Free Markets, Free People

Would you invited a known killer who hated you into your house?

Yeah, me neither.  Yet, we have a group of people out there who are more than willing to take the chance of “inviting” known killers who hate us into the country.

As usual, the media and some pundits have turned a very gray area into stark black and white arguments.  You’re apparently for allowing open immigration to anyone or you’re a racist and a bigot if you opt to be selective.

What I’m talking about is the majority of the nation which is reasonably concerned that those who would kill us are seeking entry into the country without being screened and, if necessary, rejected.  This is characterized as “unAmerican”.  So, then, was Ellis Island where we rejected would be immigrants if they were sick or had criminal backgrounds, etc.

Andy McCarthy had this to say:

Let’s bear in mind that permitting immigration is a discretionary national act. There is no right to immigrate to the United States, and the United States has no obligation to accept immigrants from any country, including Muslim-majority countries. We could lawfully cut off all immigration, period, if we wanted to. Plus, it has always been a basic tenet of legal immigration to promote fidelity to the Constitution and assimilation into American society — principles to which classical sharia is antithetical. . . .

All important points, but the final point is most likely the most important.  McCarthy again:

Our constitutional principle of religious liberty is derived from the Western concept that the spiritual realm should be separate from civic and political life. The concept flows from the New Testament injunction to render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s.

Crucially, the interpretation of Islam that is mainstream in most Muslim-majority countries does not accept a division between mosque and state. . . .

The lack of separation between spiritual and civic life is not the only problem with Islam. Sharia is counter-constitutional in its most basic elements — beginning with the elementary belief that people do not have a right to govern themselves freely. Islam, instead, requires adherence to sharia and rejection of all law that contradicts it. So we start with fundamental incompatibility, before we ever get to other aspects of sharia: its systematic discrimination against non-Muslims and women; its denial of religious liberty, free speech, economic freedom, privacy rights, due process, and protection from cruel and unusual punishments; and its endorsement of violent jihad in furtherance of protecting and expanding the territory it governs.

And that’s where we must draw the line.  If an immigrant wants to become an American, recognize the separation of church and state and embrace the constitutional principles which govern this country, I say “welcome”.  If not, I say, “don’t let the doorknob hit you in the ass as you leave”.

Of course, the left’s legacy of “multiculturalism” says we must respect different cultures and learn to live with them.  I say, no we don’t.  Why?  Because some cultures are destructive and some cultures are inferiors.  I know, not politically correct, but certainly reality based (something the left once tried to convince us was a description of their ideological grounding).

You would no more invite a killer that hated you and wanted to take over your house into your home than any other sane person.  There’s no reason why we shouldn’t apply the same principle to this country (and for those of you who don’t read carefully, that means we don’t keep out all Muslims, only those (of any religion or ethnic group) who refuse to recognize our Constitutional principles and won’t assimilate).

We don’t “owe” them anything.



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

6 Responses to Would you invited a known killer who hated you into your house?

  • Of course, the left’s legacy of “multiculturalism” says we must respect different cultures and learn to live with them. I say, no we don’t. Why? Because some cultures are destructive and some cultures are inferiors. I know, not politically correct, but certainly reality based (something the left once tried to convince us was a description of their ideological grounding).

    Actually, the Collective went a step…an important step…beyond that. They assured us that we had no right to judge our culture superior to another. All cultures, the Frankfurt Schoolers told us, were equally good/bad.

    Just as I DO have a right to hold myself superior to another person who lies, cheats and steals, because I adhere to a code that will not allow me to do those things, American culture DOES have a right to hold itself out to the world as superior to other cultures. We FURTHER have a right to project our standards of decency out into the world as an example, though a limited right and ability to IMPOSE them on others.

    PC needs to be killed. Good and hard.

    • The leftists differ with your right to feel superior to anyone. They have no “right and wrong,” and they insist that you change your definition of “wrong” to accommodate anything and everything that another person might want to justify. The only “wrong” is hurting someone’s feelings, but only if you’re not from a minority group.” They stand on their heads to tolerate groups that have no intention of tolerating them, which is truly bizarre to me.

      Trump’s position is probably for effect, and he got what he wanted out of the left in the reaction, but I don’t understand the whole “it’s only a minority of Muslims that are the problem” argument. Why is it up to me to sort that out? A very small minority of Pit Bull dogs will bite you, but enough will that nearly every municipality has a wholesale ban on them. They saw a pattern and they got in front of it. It’s called common sense, and it’s something you are required to check at the door to become a leftist. By their logic, one would need to have a bite from EVERY Pit Bull before it could be hypothesized that maybe there is something wrong with Pit Bulls. When every single Muslim-majority country is a human rights mess, and when every single day some Muslim is blowing himself up to prove one point or another, I feel comfortable concluding that there is something wrong with the Islamic set of ideals. The left refuses to do so even when the metaphorical dog is attached to their asses, screaming complete rubbish like “You ain’t no Muslim” DURING an Islamic attack, as if screaming it enough times will somehow make it come true.

      And yes, as you note, it is political correctness that dragged us to this point, where someone screams racism because you criticize an idea that has utterly no connection to race, thereby stifling the debate.

  • Nicely covers the collection of people who are big on feeling good about themselves by pretending they’ll let anyone come and go as they please because “America”.

    Press these people very hard and you’ll quickly find out that feeling good about themselves will not extend to listening to YOU, and if they had their way often ‘you’ would find yourself on the wrong side of their version of government and enforcements.

    Same people who think it’ll be a piece of cake to round up the estimated 357+ million guns in America (old data), but a tremendous problem to round up the 12 million (laughable data) illegal immigrants.

    And speaking of bad cultures – let’s just be thankful those colonizing bastards the Conquistadors wiped out the poor misunderstood Aztecs and their peace loving civilization.

  • Statistically the chance of a terrorist attack specifically involving a given person is very tiny right now.

    So supporting these murderous policies, is a way to get SJW ‘piety points’ at what overwhelmingly statistically will be at some other guy’s expense.

  • Adherence to the Constitution is something Barry struggles with everyday.

  • “re·spect
    noun: respect
    a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.
    “the director had a lot of respect for Douglas as an actor”
    synonyms: esteem, regard, high opinion, admiration, reverence, deference, honor
    “the respect due to a great artist” ”

    No. I do not have to “respect” different cultures. I may have to tolerate them, and be polite to individuals from a different culture, but respect is a different thing. Those idiot left-wingers may admire things like female circumcision or theocracy but I do not.

    When Pat Robertson ran for President in 1988 the howling and yowling of those braying asses on the left showed little “respect” for the idea of a devout Christian in the White House. When Ben Carson mildly opined that he could not support a Muslim candidate for President those same asses howled and yowled about his lack of “respect” for both Islam and the Constitution.