6 ms·

Can you explain how it's a strawman? The Muslim ban (as it has been known for a long time) is a ban on people from a particular faith.

xiangmin 10y ago
> a ban on people from a particular faith Is it though? For example of Muslim, it does not even affect about 88% of the world's Muslims (Bangladesh, Egypt, Nigeria, Turkey, Malaysia, others) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
- baddox 10y ago
  I don't see why the percentage of Muslims in the world is relevant. The internment of Japanese Americans in the 1940s certainly targeted Japanese people despite that being a small percentage of Japanese people in the world.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    The US didn't intern Japanese. They interned Japanese Americans, so that is the scope of discussion. And yes, it would be significant if the US targeted the 99% of the Japanese population vs the 1% most concerning part.
- sgustard 10y ago
  It's trivial to find stories of people being detained trying to enter from any of those countries. Bangladesh: http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/02/02/bangladeshi-student-detained-us-trump-travel-ban/ http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/02/02/bangladesh... Egypt: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/26/u-s-detains-and-nearly-deports-french-jewish-historian/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/26... Nigeria: http://indianexpress.com/article/world/donald-trump-travel-ban-immigration-4549941/ http://indianexpress.com/article/world/donald-trump-travel-b...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
hueving 10y ago
That very name is the strawman. The ban doesn't even target the largest Muslim countries.
- erispoe 10y ago
  Yet it was sold as a Muslim ban by the administration, which is a major reason for San Francisco's federal appeal court to suspend it. The fact that it's not an effective Muslim ban is a different question.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    > The fact that it's not an effective Muslim ban is a different question. It is precisely the question. What the ban is is much more important that what it purports to be. For example, if it purported to be a ban on terrorists but actually was as ban on Muslims (and I mean, a bonafide ban on all Muslims), would that not matter?
    - baddox 10y ago
      No, that would still be illegal, because a ban on Muslims is illegal. It is illegal to ban Muslims, and it is illegal to intend to ban Muslims. The latter reason is the one provided by the Ninth Circuit.
      - paulddraper 10y ago
        > Thoughtcrime, they called it. - George Orwell, 1984
        baddox 10y ago
        I don't see the comparison. One is criminalizing citizens having negative thoughts about an oppressive government. The other is prohibiting rulers from promising to discriminate against a religion and then passing a thinly-veiled bill to do so.
paulddraper 10y ago
Muslims from Algeria (99% of the population) can enter. Christians from Syria cannot. That's the weirdest Muslim ban I've ever heard of.
- wavefunction 10y ago
  It's almost as if it were a muslim ban as applied by ignorant people... As if!
  - superioritycplx 10y ago
    It's a temporary ban of seven countries that was drafted by the Obama administration.

xiangmin 10y ago

> a ban on people from a particular faith Is it though? For example of Muslim, it does not even affect about 88% of the world's Muslims (Bangladesh, Egypt, Nigeria, Turkey, Malaysia, others) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

baddox 10y ago
I don't see why the percentage of Muslims in the world is relevant. The internment of Japanese Americans in the 1940s certainly targeted Japanese people despite that being a small percentage of Japanese people in the world.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  The US didn't intern Japanese. They interned Japanese Americans, so that is the scope of discussion. And yes, it would be significant if the US targeted the 99% of the Japanese population vs the 1% most concerning part.
sgustard 10y ago
It's trivial to find stories of people being detained trying to enter from any of those countries. Bangladesh: http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/02/02/bangladeshi-student-detained-us-trump-travel-ban/ http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/02/02/bangladesh... Egypt: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/26/u-s-detains-and-nearly-deports-french-jewish-historian/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/26... Nigeria: http://indianexpress.com/article/world/donald-trump-travel-ban-immigration-4549941/ http://indianexpress.com/article/world/donald-trump-travel-b...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

hueving 10y ago

That very name is the strawman. The ban doesn't even target the largest Muslim countries.

erispoe 10y ago
Yet it was sold as a Muslim ban by the administration, which is a major reason for San Francisco's federal appeal court to suspend it. The fact that it's not an effective Muslim ban is a different question.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  > The fact that it's not an effective Muslim ban is a different question. It is precisely the question. What the ban is is much more important that what it purports to be. For example, if it purported to be a ban on terrorists but actually was as ban on Muslims (and I mean, a bonafide ban on all Muslims), would that not matter?
  - baddox 10y ago
    No, that would still be illegal, because a ban on Muslims is illegal. It is illegal to ban Muslims, and it is illegal to intend to ban Muslims. The latter reason is the one provided by the Ninth Circuit.
    - paulddraper 10y ago
      > Thoughtcrime, they called it. - George Orwell, 1984
      - baddox 10y ago
        I don't see the comparison. One is criminalizing citizens having negative thoughts about an oppressive government. The other is prohibiting rulers from promising to discriminate against a religion and then passing a thinly-veiled bill to do so.

paulddraper 10y ago

Muslims from Algeria (99% of the population) can enter. Christians from Syria cannot. That's the weirdest Muslim ban I've ever heard of.

wavefunction 10y ago
It's almost as if it were a muslim ban as applied by ignorant people... As if!
- superioritycplx 10y ago
  It's a temporary ban of seven countries that was drafted by the Obama administration.