ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 13th February 2017, 06:06 AM   #441
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,767
Originally Posted by blutoski View Post
I think the three things that shifted this EO from 'bold' to 'gong show' were:
  • the inclusion of existing visas and green cards - this lays lie to the claim that "We're only interested in illegal immigrants" story
  • Trump reassuring everybody that Christians would receive special treatment
  • Bloomberg reporting that Trump wanted to find a loophole to create a de facto unconstitutional Muslim Ban but with some sort of pretense that made it arguably legal - this lays lie to the claim that "We're only interested in protecting Americans from terrorists" story


ETA:
Oh, four actually. I would add:
  • The lack of advance warning. This resulted in genuine human tragedy stories with people handcuffed in airports, when they obviously had done nothing wrong. The Administration's stunning indifference to the treatment of innocent people who had planned a trip to the USA in good faith is a news story in and of itself.
That showed how little people care about receiving illegal orders and they will do horrific things with little provocation. Maybe we can finally stop this idea that the military would refuse to commit war crimes if ordered. We have the TSA handcuffing little kids away from their parent for 20 hours and not feeding them. And that was with no notice to normalize such things unlike torture for example.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:13 AM   #442
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,767
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
I know what was said, I'm asking how is it a ban if hundreds of millions of Muslims from other countries can still come here?
Including all the countries that have had citizens actually attack us here.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:19 AM   #443
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,767
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
First, you didn't answer his question. Do YOU think it's a muslim ban?
I think the intent was to give the impression of a ban on muslims to everyone while getting one that has any chance at getting through the courts as well as not targeting countries that could do things to major trump assets like Saudi Arabia.

Why are the border agents hassling canadian muslims?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montre...rder-1.3976230

The ban certainly seems to have empowered the actions against muslims, also see the american citizen and worker at JPL who was detained.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:24 AM   #444
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,767
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
As Ziggurat pointed out, the problem is that terrorism does not necessarily follow trends like heart attack rates, or car accidents. Terrorists kill very few people except for the times when they kill very many people, like 2001. The existence of nuclear weapons and people who devote their lives to killing as many Americans as possible makes the threat of terrorism a unique one that demands a lot of resources and vigilance.
And people react far more strongly in fear to some things like terrorist attacks or rape by a stranger than far more likely things like dying in a car accident or rape by a family member.

The point is that people are irrational.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:28 AM   #445
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,767
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
But in the case of Italian and Jewish immigrants, such detractors turned out to be wrong.
But at least we were right to send the jews back for those fears. It made Anne Frank a famous author instead of an anonymous adult.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:31 AM   #446
sunmaster14
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,608
Originally Posted by newyorkguy View Post
Having lived through the New York of the 1970s there was something to be said for broken windows. But that aside, crime statistics seem mostly poverty-driven. Black middle-class neighborhoods, for instance, are no more crime ridden then white middle-class neighborhoods. Some people steadfastly ignore that reality and then wonder why they're called racist.
It's off-topic here, but your reasoning is fallacious. Causality almost certainly runs both ways when it comes to poverty and crime. Criminal behavior causes poverty to a large extent. In addition, criminal behavior and low productivity are driven, at least in part, by similar factors, both genetic and cultural.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:46 AM   #447
sunmaster14
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,608
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
But at least we were right to send the jews back for those fears. It made Anne Frank a famous author instead of an anonymous adult.
Aside from the fact that the perceived threat from persecuted European Jews was simply unjustified, whereas the perceived threat from immigrants from jihadist-torn failed states of the Middle East is fully justified, there is the issue of the persecution itself. Just prior to WWII and during, European Jews were targeted for persecution by a powerful state actor. The refugees we would be turning back today would simply be people who were displaced due to civil unrest and civil war. Aside from the fact that it would be more effective to protect those refugees in situ, and the fact that their remaining in or near their country of origin might help to stabilize and rebuild their war-torn country in the future, there is the morally ambiguous issue of whether or not such people were aggressors who just ended up on the losing side.

For example, millions of ethnic Germans were displaced and impoverished after WWII, and nobody gave a crap. In fact, millions of German women were systematically raped for years by occupying Soviet troops and nobody gave a crap. The wife of former German chancellor Helmut Kohl was gang-raped by Soviet soldiers at the age of 12 and then thrown out of a window like a "sack of potatoes." Nobody really cares because she was one of the "bad guys."
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:49 AM   #448
willhaven
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,039
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
Haven't you seen the recent polls from both the U.S. and E.U. showing majority support for "no more Muslims, please" ?

