"Donald Trump supporter defends stance on potential Muslim registry", Megyn Kelly show
Sometimes I see teh news on my yootoob feed, and they bait me into clicking, and then I feel really dizzy from the stupidity of it and like I need to come on Steemit and express myself, lol.
Here's my breakdown of this:
Megyn Kelly is rad for a cable news host, I have to admit. Her "look at me, I'm tough .. I grill both sides toughly, that's me, Megyn Kelly" shtick is pretty transparent and lost on me but probably works great on the average cable news viewer, who doesn't realize that she can use that image to manipulate the audience a certain way (whereas like with Sean Hannity you know he's coming from one side, so you're more on guard about being influenced that way).
Comparison to Japanese during WW2 doesn't mean you're drawing a comparison to internment camps. He's saying there's precedent of filtering immigration from a country you're at war with, and that typically it isn't controversial to do that. You can't throw out the baby with the bath water; it's possible to filter immigration without locking people in camps.
Freedom of religion has nothing to do with anything. We're not talking about Americans. Nobody is saying that Americans who are Muslim need to signup for a registry. Unless you think immigrating to the US is everybody's natural born right, then it isn't a matter of rights, it's a matter of whatever (sometimes arbitrary) policy that a country wants to install in its requirement for immigration.
And to me filtering people from countries who you are at war with seems pretty normal.
I hope that doesn't sound intolerant. I'm not necessarily opposed to immigration from these countries, I don't really know what's going on or who all the US is at war with these days, lol. I just can't stand sloppy thinking that distorts the actual issue.
As far as I can tell, nobody actually thinks people should join a registry because they're Muslim, but rather because it's a country the US is at war with. You can't have your cake and eat it too. I would prefer the US left these countries alone, but when it makes enemies over there for decade after decade, it seems reasonable to filter immigration from these countries in some way.
I'm open to being wrong, but it's silly to me the way the MSM tries to reduce it to "registry for Muslims!!" vs "freedom of religion tho!!" when that's actually not the issue at all, it's just bastardizing both sides of it.
Muslims should live in Muslim countries. If they want to live in non muslim countries fine but don't bring their religion with them.They don't respect our values so why should we respect theirs. They have caused nothing but trouble and how can we just forget 9/11.
Which Muslim country is the US in war with?
Well like I said it's hard to keep track of, lol. Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, tons of sanctions on Iran (which essentially is an act of war), Syria? Are you asking me or quizzing me? lol. US is very involved militarily in Middle East.
Maybe you'll say those countries aren't predominantly Muslim? I don't know. But that's kind of my point, that restricting immigration from countries who you have made enemies of yours is different than "registry for Muslims"
As far as I know the US is not officially in war with any of these countries. And what about Muslim citizens of other countries?
Besides, who do you think is not registered yet? If you apply for a visa to the US, you get scrutinized, biometrically photographed, fingerprintef and registered. And I can tell you from my experience that if you apply for a work permit visa, you get therally interogated and have to submit a full CV, and from that moment on, it looks like the US immigration authorities know everything about you. So imagine what happens to people who apply for citizenship. The only thing this new registration could mean is that the information will become open to the public. And that's discrimination, which you can expect to have all kinds of implementations that has nothing to do with national security.
I'm talking about their activity, not what's officially declared. If your family is killed or your community is torn apart you don't say "well hmm is there an official declaration from their congress?", you just feel the way you feel about it. Do you actually disagree that the US has made enemies in that part of the world? not sure why you're nitpicking about that.
I should clarify that I'm not claiming to know exactly what US immigration policy should be. Just that it isn't an issue of "rights" (ie right to religious freedom), unless we think immigrating to other countries is something we have a right to.
Personally I don't feel I have a right to immigrate to another country, it seems they could have whatever potentially bizarre or intrusive policy they want, and this wouldn't be violating my "rights" in any way because it seems like just a privilege and my choice to immigrate there. They could make me agree to post my photo on all the milk cartons lol, and I just wouldn't go to that country if it seemed absurd.
Which isn't to say that I favor absurd and unnecessarily strict rules, I'm just responding to the way Fox presents the issue, and to the argument the guest made, and saying it isn't an issue of rights or freedoms.
So you may be right that there are already strict controls and nothing would actually be accomplished by what the republicans are talking about. But that's not the argument the guest made or the type of questions Fox asked.
Regarding Muslims from other countries, of course that's a totally different thing. And that's kind of the point: I don't think anyone is talking about people from Australia who happen to be Muslim. If somebody talks about immigration from X part of the world, the MSM (and sometimes people in general) are quick to make it about "Muslims". It's like, what? The point was what country they are from (that it's a country the US has not been friendly with), not what their religion is.
I'm pretty sure Mr. Trump was talking about all Muslims. Otherwise it really makes no sense.
I am neat picking you because when it comes to human rights you have to be precise... Hmmm... I should write a post about that.
Well regardless, if it's all Muslims it doesn't change my argument that it's not a matter of "rights" unless we think it's a right to immigrate to another country.
But people (and MSM outlets) commonly make it about religion when the person was talking about a country. So while it could be true that Trump actually said that, I'll wait for a link to it before assuming he said something.
Ya for sure you want to be as clear as possible (not just about "human rights", about anything), but it's possible to use "precision" in a way that isn't useful. If I say John is choking on a hoagie it isn't helpful to quibble about what's a hoagie and what's a sub. The "precision" of whether they officially declared war doesn't seem practical at all, since I'm just making the point that the US has made enemies (and this is true whether it was officially declared as a war or not).