CDZ Banning people from countries

[Toddsterpatriot]

Can't skip over it that easily.

You say you can ban using religion as a qualifier but you can't point to the Constitution or case law for support.

Thus you are acting like a Progressive acting on opinion.

Where in the Constitution did it say we could exclude Chinese people?

What was the justification when Carter banned Iranians?

 

[JakeStarkey]

They were not covered under the 1st Amendment is the point.

One, you want to act like a big government progressive.

Two, just ban immigrants from certain countries like Carter and make exceptions who are carefully vetted.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They were not covered under the 1st Amendment is the point.

One, you want to act like a big government progressive.

Two, just ban immigrants from certain countries like Carter and make exceptions who are carefully vetted.

They were not covered under the 1st Amendment is the point.

The 1st Amendment doesn't apply to the Chinese or Iranians?
Does it apply to any people who live in other countries?

One, you want to act like a big government progressive.

No. Stopping people from coming here doesn't require a huge bureaucracy or a giant tax hike.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Stop all immigration if necessary until we can vet if properly necessary. toddsterpatriot's question is one of those that are obvious they need not be answered.

Your failure to answer is funny.

CDZ rules apply. Remember that. We all know that the 1st Amendment protects religious belief. We cannot ban our own people from returning to America. You can take it to court if you believe we cannot ban based on religion. You will lose.

CDZ rules apply. Remember that. We all know that the 1st Amendment protects religious belief.

Yup. We can't stop American citizens from practicing Islam.
We can for sure stop non-citizen Muslims from entering our country.

And Drumpf even has a plan in place to do it. He said he would just ask people what their religion is.

As silly as that is, much worse is that, apparently there are some who actually believe that's a viable "plan". Just like some believe Duh Donuld will build a 2000 mile long fence along our southern border and that Mexico will pay for it.

President Obama went against the are pubs when he increased the number of Border Patrol to more than 18,500.

But Drumpf is gonna ask what religion travelers are??? Maybe he'll put $arah in charge of them meany muslins.

Funny stuff. Good times.

LMAO


.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Andylusion]

If we ban a quarter of the world's population from entering the US, based on their religion, we will be denying rights to the citizens of literally every country on the earth. What will England say about our refusing to let English citizens into the US because of their religion? France? Germany?

This is a notion that a bright third grader would dismiss after a few minutes of thought.

Life, Liberty, and Property (pursuit of happiness). Those are the fundamental rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Life.... Liberty... and pursuit of Happiness.

Where in there do you see, "right of people not under our government, not in our country, to come here without restriction and have us take care of them"?

These rights, under our constitution apply exclusively to our citizens. Citizens of another country, are not 'entitled' to come here. Nor is it their "right".

Sorry, but it's not a right dude.

Now I happen to be pro-immigration. I want more people coming to the US.

But regardless of my personal view on immigration, don't tell me that if we tell people they can't come here, that we are 'violating their rights'. We are not. They do not have the "right" to come here. Flat out, you are wrong.

I never said we were violating their rights. I said we would be denying them rights that we expect other countries to reciprocally grant to our citizens. If we deny the right to them, they will deny the right to us, and then we're all screwed.

No I don't. I do not assume that I as an American, have some magical "right", to go to some other country, and declare that they must make me a citizen.

I don't even believe you have a "right" to apply for citizenship in another country. You have that right.... ONLY if they make the choice to allow you that right.

You are not "entitled" to anything.

And how would I be screwed?

I haven't even visited a different country in 20 years. Can hardly imagine a reason I would want to. Heck if I want to visit Cuba, Florida is closer, cheaper, and is just a culturally different.

I don't see your point. Not at all. There is no "right" to demand some other country accept you as a citizen. They can choose to. They can choose not to. But neither us, nor them, have a "right" to it.

 

[Elvis Obama]

If we ban a quarter of the world's population from entering the US, based on their religion, we will be denying rights to the citizens of literally every country on the earth. What will England say about our refusing to let English citizens into the US because of their religion? France? Germany?

This is a notion that a bright third grader would dismiss after a few minutes of thought.

Life, Liberty, and Property (pursuit of happiness). Those are the fundamental rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Life.... Liberty... and pursuit of Happiness.

Where in there do you see, "right of people not under our government, not in our country, to come here without restriction and have us take care of them"?

These rights, under our constitution apply exclusively to our citizens. Citizens of another country, are not 'entitled' to come here. Nor is it their "right".

Sorry, but it's not a right dude.

Now I happen to be pro-immigration. I want more people coming to the US.

But regardless of my personal view on immigration, don't tell me that if we tell people they can't come here, that we are 'violating their rights'. We are not. They do not have the "right" to come here. Flat out, you are wrong.

