t just sharia, it’s older than that and is both Biblical and Talmudic. Where do you think the punishment of lapidation in Islam came from?
JJM, I found a lot in your post on Sharia Law that I just can’t agree with.
“… the imposition of any such law would be wholly unconstitutional. I seriously doubt it could even be accomplished by constitutional amendment…”
Islamization can happen very slowly over time, in small increments. Just look at all the examples in Europe if you don’t believe me. Besides, with leftards basically in charge of everything these days and based on what we have already witnessed of their ignorance, how can you doubt their current eagerness to appease Muslims? ESPECIALLY when you look at the race based justice system they have already created to appease natives.
“Muslims are free in the US and Canada to voluntarily observe sharia law amongst themselves.”
I see you discovered your own error there. If it breaks US or Canadian law, which much of it does, they are NOT free to practice it. You know, like severely beating a daughter because they got raped. I don’t think most westerners truly understand just how f*cked up and evil Sharia Law is.
“They cannot impose it on non-Muslims….”
You have probably not stopped to consider how difficult it can be for 1st or 2nd generation Canadians who are Muslim by family history only and otherwise westernized. The pressure from parents/grandparents to adhere to Islamic traditions can be violent and abusive, even deadly as we have already seen in this country.
Ha, good catch on the ham sandwich comment, though.
Sharia Law has no basis in fairness or justice and basically exists to ensure man’s dominance over woman and to enforce an unerring devotion to Islam. IT HAS NO PLACE HERE!
“The day we have 5 Muslim Supreme Court judges is the day we have Sharia law.”
Nonsense. Muslims represent less than one percent of the US population.
You’re much more likely to have a Supreme Court stacked with Hispanic Americans than Muslim ones!
OK, since we’re taking the work of the Public Religion Research Institute at face value, here are some of their other findings:
– “Perceptions of Islam vary substantially by race, ethnicity, and class. Roughly six in ten (61%) white Americans agree that Islam is at odds with American values, while fewer than four in ten (37%) disagree…There are notable differences among whites by social class. Two-thirds (67%) of white working-class Americans agree that Islam is incompatible with American values and way of life, while white college-educated Americans are evenly divided (50% agree, 50% disagree).”
– “Fewer than one in ten (8%) Americans report daily contact with someone who is Muslim. Roughly three in ten (29%) say they at least occasionally interact with someone who is Muslim, while a majority say they seldom (26%) or never (36%) have conversations with Muslims.”
– “At the same time, close to six in ten (57%) Americans say that American Muslims are an important part of the religious community in the country.”
– “Despite heightened concerns about terrorism—and political rhetoric linking Muslim refugees to the threat of terrorism—a majority (53%) of Americans support allowing Syrian refugees to come to the US provided they go through a security clearance process.”
– “There are no significant differences in attitudes by race or ethnicity, but white Americans are divided by educational attainment. More than six in ten (61%) white Americans with at least a college degree support allowing Syrian refugees into the country. In contrast, white Americans without a college degree are more divided: fewer than half (48%) say that Syrian refugees should be allowed in the U.S., while nearly as may (45%) oppose.”
– “Despite rising concerns about terrorism, and heated rhetoric about the danger posed by immigrants, American attitudes toward immigrants and support for comprehensive immigration reform remain stable. Roughly half (48%) of Americans say the growing number of newcomers from other countries strengthen American society, compared to 35% who say they threaten traditional American customs and values…Support for comprehensive immigration reform also continues to be robust. More than six in ten (63%) say that the immigration system should allow immigrants who are now living in the U.S. illegally a way to become citizens provided they meet certain requirements”
– “Americans employ a double standard when judging acts of violence committed by Christians and Muslims. Three-quarters (75%) of Americans say that self-identified Christians who commit acts of violence in the name of Christianity are not really Christian. Only 19 percent of Americans say that these types of perpetrators are actually Christian. In contrast, only half (50%) of the public say that self-proclaimed Muslims who commit acts of violence in the name of Islam are not really Muslim. Thirty-seven percent say these perpetrators really are Muslim, while thirteen percent offer no opinion.”
And in other news:
– 60% of Americans favour passing stricter gun control laws.
I’m sorry, you all were saying something about Trump giving voice to the silent majority?
“You have probably not stopped to consider how difficult it can be for 1st or 2nd generation Canadians who are Muslim by family history only and otherwise westernized. The pressure from parents/grandparents to adhere to Islamic traditions can be violent and abusive, even deadly as we have already seen in this country.”
Actually, one of the biggest domestic Islamic terrorist threats appears to be not the parents or grandparents who immigrated to Western countries but their children and grandchildren who were born and grew up in the West.
JJM…… US Code sec 1182 (f). I will paraphrase. The president can impose restrictions on the entry of any aliens or class of aliens into the US. End of story. If Trump becomes President he will be entirely within the law to restrict or refuse all Islamic immigration. and he damn well should.
I have two good friends like that but their parents were rational and they are muslims in the way I am a Christian: births, marriages and funerals. One born in Edmonton to Ugandan Asian parents (remember Idi Amin?), the other born in England to a family of Doctors.
Many Germans weren’t impressed with the Nazis, but were obliged to read Mein Kampf.
I don’t honestly think islam is capable of reform as it’s central “prophet” set the mood of the “religion”; ISIS et al are remaining pure to his example. They would regard my friends as almost apostate. I genuinely think the muslims should be de-programmed as with any other cult members.
51 % of americans and 51 % of canadians are as dumb as a bag of rocks. that any of the fools who support islam on this site have even a tiny understanding of islam sure is not evident.
Nope…..he’s asking that of Muslims. Of course, anyone who knows anything about Islam, it is completely acceptable for them to lie to infidels.
I see “old white guy” has now chipped in.
We had our “Spurwing Plover” contribution earlier so I expect “NME666” at just about any moment.
Another SDA thread bites the dust!
JJM, we were not discussing terrorism, we were discussing Sharia Law. I clearly stated “otherwise westernized” which probably describes a clear majority.
old white guy, so true. A pearl I heard years ago, believe it was George Carlin….
If you really want to scare yourself, first, think of how stupid the average person is. NOW, by definition, consider that 1/2 of everybody is stupider than that!
Yup. I’m going to rant here, in a way and at a length I wouldn’t on the main page, about the dishonesty of the Trumped-up™ media coverage of Muhammad Ali’s statement condemning radical Muslims and jihadists, because I can’t recall ever seeing such open revisionism and blatant dishonesty about a current event. The widespread lying all hinges entirely on a small detail: the now-corrected headline to the first release of Ali’s condemnation of jihadists and radical Islamists, which presumably used the recent news-making statement of Trump as a sort of teaser:
Ali’s actual statement was throughout a criticism of jihadists and radical Muslims, though, not Trump, so the Ali camp quickly changed the headline to accurately reflect its contents:
That’s the actual headline to Ali’s statement. The agenda-driven prog media has no interest in the truth, though.
The Telegraph:
NBC, in a report titled “Muhammad Ali Hits at Trump and ‘Misguided Murderers’ Sabotaging Islam”:
Steaming bullshit. NBC and all the other hyperventilating propagandists know full well that that the initial teaser headline was subsequently changed to reflect the point of the contents of the *actual* statement: Ali’s condemnation of jihadists. Almost every piece of coverage, including NBC’s, notes in as-fast-as-possible passing that the headline was changed, but then proceeds to ignore the corrected, final headline “Statement from Muhammad Ali Calling on all Muslims to Stand Against Jihadist Radical Agenda” — which, again, accurately describes the actual contents of the actual article — in order to shamelessly misrepresent it as being a statement from Muhammad Ali about…Donald Trump.
From a Washington Post report — “Muhammad Ali on Donald Trump..” — which wilfully misrepresents Ali’s anti-jihadist statement as “a statement aimed at the Republican presidential front-runner”:
From USA Today article titled “In vintage Muhammad Ali fashion, a clear message for Donald Trump”:
The lede of another USA Today report:
Here’s the thing: Ali’s spokesman has clarified in unequivocal terms that Ali’s statement wasn’t a response to Trump, but was rather a statement about “Muhammad Ali’s belief that Muslims must reject extremist views.” When he was asked why the initial headline was changed to “Statement from Muhammad Ali calling on all Muslims to Stand Up Against Jihadist Radical Agenda”, Ali’s spokesman told Reuters that the statement “was not meant toward Trump so we edited the headline.”
Who gets to decide what’s in a statement that condemns radical Muslims and calls for Muslims to stand up against jihadist-minded Muslims? Why, the media, of course. The contents of Ali’s statement, and its headline, say one thing, but the media rejects/ignores its headline (“Statement from Muhammad Ali calling on all Muslims to Stand Up Against Jihadist Radical Agenda” ), deliberately ignores/misrepresents the actual contents of Ali’s statement, and brushes aside the unequivocal statements by Ali’s camp that the statement wasn’t about Donald Trump, in order to clear the way for their hammering effort to deliberately misrepresent Ali’s statement as…an attack on Donald Trump.