And why should this be a surprise? Who in their right mind would look at the terroristic attacks, and even these people on their "better behavior" with their Sharia squads, ghettos, beekeeper suits for their women, FGM, etc.,etc,etc.,... and NOT say "no more of those people, please" ???

You take relief from the fact that we have let the lesson of 9/11 slip from our immediate consciousness. That's a foolish thing to celebrate. A sane nation would have deported all Muslims 9/12/01 and completely barred any further immigration by them.

The only way to be in favor of Muslim immigration is to completely fail to understand birth rates and just how much ascendant vigor their culture has right now. They will dominate more and more of the world and doom more and more people to miserable lives until they are stopped by force. Expelled by force.

If it were up to me, we'd push them back and re-take Byzantium and the North African / Middle Eastern kingdoms they conquered long ago. In every case, the people they conquered were their betters.
Even citizens? Yeah, that's not happening.
willhaven is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:51 AM   #449
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,767
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
Aside from the fact that the perceived threat from persecuted European Jews was simply unjustified,
Without anyway of knowing how many of them were communists and anarchists it was certainly justified. You can't protect the american way of life and let all these people in who don't respect it in.
Quote:
whereas the perceived threat from immigrants from jihadist-torn failed states of the Middle East is fully justified, there is the issue of the persecution itself.
Rather like the violence between fascists and communists in europe at the time. The fate of the US was at stake and you want to import a bunch of communists?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 06:53 AM   #450
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 36,767
Originally Posted by willhaven View Post
Even citizens? Yeah, that's not happening.
They are getting stopped at the boarder now, so we will have to see. The people charged with implementing these plans don't seem to have a serious issue with that.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 07:19 AM   #451
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 15,103
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
It's off-topic here, but your reasoning is fallacious. Causality almost certainly runs both ways when it comes to poverty and crime. Criminal behavior causes poverty to a large extent. In addition, criminal behavior and low productivity are driven, at least in part, by similar factors, both genetic and cultural.
It's been a while since I heard someone unironically endorse the "lazy negro" stereotype.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 07:28 AM   #452
sunmaster14
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,608
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
It's been a while since I heard someone unironically endorse the "lazy negro" stereotype.
Quite typical. If you point out fallacious reasoning in the context of race, inevitably the fallacious reasoners will attack you with the usual crude insults.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 09:23 AM   #453
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 13,953
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
Quite typical. If you point out fallacious reasoning in the context of race, inevitably the fallacious reasoners will attack you with the usual crude insults.
What he is accusing you of is EXACTLY what you were saying, in the context of the conversation.

Where I live, by the way, is well populated by middle and even upper class blacks. They are also productive and the middle class majority black neighborhoods are relatively crime free. They have moved here to escape urban decay, same as others.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 09:34 AM   #454
sunmaster14
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,608
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
What he is accusing you of is EXACTLY what you were saying, in the context of the conversation.
No, it's not. I was pointing out an example of fallacious reasoning, and he responded with a not-so-veiled insult.

Quote:
Where I live, by the way, is well populated by middle and even upper class blacks. They are also productive and the middle class majority black neighborhoods are relatively crime free. They have moved here to escape urban decay, same as others.
And this is almost entirely irrelevant to the claim that crime is caused by poverty.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 09:38 AM   #455
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 15,103
I don't see how it's fallacious to point out that saying that there's a genetic component that is "in part" why black people have "low productivity" is just the "lazy negro" stereotype wearing a new hat.

But, I mean, if you don't like it being pointed out when you say racist things, then the best way to avoid that is to not say racist things. Or be like Skeptic Tank at at least own it.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 09:44 AM   #456
sunmaster14
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,608
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I don't see how it's fallacious to point out that saying that there's a genetic component that is "in part" why black people have "low productivity" is just the "lazy negro" stereotype wearing a new hat.