I never said we were violating their rights. I said we would be denying them rights that we expect other countries to reciprocally grant to our citizens. If we deny the right to them, they will deny the right to us, and then we're all screwed.

No I don't. I do not assume that I as an American, have some magical "right", to go to some other country, and declare that they must make me a citizen.

I don't even believe you have a "right" to apply for citizenship in another country. You have that right.... ONLY if they make the choice to allow you that right.

You are not "entitled" to anything.

And how would I be screwed?

I haven't even visited a different country in 20 years. Can hardly imagine a reason I would want to. Heck if I want to visit Cuba, Florida is closer, cheaper, and is just a culturally different.

I don't see your point. Not at all. There is no "right" to demand some other country accept you as a citizen. They can choose to. They can choose not to. But neither us, nor them, have a "right" to it.

If we ban them, they'll ban us.

Nothing you wrote has anything whatsoever to with what I wrote, which has been true of every reply you have made to my posts. Your reading comprehension skills are nonexistent.

 

[Andylusion]

If we ban a quarter of the world's population from entering the US, based on their religion, we will be denying rights to the citizens of literally every country on the earth. What will England say about our refusing to let English citizens into the US because of their religion? France? Germany?

This is a notion that a bright third grader would dismiss after a few minutes of thought.

Life, Liberty, and Property (pursuit of happiness). Those are the fundamental rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Life.... Liberty... and pursuit of Happiness.

Where in there do you see, "right of people not under our government, not in our country, to come here without restriction and have us take care of them"?

These rights, under our constitution apply exclusively to our citizens. Citizens of another country, are not 'entitled' to come here. Nor is it their "right".

Sorry, but it's not a right dude.

Now I happen to be pro-immigration. I want more people coming to the US.

But regardless of my personal view on immigration, don't tell me that if we tell people they can't come here, that we are 'violating their rights'. We are not. They do not have the "right" to come here. Flat out, you are wrong.

I never said we were violating their rights. I said we would be denying them rights that we expect other countries to reciprocally grant to our citizens. If we deny the right to them, they will deny the right to us, and then we're all screwed.

No I don't. I do not assume that I as an American, have some magical "right", to go to some other country, and declare that they must make me a citizen.

I don't even believe you have a "right" to apply for citizenship in another country. You have that right.... ONLY if they make the choice to allow you that right.

You are not "entitled" to anything.

And how would I be screwed?

I haven't even visited a different country in 20 years. Can hardly imagine a reason I would want to. Heck if I want to visit Cuba, Florida is closer, cheaper, and is just a culturally different.

I don't see your point. Not at all. There is no "right" to demand some other country accept you as a citizen. They can choose to. They can choose not to. But neither us, nor them, have a "right" to it.

If we ban them, they'll ban us.

Nothing you wrote has anything whatsoever to with what I wrote, which has been true of every reply you have made to my posts. Your reading comprehension skills are nonexistent.

If we ban them, they'll ban us.

So....? Who cares? Big deal.

You really think I want to go to Syria? Heck if Syria bans us from coming there, that will eliminate Islamic State from a vast pool of self-radicalized idiots. Not seeing a problem here.

" I said we would be denying them rights that we expect other countries to reciprocally grant to our citizens. If we deny the right to them, they will deny the right to us, and then we're all screwed."​

That is what you posted verbatim.....

1. We do not expect them to grant our citizens those rights. I haven't yet met an American anywhere that said they EXPECTED other countries to allow us to go there and demand citizenship.

Never heard that view, ever.

2. It is not a right. Period. You are wrong.

3. We are not all screwed because country X does not allow our citizens to do to their country, and demand to be taken care of.

I deny every thing you said. All garbage.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Some here say we can ban based on religion, but have not been able to show that such is constitutional. To do so would be Big Government over reach. Such thinking would be a progressive expansion of Big Government power.

We should be able to ban any person, or group of persons, who pose a threat to the citizens and our Constitutional republic, regardless of the guise they use to cloak their threat.

This is true. We can and do ban people that we do not see fit to allow into the country.

The better question is weather or not Trump's statements on this particular matter make any sense whatsoever and I think that his statements are obviously asinine. Trying to ban a religion is simply pointless. There is no real religious test. You cannot prove or disprove that one person is of a particular religion or not. It also ignores what really presents a danger to the nation or not. Right now LOCAL terrorism presents a grater danger than imported terrorism and that is a scary thought. While we are scrambling to stop terrorists from coming here we are ignoring the fact that doing so is really a wasted effort when getting here is extremely simple even if you are not allowed and terrorists are more likely to be homegrown than imported.

