Random Politics & Religion #00

Here's the thing.

People who are against applying many of European nations' "socialist" concepts -- vehemently so at times -- argue that it stifles creativity and, while nice in some ways, generally goes against many American concepts.

But they don't consider the double-edged sword there.

Freedom comes with risks, too. And those risks are not entirely a personal responsibility. Some things are out of your control and you have to put your trust in whatever god, government, or dumb luck you subscribe to.

Our freedom of speech means you're going to get your feelings hurt sometimes stepping outside your door or turning on the TV.

Our freedom to keep and bear arms means that sometimes, despite everyone trying desperately otherwise, innocents are going to get shot that probably wouldn't have otherwise.

Our freedom of religion means that you have the right to believe whatever you like and you've got to learn to peaceably co-exist with people of other religions. The downside to that is that some people won't agree with the latter part there and are going to try to ruin it for everyone.

But once you start becoming authoritarian about religion, where does that end?

You start banning Muslims, you start living in fear of a religion and fighting a religion, all you're doing is feeding the fire for terrorists of that religion, and you're helping to cultivate new members for them that may have otherwise never have become radicalism-inclined had they not seen firsthand the blatant shunning of their beliefs.

I think keeping tabs on people who enter from a certain region is a good compromise versus an all-out ban.

But I still think any sort of observation or segregation based on religion is a slippery slope to armbands and ghettos. And we all know what presumably comes after that.

You misunderstood.

I don't agree with Trump's blanket banning of Muslims. At the same time, I don't think we should allow everyone and anyone just because.

Which we do, constantly.

The US government prides itself on it's inefficiency and ineptitude. Do you really want a potential terror threat to somebody who doesn't really care about their job well enough at the immigration stand at airports? I have been at many US airports coming in from different countries, and a good portion of the workers don't even look twice at people, it's just basically scan, ask a few questions and NEXT!

I hate referencing George Carlin. Not because I disagree with him or don't think he was great, but because he was a comedian and doesn't get taken seriously enough with his critique of American society.

It's the illusion of safety, KN.

Much like gun bans; it lets people sleep easier.

But we sacrifice too many freedoms for that illusion of safety, where does it get us, and what do we become for it?

...All of the screening is done before they get on the airplane?

LOL! You're being punished by having lgbt characters represented in the media yet I'm the one with the supposed victim complex? Good god, if I was a morning coffee drinker I would have sprayed that ***all over my screen.

Waging war is an ugly business. If the threat come from within Muslim community it's downright stupid to pretend it doesn't just so we can jerk our PC ***.

Open borders has never been a part of my libertarian philosophy. Pretending it has isn't accurate.

You come through the line with people who have US passports.

Every airport I've visited seperates the US citizens from internationals because biometrics are required**

** photos are now required of US citizens each time they return, but that has only started the last 2-3 years

Candy canes and Godwin's Cat!

But you make a good point. I didn't think about that possibility.

...you are right, I forgot that there were different lines for different people. It's been almost a year since I flew out of country....

By who? The US government? Or the port-of-origin government?

Security is supposed to be higher in the US government, but even then, it's not infallible. Hell, most agents cannot even tell if the passport is legit or not.

Perspective can be very difficult. For everyone, really, but for some more than others.

For instance, Saev's comment about "over-representation" is accurate to an extent. But then again, I don't see him complaining about the amount of (traditionally-gauged) good-looking people vs. ugly in entertainment.

I don't see anyone complaining about the inaccurately-portrayed skinny people in fast food commercials.

Entertainment is about 1) making money and 2) escapism.

In that order.

Having LGBT 1) allows broadcasts to cast a wider net for their audience and 2) allows more people to feel that kinship with characters, thereby enhancing escapism.

Don't worry. There are always bigots to be had in entertainment. I mean, they're always bad guys...I guess maybe that's not fair either?

That wasn't the punishment I was referring to.

Damn those good looking people!

If you aren't a US citizen then both gov'ts are going to screen you and the point of origin gov't has to follow US guidelines before letting you get on the plane. We don't have an open border. People aren't just coming into this country from North Korea or Iran on a whim.

Sounds like a regulation.

Please share that regulation to the class.

Well that's sort of what I mean, right?

I mean, the lesbians are always super-hot too.

*shrug*

I'm just saying. I'm not complaining.

Show me on the doll.

No thanks? Look it up yourself if you really believe your perception of airport security is indicative of a problem with the US gov't.

Just remember, not all lesbians are super-hot.

Just like not all gay men look like Ben Affleck.

So, talking out of your *** yet again. Remember boys and girls, the burden of proof falls on the person making the statement, not the person who the statement is made to.

Ok, lets start with you, since you started this conversation. Prove it. Prove this entire post is true, or you are talking out of your ***.

wait one darn minute here....
you're not!?

how is that even possible!?

they let me back in the country after a business trip to mexico... twice!

I have the passport stamps to prove it.

Well clearly. But this ultimately is my point.

It's fiction. A fantasy. Everyone wants to be represented in fantasy.

And in reference to the disabled as someone made facetiously earlier, let's not forget able Oracle.

Nik, stop trying to throw us off the trail.

We all know you have evil Illuminati clearance.

Wait, you want me to prove an opinion? The only provable thing in this post is that the US government is inefficient and inept. That's the only part of the post that's not opinionated.

But seriously, this is common sense. You literally have to have your head up your *** to not see this.

I want to you to prove your claim that we are constantly letting anyone and everyone into the country just because. Specifically, potential terror threats. Here I will bold it for you.

[sartalics]Yes, this is all simply a recent occurrence. And neither 7/7 nor the Madrid bombings (among a few, but those examples instantly spring to mind) happened, right? It's the refugees![/sartalics]

Memory is appallingly fleeting on AH. The kicker is, even if you're not a citizen of the EU, an expat or have family abroad, we've touched on these subjects time and time again. At least a few here have some sense of awareness.

Demonstrably inefficient I'll accept.

"Inept" is a slightly more subjective call and as such exists at all levels across all walks of business and life and can be temporary or permanent in any given individual.

I understand that I'll not quench your endless distaste for the government, I merely ask you to accept that no system is infallible and every system is susceptible to moments of "wtf" at the hands of aforementioned acute or chronic ineptitude.