Is it time Europe bans Islam & muslim immigration?

You'll see.

Hopefully yes

There isn't even a confirmed link between refugees and the attacks yet. This could be 100% home grown.

The statistical likelihood of them not using that is very small.

Secondly it has nothing to do with my original statement


Posted from TSR Mobile

Good on you. The post wasn't directed at you, however, so I don't see why you take that as an insult, and why you presume that what I meant by pro-Islam in that context was 'saying that not all Muslims are terrorists and that it's stupid to think of them that way.' I don't want to assume much but the fact that you took the trouble to respond to a post just to make a general point assuming that I was making a general argument that I wasn't when it's clearly aimed at a different person doesn't seem too promising.

If saying that not all Muslims are terrorists and that it's stupid to think of them that way is pro-Islam, then I am proudly pro-Islam.

Exactly what I don't understand.

All muslims have a chance of being radicalised. But then all non muslims also have a chance of converting to wahaabism and becoming terrorists, too. The problem here is one of likelihood and observed occurences. There are people of ethnicities without many muslims who become wahaabi-khariji terrorists.
There are less non-muslim arabs who convert to the wahaabi-khariji form of islam and become terrorists.
There are also less shia who become sunni, wahaabi terrorists than there are non muslims who become sunni, wahaabi terrorists.

However, there are far more moderate sunnis who are converted to that interpretation. That is why they are seen to be 'potential future terrorists', along with the fact that the people who the roots of their ideology came from did the same things as da'esh are doing - and moderate sunnis declare love and reverence for historical people who were almost as bad as ISIS. A few of the only differences is that back then, they had much larger armies and didn't engage in guerilla warfare or terrorism within other states. Take Shaam, your homeland for instance.

What did they do to deserve annexation by the arabs? What did they do to deserve being taxed extra for being non muslims?

The stability of Iran is giving it the opportunity to create an Islamic reinaissance within itself that it will export more successfully than they tried to export the 1979 revolution, when their ideology was still immature and influenced by violent and oppressive safavid, sunnified attitudes and laws. I don't support Iran the way it is. I see its potential to become a bastion of a type of islamic revivalism which is progressivist, liberal, and incorporates secular elements. Western governments should be supporting the chances of such a renaissance, not pushing for regime change, sanctions, and stifling all the ingredients necessary for cultural evolution.

Make light? What's 'light' about people dying? Every time something like this happens Muslims are punished. And in talking about innocent Muslims who have nothing to do with this or took part in any of it. It's people like you who are quick to generalise every time and attack like this happens. Sorry,what exactly am I trying to do? You sound so agitated and making quick assumptions,whoah

Then muslims would do well to give up their silly faith. All religions are farcical IMO and are often the basis for conflict.

Iran has a very young (median age of 28), pro-Western and irreligious population

However, it's still ruled by old fascist clerics/crazy people who occupy pretty much all the spheres of influence.

We didn't do anything to deserve annexation by Arabs. I can't think of anything

Imagine that you are walking alongside a lake and you see a drowning man; someone comes up to you and offers to sell you a life buoy for all your worldly goods. All your worldly goods are certainly not as valuable to you as his life is to him. Are you obligated to do it? In my opinion no, and in the opinion of the law also no. In your framework, I think the answer has to be yes.

Now suppose that that man will use all your worldly goods to buy a few hundred assault rifles and stage a coup d'etat to impose his cult-like beliefs about how to conduct every aspect of daily life on thousands of innocent others, while you intended to use them to buy a house and go on holiday to Tuscany.

Secondly, although it's a weaker philosophical counterargument - you clearly believe in totally open borders - I'd remind you that in practice my proposal does no violence whatsoever to your values. I am assuming that immigration levels are fixed by political requirements much below the total demand for immigration. By excluding muslims specifically I am not reducing the total number of people removed from third world poverty. At the same time, I am reducing the damage immigration causes to the UK. So my proposal has equal benefit to the worst off and greater total net benefit to the world. Given my assumption of limited immigration, you ought to agree with me even within your own moral framework.

What a preposterous xenophobic point! Who will run the NHS, dentists or judiciary system?! Most Muslims I know are all doctors or studying working very hard to become quality providers to the population. Deporting Muslims would mean the country would fall apart


Posted from TSR Mobile

preventing 1.5 billion people from entering Europe is rather stupid.

Yeah, all the world should enter Europe.

That would be incredibly unfair. This is assuming that all Muslims are involved in the attacks or believe in them.
A lot of these Muslims are running to find safety because they too are being attacked by the same people we are.
Could you live with yourself knowing you denied so many humans safety? That you turned them away and sent them to a brutal death?
Besides, immigration is not the only method they have to get IS members into our countries. A lot of them contact people via social media and have people already living here.

The refugees were safe in Turkey, they come to Europe for the benefits.

At best, we should only admit women and children, young men - who form the overwhelming majority of the migrants - could stay in their country and fight.