But, I mean, if you don't like it being pointed out when you say racist things, then the best way to avoid that is to not say racist things. Or be like Skeptic Tank at at least own it.
Because (a) I was not speaking about black people specifically, but about the connection between crime and poverty, and (b) I am agnostic about the relative contributions of genetics, environment, and culture to success in society. It is certainly annoying to not be able to have a discussion about fallacious reasoning without having to put up with being called a racist. Still, I guess to the extent that it's an indication of the fundamental weakness of your position, and your inability to engage on an equal intellectual footing, I should be gratified. Still disappointed though.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 10:12 AM   #457
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 15,103
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
Because (a) I was not speaking about black people specifically, but about the connection between crime and poverty,[...]
Then your post was a non-sequitur and irrelevant to the post it was quoting.

Quote:
[...]and (b) I am agnostic about the relative contributions of genetics, environment, and culture to success in society.
Then your post, in which you claimed as factual a genetic component to criminal behaviour and low productivity, was dishonest.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 10:31 AM   #458
sunmaster14
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,608
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Then your post was a non-sequitur and irrelevant to the post it was quoting.
Huh? newyorkguy's logic was fallacious. I merely pointed it out. I have to do that a lot actually.

Quote:
Then your post, in which you claimed as factual a genetic component to criminal behaviour and low productivity, was dishonest.
There is certainly a genetic component to criminal behavior and/or low productivity. I don't think anybody seriously disputes that. I am agnostic about how much depends on a genetic component and how much such a genetic component is heritable. You are the one who introduced race into this. Pretty typical for liberals. They're obsessed with race, as well as obsessed with using it to attack their interlocutors when they're losing an argument.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 10:36 AM   #459
Lurch
Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 34
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
Aside from the fact that the perceived threat from persecuted European Jews was simply unjustified, whereas the perceived threat from immigrants from jihadist-torn failed states of the Middle East is fully justified, there is the issue of the persecution itself. Just prior to WWII and during, European Jews were targeted for persecution by a powerful state actor. The refugees we would be turning back today would simply be people who were displaced due to civil unrest and civil war. Aside from the fact that it would be more effective to protect those refugees in situ, and the fact that their remaining in or near their country of origin might help to stabilize and rebuild their war-torn country in the future, there is the morally ambiguous issue of whether or not such people were aggressors who just ended up on the losing side.

For example, millions of ethnic Germans were displaced and impoverished after WWII, and nobody gave a crap. In fact, millions of German women were systematically raped for years by occupying Soviet troops and nobody gave a crap. The wife of former German chancellor Helmut Kohl was gang-raped by Soviet soldiers at the age of 12 and then thrown out of a window like a "sack of potatoes." Nobody really cares because she was one of the "bad guys."
This smells of "whataboutism", although concerning one's own side but at a different time.

The impoverished or abused post-war Germans no one "gave a crap" about were more those ensnared in the Soviet zone. Where the Allies administered, the lot of those Germans was rather better.

Whether a ban against Muslims today is "fully justified" depends on the level of risk. Or is it really dependent on the level of fear of imagined consequences? We *know* than not all entrants pose a real threat of violence, or more specifically terrorism. Indeed, a pretty small fraction would turn out be so inclined.

American citizens legally purchasing/owning guns are slaying their compatriots at a rate foreign terrorists could only dream of matching. If gun laws could be sensibly brought up to the standards enacted by just about every other democracy, that alone would likely save more lives than would any additional security measures against incoming foreign killers.

To me a far more immediate crisis, if numbers of victims is the benchmark, is the gun-saturated society that's itself letting rivers of blood. To the tune of some ten 9/11s or as many Pearl Harbours every year. But no! "Take our guns from our cold, dead bands! We reserve the right to slaughter ourselves in frightful numbers, thank you very much. But Gawd damn any Mooslime who'd dare to try!"

It's this inverted reasoning, this double standard, that baffles me. Blithely permit to citizens by the thousand with mental health or societal issues access to firearms, but quake in fear of and fulminate against the possibility of a single foreign infiltrator with malicious intent. An American is far more likely to be murdered by a *family member* than by a foreigner.
Lurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 01:26 PM   #460
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 10,078
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I agree with this, but I would add one thing. It would be appropriate to give Christians special treatment. The Chaldean and Assyrian communities are being destroyed. "Christian" in this case is not just a religious choice, it's an ethnicity. The Mandaeans have more or less ceased to exist. The Yazidis have fled.

