French getting another round of "inshallah"

[webmaster]

Do you realize we have religious 'courts' in this country? Both Christian and Jewish. They are really more arbitration panels that handle civil matters with the consent of all parties and can't clash with established law, they also don't touch criminal law in any way. 'Sharia courts' in France fall under this category and can't conflict with the government law there.

Yes, I realize that there are a wide variety of councils, tribunals and other systems in place that segments of our populace allow themselves to be subject to (Mormons, Christians, Jewish, etc). And in each I am sure we can all easily post extremes to point out and decry the perfidy of that group's culture. You "do realize" that you are talking to educated people right Flash? Just sometimes it comes off that you seem fatigued pointing out to others with differing views, "you realize this", "my experience this", "this is the viewpoint"... etc. Maybe I am misconstruing, but since we are all touchy feeling, figured I would point out that yes, I realized that. Food for thought.

 

[webmaster]

I continue to be amazed how much generalizations can take hold of the public perception.

Some statistics to chew on:

2010 US Total Population: 309.3M
2010 US Muslim Population: 2.6M (0.8%)
2010 US African - American Population: 38.9M (13%)

Some would argue that the African American population still hasn't fully established itself on equal footing with the rest of American society, and that population is at 13%. Are we really afraid that 0.8% of the population is going to disassemble the constitution, abolish the governing system that has been in place for over 200 years and institute sharia law?

Don't become a victim of fear. Stand up for what is right..... helping people fleeing a war torn country where murder, rape, torture, and more are the standard. Tell ISIS to go screw off! The US shouldn't compromise its values and morals because we are afraid of them.

This is mostly the thrust of my argument that we as a country should be concerned about the immigration that is probably going to take place in the next couple decades. To support the US economic system, the entitlements, the promises, and most importantly continued growth of our GDP, mass immigration to account for baby boomers is one of the only realistic scenarios that will address the inverse population pyramid that the US is quickly becoming.

There are quite a few studies out there about our country's aging populace, and I am sure we have all read about it one time or another. Here is one from the US Census if anyone isn't particularly familiar (An Aging Nation: The Older Population in the United States) https://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/p25-1140.pdf.

But to reiterate, my main concern is that this is the tip of the iceberg in continued immigration that our society will have difficulty assimilating to the American way of life. I personally don't care about anyone's religious or political leanings, I just hope they identify as an "American" first and foremost, and will be prepared to support our country and way of life. Unfortunately, unlike many other cultures that have successfully immigrated and assimilated, I wonder if these may identify more with their religion and cultural ties than our way of life and constitution. Especially when many view the Koran and their religious laws as superior to the host nation.

 

[wink]

In FY13, the United States admitted 69,926 refugees into our country. I fail to believe we can't process 10,000 from Syria.

http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/statistics/

True. But the vaunted vetting process that everyone is convinced will protect us in the current crisis actually ran its course for all those people. My point is that the President said 10K Syrians by the end of this fiscal year. How will they accomplish that with the vetting process taking 18-24 months? I fear pressure from the administration to cut corners and pencil whip a hitherto fore successful process. As Flash said, some are already in the pipeline. But I am very sure no where near 10K. The current flood of refugees is not even a year old.

Do you believe that the State Department, CIA, FBI, and DHS is not adapting to the threat? Why is closing our doors to the world and turning a cold shoulder to innocents who desperately need our help the only way? And by this rationale, shouldn't we turn off all tourist visas, student visas, and stop all naturalization processes? After all, the Boston bomber got here on a tourist visa, claimed asylum, then became a naturalized citizen. That looks like 3 failures, so we should close our doors to everyone?

I do not and never have supported banning refugee status for the current flood of Syrians. In fact, I suppose admitting some victims of the war is the least we can do since we turned our backs on them more than once before. We set a ridicules red line and didn't enforce it which empowered Assad. We have done very little effectively to help them in the war. By underestimating ISIS they grew virtually unimpeded so they could threaten the Syrians who are refugees today. We didn't seem to care very much about them when they had homes to protect. Now that they have lost everything, we do. What I do support is treating the actual refugee process for this population, which an avowed enemy has said they will exploit to move their fighters to the west, differently. I fail to see what is so un-American about responding to a threat by an enemy who has the means to carry through. I don't know about CIA and FBI adapting. It seems to me if we are relying on the FBI, a domestic law enforcement organization, we are already at out last line of defense. As for State and DHS, they most certainly are not adapting because America is arguing over whether to let in Syrian refugees at all or what sort of different process, if any , to use vetting them. In the mean time, the process remains the same. So no. I don't think State and DHS is adapting.

