Page 20 of 20 FirstFirst ... 101617181920
Results 191 to 195 of 195

Thread: America!

  1. #191
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    2,149

    Default

    Wait a minute folks....hold on here...

    Looking back to the top of page 14 on this thread....

    Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

    The religious test is that you must be a minority religion in a predominantly muslim country, thereby creating a religious test

    It's plain as day

    You CAN'T give preference to one religion over another, it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL

    There is a level of beneath contention here...in the very manner in which this nation has been held hostage and in bondage for so many many years to the very devout and zealous religion of politics in sponsoring minorities, race, sex, sexual orientation... to play through on on the public purse...under a constant stream of carefully cultivated "Victimization." This devoutness has the hallmarks of a a devout and zealous religion being hidden, concealed, and filtered by the priesthood of the body politic ..while avoiding any such comparison..but it is definitely catering to a minority.

    You cant what T dale..and others???? You can't give preference to what ???? It's plain as what????


    This has already happened carte blanche....under the Obama Administration....only now it matters that it is a minority religion when the Obama administration has been discriminating against a religion for 8 plus years.

    Only now when the devout and zealous religious dogma of PC is at stake does it seem to matter.

    But under the Obama administration there was a definite conspiracy of silence by both phony Republicans and Phony Democrats to let this go through unchallenged and unquestioned....as if it was not happening...the discriminating of or against a religion by another religion to which government obviously gave preference.

    The courts are sticking to the letter of the law ...when they totally avoided this position under the Obama administration with a definite preference for a religion.

    It is very slick to point this out under the letter of the law when it was in fact avoided for 8 years.

    I call BS on this one.

    Some of us have short memories ..but not all.

    The sleeper must remain asleep..even if you have to heap piles of confusion upon them to keep them asleep.


    Orangetom
    Last edited by orangetom1999; 02-16-2017 at 01:21 PM.

  2. #192
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,197

    Default

    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

  3. #193
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    2,149

    Default

    Let us look again at this debate and historical point...from a slightly different angle and with a view to a pattern previously discussed by me and some of the other members here.

    Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality. Where necessary and appropriate, the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security shall recommend legislation to the President that would assist with such prioritization.

    The religious test is that you must be a minority religion in a predominantly muslim country, thereby creating a religious test

    It's plain as day

    You CAN'T give preference to one religion over another, it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL

    Let us take a look at this law...EO or what ever it is that a court is likely to decide on next.


    The question for people of conscience is ...What is the intent of this law...EO or whatever is being debated here ...or in the next case to come before the courts.


    The matter at issue here is that one religion is persecuting another religion or people identified by their religion. The obvious intent here is to minimize the persecution of a people based on their religion. The religion is how these groups are identified...in the Persecution.


    The objective here is clearly to stop the persecution.


    So what does intelligent logical reasonable men of letters...and education do.. men in the court system.???

    They do the reasonable logical thing and call it preferring one religion over another...by government when the obvious rational behind this action was to stop the persecution.

    And what has and is happening historically....the persecution was allowed to continue in these countries...while another religious group was given preference...by their religion...and by this government.


    As In all demonic actions by logic reasonable educated men..they become the thing they dislike in others.

    Perfectly sane...perfectly reasonable...perfectly logical...

    The T's are crossed and the I's dotted....

    But someone is still suffering religious persecution in those countries.

    Before this is finished ..by logic and reason...by intellect ..the people of this country are going to be suffering religious persecution ..while our courts and intellects are still arguing and debating...preference by government for one religion over another....ie..constitutionality.

    In summation...the last 8 years have already instituted a religious preference over the people of this country.



    And remember something....this nation went to Yugoslavia in the 1990s with our military to stop a genocide which was going on ..persecution. Think about the two sides of this conflict ..which side did America take and try to preserve from persecution/genocide???
    Have we forgotten while we stick to legal here verses lawful....substance verses form????


    Do not fall for this kind of gaslighting. It sounds reasonable and even logical...but it was never the intent of what was written.

    The religious test is that you must be a minority religion in a predominantly muslim country, thereby creating a religious test

    It's plain as day
    The intent is to stop the persecution. The two sides are identified by their religions in this dispute...and the argument is that it is a religious test...when the religions are used to identify sides. This argument does nothing for the persecution..but it makes some people think the law was upheld when the reason for this is persecution...to stop the persecution...

    This is a bait and switch argument...that the forms are kept but the substance avoided. Legal verses Lawful.

    Bewarned...you are going to see more of this gaslighting in the future...by logical, reasonable, educated men.

    This is confusion...manufactured confusion.


    Orangetom

  4. #194
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mountains & Lakes of the extreme NorthEast
    Posts
    1,296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orangetom1999 View Post
    Let us look again at this debate and historical point...from a slightly different angle and with a view to a pattern previously discussed by me and some of the other members here.