It's ok to give preferential treatment to persecuted minorities. They really are persecuted.
I partly agree... the reason I hesitate in this example is that, for example, Ismailis are a persecuted ethnicity in most of these nations as well (In Sunni countries, they're persecuted as Shiites, and in Shiite countries, they're persecuted for following a human, the Aga Khan). And AFAIK, atheists have the death penalty in most of those countries, too.

The distinction is that Trump was not prioritizing based on the position of persecution. He was prioritizing Christians, with the premise that they're the region's only deserving victims.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 01:31 PM   #461
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 15,103
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
Huh? newyorkguy's logic was fallacious. I merely pointed it out. I have to do that a lot actually.
You merely pointed it out by not referencing his argument? That's an interesting approach.

Quote:
There is certainly a genetic component to criminal behavior and/or low productivity.
Well, make up your mind.
Quote:
You are the one who introduced race into this.
That's interesting. You enter into a conversation about race, speak about the genetic components of what's being discussed and then, when it's pointed out to you what you've actually said, you claim that the conversation wasn't about race. And this is after having admitted that what you said was "in the context of race". Alternative facts?

Quote:
Pretty typical for liberals. They're obsessed with race, as well as obsessed with using it to attack their interlocutors when they're losing an argument.
I'm a typical liberal? That's interesting, seeing as how I'm not a liberal. And I wasn't engaged in any dialogue with you, let alone "losing an argument" when I pointed out what it was that you'd just said.

Perhaps it would serve you well to attempt to view other people as individuals, rather than some homogeneous "opposition".
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.

Last edited by Squeegee Beckenheim; 13th February 2017 at 01:46 PM.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 01:51 PM   #462
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,355
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Perhaps it would serve you well to attempt to view other people as individuals, rather than some homogeneous "opposition".
Good luck with that in this current political climate
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 02:00 PM   #463
Steve
Master Poster
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,482
Interesting side effect of the EO under discussion. Seems there is a slow but steady stream of refugee claimants crossing the border into Canada. These people are afraid to remain in the U.S. Having people desperate to leave is not something for the "best country in the world" to be proud of.

There are some in this thread who will claim that the US is better off without these refugees. IMO Canada is a better country for accepting them and they will be glad they came here.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 02:18 PM   #464
sunmaster14
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 9,608
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
You merely pointed it out by not referencing his argument? That's an interesting approach.
newyorkguy's argument ran thusly (with claims shown either as implicit or explicit and with ethnic group names removed to strip out emotion and bias):

[implicit] Group A has higher crime rates than Group B overall
[implicit] Group A has higher poverty rates than Group B overall
[explicit] Middle class neighborhoods composed of Group A have the same crime rates as middle class neighborhoods composed of Group B
[explicit conclusion] poverty rates drive crime rates
[implicit conclusion] if we equalize the poverty rates, the crime rates will equalize

My claim was that his reasoning is utterly fallacious, and his conclusion(s) are not remotely supported. Based on his observations (which we'll assume as true), he has only shown a correlation between crime rates and poverty rates, not a causal relationship, let alone one in the "poverty drives crime" direction.

Quote:
Well, make up your mind.
You see contradictions where there are none. I have been completely consistent in my writings. Perhaps you haven't been consistent in your readings.

Quote:
That's interesting. You enter into a conversation about race, speak about the genetic components of what's being discussed and then, when it's pointed out to you what you've actually said, you claim that the conversation wasn't about race. And this is after having admitted that what you said was "in the context of race". Alternative facts?
First of all, I spoke about more than genetic contributions. I included that in a list of possible factors that drive both crime and poverty (which would explain a positive correlation without causation). Other factors could be cultural or environmental, or something I haven't even thought of. It was only for illustrative purposes. I am not here to argue one way or the other. In my view, the main driver is cultural, which is exacerbated by social welfare programs that are providing perverse incentives.

Second, my argument was focused on the fallacy, not on race per se. newyorkguy could have been speaking about men vs women, or single parent households vs married couple households, or Christians vs Jews. Doesn't matter. Fallacious reasoning is fallacious.