 

[webmaster]

I continue to be amazed how much generalizations can take hold of the public perception ....
Don't become a victim of fear. Stand up for what is right..... helping people fleeing a war torn country where murder, rape, torture, and more are the standard. Tell ISIS to go screw off! The US shouldn't compromise its values and morals because we are afraid of them.

I don't know if this is direct at me or just out loud. I don't think I am espousing generalizations when it comes to cultural issues that sharia law and lack of assimilation pose. I agree that we as a country are used to these issues, and have confronted other religious extremes in our past.

And I don't appreciate the commentary "don't be a victim of fear", you are trying to dismiss my (and others) legitimate concerns and discourse stating that we are arguing from fear of the unknown. I counter that I (and many others in this thread) are well versed in this arena. I spent 12 years of my adult life in the middle east, read a great deal on this topic, and have seen the good and bad that our cultures clashing and/or working together have brought about.

For me the ideal end state would involve assimilating these refugees into our society and setting them up for a path to success and not become a marginalized segment of our society. I am concerned though that too many of the youth and men desire to bring more of their traditions, sharia law, and treating women within their society as second class citizens. How do we break that apart and give the succeeding generations the ability for more freedom within our system? Flash mentions anecdotal success stories, that's great, and that is what I hope for. But the generalization is supported that this culture does not assimilate well.

 

[Flash]

Yes, I realize that there are a wide variety of councils, tribunals and other systems in place that segments of our populace allow themselves to be subject to (Mormons, Christians, Jewish, etc). And in each I am sure we can all easily post extremes to point out and decry the perfidy of that group's culture. You "do realize" that you are talking to educated people right Flash? Just sometimes it comes off that you seem fatigued pointing out to others with differing views, "you realize this", "my experience this", "this is the viewpoint"... etc. Maybe I am misconstruing, but since we are all touchy feeling, figured I would point out that yes, I realized that. Food for thought.

If what I say comes across as wearied then I suppose I may be but....when you throw out 'France has allowed the establishment of sharia courts in its country' with no context applied, like that they cannot rule on criminal matters or mete out punishments, then don't be surprised that my response may be a bit 'basic' even for us edumacated folks here. Say 'sharia courts allowed in France' to a lot of folks, including supposedly smarter ones, and they are going to lose their shit and say stupid things like that there are no-go zones in Europe where Christians fear to tread when that is not the case.

Plus, it is better than calling you an asshole or a dumbass.

 

[webmaster]

If what I say comes across as wearied then I suppose I may be but....when you throw out 'France has allowed the establishment of sharia courts in its country' with no context applied, like that they cannot rule on criminal matters or mete out punishments, then don't be surprised that my response may be a bit 'basic' even for us edumacated folks here. Say 'sharia courts allowed in France' to a lot of folks, including supposedly smarter ones, and they are going to lose their shit and say stupid things like that there are no-go zones in Europe where Christians fear to tread when that is not the case.

Plus, it is better than calling you an asshole or a dumbass.

I guess my post is not as nuanced or cited with appropriate specificity (should I use APA 6th. edition format too? I digress...). France has had a problem with Muslim immigration and lack of assimilation that is well documented. Muslim enclaves (ghettos and the like) have been established over the last 50+ years, and their society has not adopted or assimilated into the national host. But, the fact is, that Sharia Law IS practiced and allowed in France. I am not losing "my shit", but are you ok with sharia law and the treatment of women as property and second class citizens it entails (that is at complete odds with western democratic ideals?).

I guess I don't understand how what I brought up labels my point or me as a dumbass.

