Why the Hawaii Attorney General is Critically Wrong

The attorney general for Hawaii said that an executive order issued by the federal government to deny entry to people from certain cultures is religious hostility.

That is very wrong and, for someone in a position of responsibility like him, is a critical mistake. It is based on a logical error and whether this is deliberate or not I cannot say although I suspect that in many similar cases it probably is deliberate.

The error is this: There is the basic premise of the US Constitution that it’s bad or wrong to discriminate against any religion. Thus it says that the government cannot engage in religious discrimination. “Religious discrimination” becomes a bad word – add it to the list of all these other words that can be called off-the-scale words because once they are levelled it amounts to something like an ad hominem attack that is intended to be some kind of absolutist pronouncement and halt all other discussion and thinking about a topic.

It’s funny too because of all the people that frequenty are criticizing our president and saying things like “shut it down” – this tactic of throwing out off-the-scale words is definitely an attempt to shut down – to shut down thought, to shut down discussion, and the process of consideration.

But getting on with the issue, the core problem is this: What do we really mean by saying for example that we are going to ban Muslims? Are we actually referring to a religion?

Let’s put it another way – in a person’s own private life, does anyone actually give a fuck who they bow down to? To what deity(ies) they have an altar? To what book they read or prayers they say?

Basically it’s a non-issue, because basically no one gives a fuck what another person does. But isn’t that mostly what “religion” is? I put quotes around it becuase this is the crux of the problem: If someone is going to throw out this weighted term “religious persecution” then don’t you think it’s important to be damn sure what the hell is actually meant by “religion”.

What I’m getting to here is this: Maybe it’s not about perseucting a religion. Maybe it’s about something else. That something is: Culture.

That’s the problem. We are not talking about religion, but culture. They can say it’s religion. It might be a common phrasing to state Muslim as referring to a religion, but it clearly – very clearly – is not what anyone is thinking when they are thinking of a travel ban. They are thinking of a culture.

And our government has every right – in fact it has a duty and obligation – to ensure that any cultures which are inhospitable or incompatible with our own culture – with our own basic values about things like freedom and human rights – to make sure that we deal with those cultures very carefully which means, in some cases, yes imposing bans on immigration. Absolutely.

Anyone found guilty of insulting the Prophet Muhammed, or Islam in general, risks being sentenced to death, and the country is keen to track down offenders both at home and abroad.

betanews.com: Pakistan risks privacy concerns by asking Facebook and Twitter to identify users suspected of blasphemy

The report estimated that 1,400 children had been sexually abused in the town between 1997 and 2013, predominantly by gangs of British-Pakistani men. Abuses described included abduction, rape, torture and sex trafficking of children.

wikipedia.org: Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal

Remember that the real scandal was the lies and coverup of such extensive, major abuse.

As of 18 March, the Cologne Public Prosecutor reported 1,139 crime complaints filed during New Year’s Eve, 485 of which were sexual offences. By 6 April, the number of reported crimes in Cologne was 1,529. A total of 1,218 victims were involved, 529 of which were victims of sexual offences. In July, it was estimated that more than 600 women had been assaulted in Cologne.

wikipedia.org: New Year’s Eve sexual assaults in Germany #Cologne

The real story was the lies, the coverup by the media.

The media and our governments are not there to protect us. They are there to subjugate us.

Oh, and in America you’re not allowed to talk about this kind of thing, which happens all the time. You’re not allowed to discuss how integration has failed and maybe the United States needs to seriously rethink the past 150 years of its history. People are victimized in myriad ways and we should not be forced to lose the cities, the cultural centers which our ancestors built for the sake of some pathological altruism which causes suffering.

See the thing I don’t get: If you hate whites so fucking much, why the fuck don’t you move to a non-white country, of which there are plenty in the world? In fact, globally, whites are a minority at only about 20%. Why do you have to fuck up our society because of your bullshit??

We built great cultural centers, created computers and mobile phones, sent people to the Moon and landed probes on planets millions of miles away. If you think we’re so fucked up, why don’t you live in one of the countries of your poor “victims” and see how far they’ve gotten with culture in the past few thousand years?

I wonder if the guy burning the sign is even capable of reading what it says.