Quote:
I'm a typical liberal? That's interesting, seeing as how I'm not a liberal. And I wasn't engaged in any dialogue with you, let alone "losing an argument" when I pointed out what it was that you'd just said.
If you read carefully (very carefully), you'll see that I did not claim that you were a typical liberal.
sunmaster14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 02:37 PM   #465
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,432
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Interesting side effect of the EO under discussion. Seems there is a slow but steady stream of refugee claimants crossing the border into Canada. These people are afraid to remain in the U.S. Having people desperate to leave is not something for the "best country in the world" to be proud of.

There are some in this thread who will claim that the US is better off without these refugees. IMO Canada is a better country for accepting them and they will be glad they came here.
The CBC has a story on it.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 03:02 PM   #466
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 15,103
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
My claim was that his reasoning is utterly fallacious, and his conclusion(s) are not remotely supported.
A claim you made in what you admit1 is the context of a conversation about race by citing "genetic factors" as causal of "criminal behaviour" and "low productivity".

Quote:
First of all, I spoke about more than genetic contributions. I included that in a list of possible factors that drive both crime and poverty (which would explain a positive correlation without causation).
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
In addition, criminal behavior and low productivity are driven, at least in part, by similar factors, both genetic and cultural.
Originally Posted by sunmaster14 View Post
There is certainly a genetic component to criminal behavior and/or low productivity. I don't think anybody seriously disputes that.
Come on, you're not even trying. It's like you don't realise that your posts are still there and can be referred back to.

Quote:
If you read carefully (very carefully), you'll see that I did not claim that you were a typical liberal.
Just another random non-sequitur, then? Like the comment about me brining it up because I was losing the argument? Like the comment about me being a "fallacious reasoner" that you were pointing out the fallacious reasoning of?

How about this, moving forwards - when you quote my posts, make everything you say in that post relevant to what you're quoting and the person that you're quoting? Sound reasonable? Because when you address comments to me I'm going to assume that those comments are intended to be addressed to me and post accordingly.

1When you're not trying to pretend that I introduced that subject.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 03:36 PM   #467
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 8,703
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Interesting side effect of the EO under discussion. Seems there is a slow but steady stream of refugee claimants crossing the border into Canada. These people are afraid to remain in the U.S. Having people desperate to leave is not something for the "best country in the world" to be proud of...
International advocacy groups usually tell people considering trying to escape a dangerous place by seeking asylum, if they are truly in fear of their lives go! Bottom line is, at least they'll be alive. The sad thing is, they have also been telling them, since 9/11 the U.S. can be a risky place to try and find asylum. That they are much better off going to Canada.

I also saw a lawyer in New York who represents people who have entered the U.S. illegally and are fighting deportation. He said some of his clients from Central America absolutely qualify for asylum because of a well-founded fear of persecution if they had stayed in their country. But he said that usually U.S. immigration officials won't even consider it. He said his counterparts in the Immigration Service have told him privately, "Given the reality of the situation, whether the clients qualify or not, INS is going to fight it." This was even before Trump so you can imagine what the situation is like now.

The sad thing is, everything is being done in the name of short term 'feel-good' policies. The long-term result will be, the United States will no longer be the country it once was.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 03:40 PM   #468
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 16,535
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
I think if you look at the number of first generation immigrants engaged in violence against the number of native born terrorists here in North America, you'll find that there have been far more native born terrorists then imported.

In the case of Italian immigrants you'll find that there was still significant backlash and prejudice up until WWII, almost half a century after significant Italian immigration started. They were used as a prime reason to impose Prohibition (those damned immigrants are always drinking wine), and are still equated with organized crime in popular imagination due to long term stereotyping.

The Irish suffered equally as long prejudice in the 19th century.

And you get many of the same arguments - they don't assimilate, they are lazy and shiftless, they steal jobs from real citizens, etc

We see them espousing some of the current radicalization from their homelands more now because communications tech allows comes faster then ever before (and it never did stop Irish nationalism from causing some terrorist incidents here either).

It all started going to hell when we let those Hessians stay that didn't want to go home in 1783.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 04:14 PM   #469
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 14,724
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
See that word I hilighted? That's where you went wrong. The whole point is that we shouldn't be trying to stop the last outlier, we should be trying to stop the next oulier. And the outliers matter the most because of their magnitude.



That's not really true in the case of Islamic terrorism against the US. Attacks have consistently varied.