If Trump was really serious he would never have said ban Muslims - he would have said to ban nationalities - something that is FAR easier to establish and much more in line with preventing terrorists. There is a greater threat from a foreign person that claims to be Christian from Iraq than there is from a Muslim in the UK. If the UK Muslim wanted to blow something up he would do so in his own country.

Oh, I agree. Trump misspoke by citing a religious sect as a target. Far easier to determine a point of origin than a less identifiable choice. Any person originating from somewhere where the overwhelming opinion involves "death to Americans" or similar sentiment should be denied entry to this country. After all, if they hate us that much, why come here...unless they intend to carry out their threats?

 

[gallantwarrior]

If we ban a quarter of the world's population from entering the US, based on their religion, we will be denying rights to the citizens of literally every country on the earth. What will England say about our refusing to let English citizens into the US because of their religion? France? Germany?

This is a notion that a bright third grader would dismiss after a few minutes of thought.

Life, Liberty, and Property (pursuit of happiness). Those are the fundamental rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Life.... Liberty... and pursuit of Happiness.

Where in there do you see, "right of people not under our government, not in our country, to come here without restriction and have us take care of them"?

These rights, under our constitution apply exclusively to our citizens. Citizens of another country, are not 'entitled' to come here. Nor is it their "right".

Sorry, but it's not a right dude.

Now I happen to be pro-immigration. I want more people coming to the US.

But regardless of my personal view on immigration, don't tell me that if we tell people they can't come here, that we are 'violating their rights'. We are not. They do not have the "right" to come here. Flat out, you are wrong.

I never said we were violating their rights. I said we would be denying them rights that we expect other countries to reciprocally grant to our citizens. If we deny the right to them, they will deny the right to us, and then we're all screwed.

No I don't. I do not assume that I as an American, have some magical "right", to go to some other country, and declare that they must make me a citizen.

I don't even believe you have a "right" to apply for citizenship in another country. You have that right.... ONLY if they make the choice to allow you that right.

You are not "entitled" to anything.

And how would I be screwed?

I haven't even visited a different country in 20 years. Can hardly imagine a reason I would want to. Heck if I want to visit Cuba, Florida is closer, cheaper, and is just a culturally different.

I don't see your point. Not at all. There is no "right" to demand some other country accept you as a citizen. They can choose to. They can choose not to. But neither us, nor them, have a "right" to it.

If we ban them, they'll ban us.

Nothing you wrote has anything whatsoever to with what I wrote, which has been true of every reply you have made to my posts. Your reading comprehension skills are nonexistent.

(See highlighted above) So, I don't see a down side to that.

 

[Elvis Obama]

If we ban a quarter of the world's population from entering the US, based on their religion, we will be denying rights to the citizens of literally every country on the earth. What will England say about our refusing to let English citizens into the US because of their religion? France? Germany?

This is a notion that a bright third grader would dismiss after a few minutes of thought.

Life, Liberty, and Property (pursuit of happiness). Those are the fundamental rights.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"

Life.... Liberty... and pursuit of Happiness.

Where in there do you see, "right of people not under our government, not in our country, to come here without restriction and have us take care of them"?

These rights, under our constitution apply exclusively to our citizens. Citizens of another country, are not 'entitled' to come here. Nor is it their "right".

Sorry, but it's not a right dude.

Now I happen to be pro-immigration. I want more people coming to the US.

But regardless of my personal view on immigration, don't tell me that if we tell people they can't come here, that we are 'violating their rights'. We are not. They do not have the "right" to come here. Flat out, you are wrong.

I never said we were violating their rights. I said we would be denying them rights that we expect other countries to reciprocally grant to our citizens. If we deny the right to them, they will deny the right to us, and then we're all screwed.

No I don't. I do not assume that I as an American, have some magical "right", to go to some other country, and declare that they must make me a citizen.

I don't even believe you have a "right" to apply for citizenship in another country. You have that right.... ONLY if they make the choice to allow you that right.

You are not "entitled" to anything.

And how would I be screwed?

I haven't even visited a different country in 20 years. Can hardly imagine a reason I would want to. Heck if I want to visit Cuba, Florida is closer, cheaper, and is just a culturally different.

I don't see your point. Not at all. There is no "right" to demand some other country accept you as a citizen. They can choose to. They can choose not to. But neither us, nor them, have a "right" to it.

If we ban them, they'll ban us.

Nothing you wrote has anything whatsoever to with what I wrote, which has been true of every reply you have made to my posts. Your reading comprehension skills are nonexistent.

(See highlighted above) So, I don't see a down side to that.

Really? It seems so obvious to so many others. Dick Cheney, for one. Rank and file Republicans love it, of course, but their knowledge of foreign policy is non-existent.