Shameless liars put their own words in the mouth of a disabled black Muslim, who can no longer speak and has long been known to be functionally illiterate, in order to service their own anti-racist and anti-“Islamophobic” agenda. Is that journalism?
Good lord…
I guess it depends which polls you believe:
“Nearly three weeks after the latest mass shooting claimed the lives of nine people, 52% of Americans now oppose stricter gun control laws, 6 percentage points more than the 46% of Americans who support such laws.” – October of this year
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/21/politics/gun-control-poll-americans/
I guess that’s why they have the constitution so that the majority can’t take away fundamental rights of the minority… unless you want to head down that road?
As per Trump’s views, I am really only troubled by this recent addition….
“until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on”
Bullshit! That was in his original statement!
Yet another concern troll looking to do anything to discredit Trump.
Go fly a kite.
Islam is not a religion (of peace or any other kind). Islam is a theocracy. It is complete cultural entity. Portions of it can’t exist without the rest, otherwise it is not Islam, and you are not a Muslim. And you cannot not be a Muslim.
Hey, asshole, next time you want to accuse me of things, try actually reading my post first.
Indeed, I was wrong about the timing and now realize that that part of the statement was in the original draft. That doesn’t change the fact in the slightest that we ALREADY KNOW what the problem is. There is nothing to figure out. Islam is evil. THAT was my only complaint about Trump’s stand in my post. It is also apparently where you started to hallucinate and read things not there. Really, do you not understand English?
You sir, are a frickin’ idiot and a total hypocrite(since you are the troll here).
“Muhammad ordered a Jewish woman put to death for literally losing her mind while the male members of her family were being beheaded (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 691). There were also several women that the prophet of Islam ordered killed for adultery. One example:
He went to her in the morning and she made a confession. And Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) made pronouncement about her and she was stoned to death. (Sahih Muslim 4209)
There are other examples as well, but perhaps the story from Muhammad’s biography that best lays to rest the silly idea that he never approved of harming women is the assassination of Asma bint Marwan, a poet and mother of five. For the crime of “displaying disaffection” at the Muslim murder of an elderly man (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 995), the “apostle” ordered her executed in the dead of night.”
So although this is not stoning to death women for adultery it’s done for far less in the history of their pedo prophet. What matters today is that this IS now what they sharia adherent moslems DO do to women for adultery and various other ‘offensives’ that males decide they need to spill blood in most ghoulish public way – calling it honor….
“Portions of it can’t exist without the rest, otherwise it is not Islam.”
Tell me, which parts of Christian theology can one entirely ignore, while still being a Christian? About which parts of the Tanakh, while still being a faithful Jew? And which parts of the Vedas, while still being a devout Hindu?
Shut up KT. Your blatherings are too stupid to tolerate.
“Tell me, which parts of Christian theology can one entirely ignore, while still being a Christian? About which parts of the Tanakh, while still being a faithful Jew? And which parts of the Vedas, while still being a devout Hindu?”
Instead of focussing on the actual security threat at hand (Islamic extremist violence), a lot of folks here would much rather treat Islam as some sort of sinister monolithic “Borg”.
Hey JJ, I agree with most of wot you post. I even agree that there is mention of stoning in the old testament, hell, the Koran is actually largely based on the olde testament. I’v said often enough in here that they are all, including Judaism, Abrahamic religions. And as some in here have already touched on, there is NO shari law, the term is shariah, and it is all encompassing. It includes all aspects of Islamic life, period. As some one stated in true Islam you can not part the sucker out, you are all in, or you are an apostate. And shariah supersedes any and all laws of the host country. Kristianity used to be the same, it changed, as I’v been told in here many times. What the tool fools who have told me this don’t appear to realize, is what that actually says about kritianity. It says that kristianity is based on an unacceptable, by todays standards, belief system. As to the quaking fools who think that Judaism and Islam are actually different, some of the earliest mosques were run by rabbis, because they were based on the same belief system, the olde testament .
Another heads up for the tools in here, every time something (bible) is written, one needs to consider context and authors bias, when assembled and rewritten you need to consider context and bias. When translated, context and bias. So todays “bible” is far different than what was the original intent of those writings. And then we have to consider the context and bias of any individual that reads it
JJM, you and the other tools in here certainly provide one h3ll of a lot of entertainment
Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!
Kate, this morning: “As the effectiveness of “Shut up”, they argued is fading with every passing news cycle.”
Canuckguy, this afternoon: “Shut up KT.”