    Let us take a look at this law...EO or what ever it is that a court is likely to decide on next.


    The question for people of conscience is ...What is the intent of this law...EO or whatever is being debated here ...or in the next case to come before the courts.


    The matter at issue here is that one religion is persecuting another religion or people identified by their religion. The obvious intent here is to minimize the persecution of a people based on their religion. The religion is how these groups are identified...in the Persecution.


    The objective here is clearly to stop the persecution.


    So what does intelligent logical reasonable men of letters...and education do.. men in the court system.???

    They do the reasonable logical thing and call it preferring one religion over another...by government when the obvious rational behind this action was to stop the persecution.

    And what has and is happening historically....the persecution was allowed to continue in these countries...while another religious group was given preference...by their religion...and by this government.


    As In all demonic actions by logic reasonable educated men..they become the thing they dislike in others.

    Perfectly sane...perfectly reasonable...perfectly logical...

    The T's are crossed and the I's dotted....

    But someone is still suffering religious persecution in those countries.

    Before this is finished ..by logic and reason...by intellect ..the people of this country are going to be suffering religious persecution ..while our courts and intellects are still arguing and debating...preference by government for one religion over another....ie..constitutionality.

    In summation...the last 8 years have already instituted a religious preference over the people of this country.



    And remember something....this nation went to Yugoslavia in the 1990s with our military to stop a genocide which was going on ..persecution. Think about the two sides of this conflict ..which side did America take and try to preserve from persecution/genocide???
    Have we forgotten while we stick to legal here verses lawful....substance verses form????


    Do not fall for this kind of gaslighting. It sounds reasonable and even logical...but it was never the intent of what was written.



    The intent is to stop the persecution. The two sides are identified by their religions in this dispute...and the argument is that it is a religious test...when the religions are used to identify sides. This argument does nothing for the persecution..but it makes some people think the law was upheld when the reason for this is persecution...to stop the persecution...

    This is a bait and switch argument...that the forms are kept but the substance avoided. Legal verses Lawful.

    Bewarned...you are going to see more of this gaslighting in the future...by logical, reasonable, educated men.

    This is confusion...manufactured confusion.


    Orangetom
    Another great post, thanks OT. In my youth, they used to call them red herrings.

  5. #195
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orangetom1999 View Post
    Let us look again at this debate and historical point...from a slightly different angle and with a view to a pattern previously discussed by me and some of the other members here.




    Let us take a look at this law...EO or what ever it is that a court is likely to decide on next.


    The question for people of conscience is ...What is the intent of this law...EO or whatever is being debated here ...or in the next case to come before the courts.


    The matter at issue here is that one religion is persecuting another religion or people identified by their religion. The obvious intent here is to minimize the persecution of a people based on their religion. The religion is how these groups are identified...in the Persecution.


    The objective here is clearly to stop the persecution.


    So what does intelligent logical reasonable men of letters...and education do.. men in the court system.???

    They do the reasonable logical thing and call it preferring one religion over another...by government when the obvious rational behind this action was to stop the persecution.

    And what has and is happening historically....the persecution was allowed to continue in these countries...while another religious group was given preference...by their religion...and by this government.


    As In all demonic actions by logic reasonable educated men..they become the thing they dislike in others.

    Perfectly sane...perfectly reasonable...perfectly logical...

    The T's are crossed and the I's dotted....

    But someone is still suffering religious persecution in those countries.

    Before this is finished ..by logic and reason...by intellect ..the people of this country are going to be suffering religious persecution ..while our courts and intellects are still arguing and debating...preference by government for one religion over another....ie..constitutionality.

    In summation...the last 8 years have already instituted a religious preference over the people of this country.



    And remember something....this nation went to Yugoslavia in the 1990s with our military to stop a genocide which was going on ..persecution. Think about the two sides of this conflict ..which side did America take and try to preserve from persecution/genocide???
    Have we forgotten while we stick to legal here verses lawful....substance verses form????


    Do not fall for this kind of gaslighting. It sounds reasonable and even logical...but it was never the intent of what was written.



    The intent is to stop the persecution. The two sides are identified by their religions in this dispute...and the argument is that it is a religious test...when the religions are used to identify sides. This argument does nothing for the persecution..but it makes some people think the law was upheld when the reason for this is persecution...to stop the persecution...

    This is a bait and switch argument...that the forms are kept but the substance avoided. Legal verses Lawful.

    Bewarned...you are going to see more of this gaslighting in the future...by logical, reasonable, educated men.

    This is confusion...manufactured confusion.


    Orangetom
    Tried to make it clear I was done debating this subject

    Thread now closed
    Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •