Number 3 is a really good one I agree with that I didn’t mention. Punish the businesses who are clearly incentivizing illegal behavior.
Kudos to @Aragorn (and you).
1 Like
Racial tensions are indisputably better.
3 Likes
More empty assertions
You haven’t been in the country long enough to see the before and after. Not a judgement, just a statement of fact.
1 Like
You asked the question, dumbass, and had I said “they’re worse”, you wouldn’t be challenging the sufficiency of the claim.
But in any event, I’m native to the country, and I know its history. It’s far better than it once was. That’s common knowledge and not subject to debate. If you contend otherwise, post your “proof” and don’t forget to link to sources.
This is about how 90% of your posts go.
You make an assertion using firm language in place of examples or an argument.
Yeah, it also helps if you imagine me pointing with authority using the stem of of my glasses while standing at a lectern, if you want the full effect. Firm!
Look, be serious. You couldn’t argue your way out of a wet paper sack. Stop trying to go down this road given your embarrassing report card here.
If you think you have some proof that racial tensions are actually worse since America became more diverse, then deliver it up.
I think this is a questionaire
To be very honest with you I would be comfortable with anyone keeping out those who want to do us harm, wouldn’t you?
From your own cite:
On balance, the public thinks that when it comes to discrimination against black people in the U.S. today, discrimination that is based on the prejudice of individual people is a bigger problem than discrimination that is built into the nation’s laws and institutions. This is the case among both blacks and whites, but while whites offer this opinion by a large margin (70% to 19%), blacks are more evenly divided (48% to 40%).
The problem, in the view of both blacks and whites, is not so much institutional racism, as it once was, but driven by individuals.
No he considers it harmful to keep out people who are harmful
I doubt that. Why would anyone have a problem with keeping out people who would do us harm? At least any rational human being which he certainly is.
1 Like
Is it suffice to say people who adhere to the teachings of Islam want to do us harm?
It literally says to kill non believers
The Bible also literally says to kill non-believers:
“If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.”
I assume that your ban on Christian immigrants is shortly to follow?
I’ll let Christian posters to chime in this has been discussed before
Well, it looks like you outmaneuvered me in another discussion!
I’ll retreat back to the lower end of the White IQ bell curve.
2 Likes
Well at least you admit IQ is real and matters, that sounds like a step up
This is because you assume all Muslims follow their religion to the letter, while Christians do not, and is fundamentally wrong.
In reality 99% of people take religion for what it is, a loose set of evolving guidelines with which to structure your life. As a previous catholic school attendee, following the Bible to the letter is just as unrealistic (and terryfing) as following the Quran to the letter.
We both know who is deemed harmful would depend on the party in power. Do liberals not deem conservatives harmful to progress?
You’re an idiot.