Then why are you so convinced that the next major outlier terrorist attack is likely to be not only perpetrated by Muslims, but Muslims from those countries?

Will blocking immigration from them actually do what you say, or will it cause the next attack to be another one from internal marginalized groups? What of the arguments from the security groups in government that conclude these kinds of steps make us less safe?

Basically, I'm trying to figure out how what you're saying is actually a defense of this policy at all.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th February 2017, 10:38 PM   #470
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,953
Originally Posted by Fudbucker View Post
A nuke going off in a city?

Is is even a remote fear that some Syrian refugee or Muslim immigrant might be bringing a nuclear device with them in their carry-on or checked luggage? Otherwise, I completely fail to see a connection between the fear you express here and Trump's immigration ban.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2017, 04:21 AM   #471
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 16,535
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Is is even a remote fear that some Syrian refugee or Muslim immigrant might be bringing a nuclear device with them in their carry-on or checked luggage? Otherwise, I completely fail to see a connection between the fear you express here and Trump's immigration ban.

They could hide it in their sock?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2017, 06:08 AM   #472
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 36,796
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Then why are you so convinced that the next major outlier terrorist attack is likely to be not only perpetrated by Muslims, but Muslims from those countries?
I'm not convinced of that. When did I ever say I was convinced of that?

Quote:
Will blocking immigration from them actually do what you say
What exactly did I say this order will do? Seriously, tyr, look through my posts. Try to find a quote.

Quote:
What of the arguments from the security groups in government that conclude these kinds of steps make us less safe?
Those arguments are not logically flawed like what I've addressed. I don't find them very compelling for reasons I'm not all that interested in getting into, but your mileage may vary.

Quote:
Basically, I'm trying to figure out how what you're saying is actually a defense of this policy at all.
You have stumbled on the truth, tyr, but you picked yourself up and kept walking like nothing happened.

The reason you can't figure out how what I'm saying is a defense of this policy is because it's NOT a defense of this policy. It's a criticism of a class of bad arguments used against the policy. Bad arguments are bad, regardless of what side they're arguing for, even if they're arguing for the correct thing.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2017, 07:24 AM   #473
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 14,724
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I'm not convinced of that. When did I ever say I was convinced of that?



What exactly did I say this order will do? Seriously, tyr, look through my posts. Try to find a quote.



Those arguments are not logically flawed like what I've addressed. I don't find them very compelling for reasons I'm not all that interested in getting into, but your mileage may vary.



You have stumbled on the truth, tyr, but you picked yourself up and kept walking like nothing happened.

The reason you can't figure out how what I'm saying is a defense of this policy is because it's NOT a defense of this policy. It's a criticism of a class of bad arguments used against the policy. Bad arguments are bad, regardless of what side they're arguing for, even if they're arguing for the correct thing.

It has become morbidly enjoyable extracting from you points that you dance around to not criticize the Republicans directly, and making you state them a bit more explicitly.

Thank you, this EO is wrong and doesn't make us safer. We're in agreement.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2017, 07:57 AM   #474
newyorkguy
Philosopher
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 8,703
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
...Will blocking immigration from them actually do what you say, or will it cause the next attack to be another one from internal marginalized groups? What of the arguments from the security groups in government that conclude these kinds of steps make us less safe?...
The problem Trump has is, he made it clear during the campaign he wanted to ban Muslims. Period

Quote:
“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on." Trump included recent poll findings that he says show that a sizable segment of the Muslim population has "great hatred towards Americans." Link

Will this ill-advised ban trigger lone wolf attacks? They might but no one knows what the future holds. Security experts have asked the Trump administration to have a real conversation and the Trump administration has refused. What are the shortcomings in the present immigration process? How do we fix them? Instead Trump and Pence tell the American people, "We have to start vetting immigrants," as though at present, to quote one of their supporters, "It's all left to chance."

This is why I suspect, the policy is actually aimed at solidifying Trump's base. The idea being, we have all seen Muslims do bad things. Now we're going to do something bad to Muslims. I really don't think there's much more to it than that.

