I agree with Vernon Tull. Best post in this string.

Anybody else running for president?

I was referring to those immigrants that were wanting to enter the US that would not be allowed if Trump's ban were in place. The discrimination I was referring to, would be the denial of entry to the US based on their religion. My point was that the safety and security of citizens should be a higher priority than the result of discrimination against a non-citizen immigrant that wants to enter the US.

Gotcha. I don't think of them as immigrants until they have immigrated.

Touche...I guess the definition of immigrant isn't clear. "one who migrates"...as opposed to "one who migrated". I thought they got the label when they got on the boat.

That's not entirely accurate. Our Constitution provides them with the opportunity to immigrate over to this country. It doesn't guarantee that they will get in, but it does allow for them to try. If you go back and look over the course of history at all the immigration laws you will see that there have been several laws added that prevent people from coming into our country on the basis of where they're from. Other laws set quotas on the number of immigrants from certain areas of the world. But there's never been a law that prevents people from immigrating based on their religious preferences. I don't think anybody is disagreeing with Trump that they all need to be stopped from entering the country. The disagreement comes from what criteria you use to stop them from entering. There is already historical precedence for stopping immigrants from certain parts of the world. Why not use that criteria instead of the unprecedented criteria of religion? Just say that if you're from "fill in the blank" countries that promote terrorism, you are not allowed into the United States.

Now, the biggest problem is the fact that a lot of these people are coming in illegally. They're pouring over the borders through Mexico and Canada. And once they're in, guess what...the Constitution now applies to them. It shouldn't, but good luck finding a judge to agree with that. Hell, we're bringing them off of the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan to stand trial in civilian courts. We're giving them Constitutional rights when they're not even on US soil. Go figure that one out.

Yes thats another of Big Ears bright ideas. Closing GITMO was a big mistake. Liberal bleeding hearts, when will they admit they have been fools ? Will it ake several Paris type attacks here ?

Unfortunately that's more than likely what it's going to take. That and getting Big Ears out of office. That can't happen soon enough.

They don't seem to understand taking all the guns away from legal citizens won't stop beheadings or suicide bombers.

In his speech the other night he said" we can't identify or stop all of the terrorists so we have to make guns harder to get" . My thinking is just the opposite. Because we can't stop them all we all need to be armed and prepared.

We all need to be clear on this: the Constitution DOES NOT provide anyone anywhere the right to immigrate into the U.S.

Immigration is 100% the creature of federal statutory law. And all the regulations promulgated by the INS in furtherance of the immigration statutes.

No one has a constitutional right to immigrate into this country.

As I and some other folks have said upstream, the best thing to do is completely ban immigration from all of the Muslim countries without any reference to religion. And do that statutorily. And via the use of executive power and authority on the front end as the Congress is to screwed up to really do anything.

I haven't read this whole thread, but all of the people on here who are hoping that this policy comes to fruition, better be careful what you wish for...

... Are you sure that you want the Land of Liberty, The United States of America to go down the road of religious persecution? I know I don't.

I don't have any Muslims or Devil worshippers, for that matter, on my Christmas list, but that doesn't mean that I don't for one second believe that they shouldn't be afforded the same liberties that we all enjoy.

We exterminated Native Americans, we enslaved African Americans, we exploited Chinese Americans and Irish Americans and we interred Japanese Americans... None of which were bright spots in American history. So before we got a rope out and start looking for a tree, we might want to cool off a bit and think of the long term ramifications.

Stopping further immigration of Muslims into the U.S is NOT "religious persecution"!!

But it is a literal matter of national and civilizational SURVIVAL.

Immigration is 100% the creature of all men being created equal and endowed with unalienable rights like life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There was never a question in the minds of the framers of the Constitution of whether immigration should be allowed or disallowed. After all, they were all immigrants. What they did in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution was put the power for making immigration laws in the hands of Congress instead of letting the individual states have their own immigration regulations. So, you're technically correct that the Constitution doesn't provide anyone the right to immigrate to the U.S. Immigration was a given, evidenced by the fact that the only mention of it you get from the original writers of the Constitution is to establish who exactly regulates it...i.e. federal statutory law.

Now what they need to do is to regulate it.

It's not religious persecution, it's religious discrimination.

This is why trump is so popular, people say, We cant stop muslims, we should just stop people from this country and that one and blah,blah ,blah. Creating mulitple loop hole so more laws will be enacted to close those loopholes the whole time not actually doing nothing to stop the inflow of the muslim radicals. So trump just says what everyone wants and is trying to do, that would actually work for the most part,You can put all the countries on the list you want, but what if they come from france. Who are we trying to protect our lives or their feelings.

Our 1st Amendment rights. It has nothing to do with feelings. Once you allow Congress to pass a law allowing or preventing something based on religion you have trampled the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. Now, that might not be a big deal to you as long as it's a law pertaining to Muslims, but when it pertains to you and your religious beliefs what are you going to do then? You're falling into the mindset that the libtards want you to...I'll give up some of my freedoms so that the government can keep me safer.

those who trade liberty for safety, deserve neither

That's my point. You sound like you're willing to potentially give up 1st Amendment rights for safety.

No it's not. Islam is not a real religion. It is a totalitarian Nazi-like political ideology masquerading as religion that seeks complete total *physical* conquest and domination of the entire world - just like the German Nazis and Russian Communists sought.

To be in favor of Muslim immigration is an act of Treason.