 

[CAMike]

France definitely has a problem as they didn't have an effective plan for assimilation rules and regs. Belgium certainly has a problem too. If the US doesn't create and enforce strict rules and regs we should expect the same. At this time in history, if we pussy foot around long enough ...we'll most likely have a century long problem. If one comes here as a refugee or immigrant, you must accept that your personal privacy will be monitored for everyones safety. Safety Violators won't be tolerated. What that exactly will look like? That criteria shouldn't be debated for very long.
http://www.cbn.com/TV/embedplayer.aspx?bcid=1509282970001

 

[Flash]

I guess my post is not as nuanced or cited with appropriate specificity (should I use APA 6th. edition format too? I digress...). France has had a problem with Muslim immigration and lack of assimilation that is well documented. Muslim enclaves (ghettos and the like) have been established over the last 50+ years, and their society has not adopted or assimilated into the national host. But, the fact is, that Sharia Law IS practiced and allowed in France. I am not losing "my shit", but are you ok with sharia law and the treatment of women as property and second class citizens it entails (that is at complete odds with western democratic ideals?).

I frankly don't know enough detail about the application of 'sharia law' in France to say whether what is occurring in France is okay or not. From my understanding it is applied like other religious courts and does not contravene French law, it only applies to civil matters and only with the consent to all parties. And that is it. Again, it cannot legally infringe on 'real' laws, the same as other religious 'courts'. That is part of the reason I asked if you realized we have religious 'courts' here in this country, there seems to be a fundamental understanding of what religious 'courts' or panels can and can't do in western countries on the part of many folks.

No, I am not okay with any 'laws', religious or otherwise, that violate western democratic ideals whether it be in France or here. I have never said or suggested otherwise.

I guess I don't understand how what I brought up labels my point or me as a dumbass.

It was meant to be sarcastic and a joke! Sorry for no smiles....

 

[Flash]

I frankly don't know enough detail about the application of 'sharia law' in France to say whether what is occurring in France is okay or not. From my understanding it is applied like other religious courts and does not contravene French law, it only applies to civil matters and only with the consent to all parties. And that is it. Again, it cannot legally infringe on 'real' laws, the same as other religious 'courts'. That is part of the reason I asked if you realized we have religious 'courts' here in this country, there seems to be a fundamental understanding of what religious 'courts' or panels can and can't do in western countries on the part of many folks.

A note about religious courts/panels, particularly the parts about them being voluntary/only applied when consented to by all parties and not conflicting with the real law. There have been some instances where members of certain communities are pressured to take part in religious panels even here in the US. The example that has come up in this country recently is some Orthodox Jewish sects in New York City have pressured members to keep disputes and even illegal activity within the community and not involve civil authorities, even in criminal matters. That is when religious courts/panels and their relationship with government and the law can get complicated, especially when the question arises if everyone is taking part voluntarily (a couple going through a divorce for example, is a woman who does have the same rights as a man in a particular religion really 'consenting' to the process) and if the rulings conflict with local, state and national law.

There is legitimate concern that a religious court, including 'sharia courts', allowed in a western country could overstep its bounds and commit illegal acts but I think our civil society and rule of law are strong enough to counter those concerns here.

 

[DesertRooster]

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5128/france-no-go-zones
An article with many links to other articles about France and their Muslim law problems

 

[Flash]

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5128/france-no-go-zones
An article with many links to other articles about France and their Muslim law problems

The 'no-go zones' assertions were widely mocked and Fox News even apologized for making those assertions. Are there places that are more violent and more difficult for police to operate? Sure, just like in this country, but 'no-go zones'? Not so much apparently.

The report you link may not be the best one to back up your claims either, citing a Russian TV report and some other less credible sources to back up it's assertions.

 

[IRfly]

Well...Fox wasn't ENTIRELY wrong. "No-go zones" do indeed exist.

But not in France or England, and it's not Muslims who will be throwing rocks at you.

 

[Brett327]

If a group starts using the Old Testament as justification for conquest and genocide, I'd feel comfortable calling them Jewish Terrorists.

ANTISEMITE!!!

 

[Spekkio]

ANTISEMITE!!!

No wait, he's not an anti-semite because those guys aren't really Jewish. They are just pretending and making stuff up, and since you don't speak Hebrew I declare that I am automatically right.

 

[wlawr005]

You know what this forum needs? More political discussions!

Discussions? I thought everyone was just arguing in hyperlinks...