PS - Don't sweat the personal attacks. It reflects more on the people who make them.
newyorkguy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2017, 10:02 AM   #475
Agatha
Winking at the Moon
Moderator
 
Agatha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 10,768
Mod Warning Will you all please make a greater effort to discuss the arguments rather than those making them. Whilst it is not in itself uncivil to point out that someone has misrepresented or misunderstood another post, or even to claim that a post contains a lie. it is uncivil and a breach of rule 12 to post "you are a liar" over several posts.
Posted By:Agatha
__________________
London, Hamburg, Paris, Rome, Rio, Hong Kong, Tokyo; L.A., New York, Amsterdam, Monte Carlo, Shard End and...

Vodka kills salmonella and all other enemies of freedom for sure - Nationalcosmopolitan
Agatha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th February 2017, 09:23 AM   #476
TheL8Elvis
Philosopher
 
TheL8Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,305
Trump Will Issue New Travel Order Instead of Fighting Case in Court
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department told a federal appeals court on Thursday that it would not seek a rehearing of a decision that shut down President Trump’s targeted travel ban. Instead, the administration will start from scratch, issuing a new executive order, the department said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/u...h-circuit.html

SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!

Or not.
__________________
"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States...nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
TheL8Elvis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2017, 07:30 AM   #477
Sabrina
Wicked Lovely
 
Sabrina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,354
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/22/politi...kes/index.html

New EO expected as early as today. I found this part particularly delicious:

Quote:
Has White House learned a lesson?
By Tuesday, there were initial signs that the administration had started to conduct the widespread consultation among its allies in the House and the Senate that was missing with the initial travel ban.
A top House Republican aide said the Department of Homeland Security had been in touch with House Speaker Paul Ryan's office about the new executive order. But it is unclear whether the White House has been engaging with the committees with jurisdiction over immigration and national security.
Keeping allies in the loop is important because the refashioned executive order is likely to be viewed elsewhere in Washington as an omen for whether the administration is able to pull off the technical, legislative and political lifts needed to implement the promises for fundamental changes in America that Trump vowed as a candidate.
Plus this:

Quote:
The significance of this new attempt -- the language of which is expected as soon as Wednesday -- is reflected in the participation of White House Counsel Don McGahn.
McGahn's office had only a cursory look at Trump's original order, which was written by transition and policy staff. Significantly, Trump's key political aide Stephen Miller has had much less to do with the second executive order, sources familiar with the matter said, and the Trump administration was communicating with Republicans on Capitol Hill about the legislation.
Just further proof that the initial EO was FUBAR in the extreme. I don't hold out much hope the new one will be much better, considering that there is practically ZERO evidence any terrorist attacks will come from one of the seven named countries and it's therefore useless in the extreme to bar refugees from them, but at least this EO will have gone through proper vetting this time.
__________________
"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is the right thing to do."-Justice Potter Stewart, US Supreme Court Justice 1915-1985
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons... for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Sins are very desirable... as long as no one judges you for them.
Sabrina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2017, 10:43 AM   #478
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 17,260
Ramping up the number of Border Patrol agents could be problematic. The former Inspector General was on NPR this morning.

Hiring 5000 people takes time and LEOs takes more time unless they skip some steps like the mandated lie detector test. They did that last time and when they finally got around to the lie detector test they found out they had hired convicted felons, smugglers and even drug cartel plants.

The other problem with the border patrol is that most of the border that needs them is in the rural Southwest. Not many people want to move there.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2017, 10:53 AM   #479
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,890
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
Ramping up the number of Border Patrol agents could be problematic. The former Inspector General was on NPR this morning.

Hiring 5000 people takes time and LEOs takes more time unless they skip some steps like the mandated lie detector test. They did that last time and when they finally got around to the lie detector test they found out they had hired convicted felons, smugglers and even drug cartel plants.

The other problem with the border patrol is that most of the border that needs them is in the rural Southwest. Not many people want to move there.
I agree with your main point, but you do seem to suggest that polygraph tests are reliable, which is rather a matter of controversy, no?
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd February 2017, 10:55 AM   #480
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 59,724
Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis View Post
Trump Will Issue New Travel Order Instead of Fighting Case in Court
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department told a federal appeals court on Thursday that it would not seek a rehearing of a decision that shut down President Trump’s targeted travel ban. Instead, the administration will start from scratch, issuing a new executive order, the department said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/u...h-circuit.html

SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!

Or not.
So Trump decided to Mulligan?
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:22 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.