5 ms·

The Chinese immigrants were not (and still are not) particularly religious, and certainly didn't have a religion that promoted extremism and placed them at odds

by magduf 8y ago

The Chinese immigrants were not (and still are not) particularly religious, and certainly didn't have a religion that promoted extremism and placed them at odds with the existing inhabitants. Other Asian immigrants in the US were also either not religious, or (like with Koreans and Filipinos) adopted the same religion as the dominant culture. The fundamental problem, as I see it, is religion.

dragontamer 8y ago
> and certainly didn't have a religion that promoted extremism Lets cut through the code words then and have a direct counterexample to what you're trying to say. Nigerians are primarily Muslims. They are also highly educated and among the most entrepreneurial immigrants to the USA. And while there's a "Nigerian prince" joke every now and then, they really are doing relatively well in the USA. Like, "better than Asians" with regards to college education statistics. https://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-most-educated-in-the-U-S-1600808.php https://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-m... Nigerians are basically the perfect counterexample to the "Religion" (aka: Islam) problem that is so often brought up. High rates of college completion, high rates of business / entrepreneurs, high-rates of integration. Overall, clearly net-positive to the USA. > Other Asian immigrants in the US were also either not religious, or (like with Koreans and Filipinos) adopted the same religion as the dominant culture. What about Indians? Who are usually either Hindu or Muslim? Indians are also highly educated and start a large number of businesses. I'm personally Catholic. I'd obviously prefer it if immigrants would come with the same Religion as me, but the statistics are in. Nigerians, Indians, and a whole host of other immigrants kind of do perfectly fine in America. There's no need for them to be Christian or otherwise "mainstream". Indeed, bringing in immigrants on the basis of religion is severely anti-American IMO. America is certainly big enough to sustain Hindu, Muslims, and other religious groups. Especially if those people are coming in highly-skilled, highly educated, and overall are a benefit to our society.
- magduf 8y ago
  Ok, then what is the problem then? It's not racism; Nigerians are a lot darker than Arabs. Maybe it's a cultural problem, combined with religion: you never hear of Nigerian Muslims committing terrorist acts in the West. Islam is a big, big religion, and Muslims from some cultures simply don't have any kind of bad reputation (I'm thinking Malaysia here), while others certainly do. So maybe it is religion, just not the whole religion, but rather particular sects. All Christians are not like the Pentecostals or the Mormons, and similarly all Muslims are not the same.
  - dragontamer 8y ago
    Its certainly a problem that's specific to particular sects. The sect of Osama Bin Laden was "Wahhabism", which is relatively rare outside of Saudi Arabia. And even then, the Saudi Princes who work with the USA are often pro-Wahabbism, so the USA can't even deride that sect (even if its the primary sect of Al-Qaeda). Because there's still "good guys" who follow that particular sect. Note that the "Bin Laden" family was a very rich and entrepreneurial group of people. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family) Some of them were huge investors in the US before their "black sheep" messed up their family name forever. The Middle East is complicated. Like, super super complicated. Honestly, the bin Ladens in general (aside from the infamous one) should be welcome to the USA. A bit unfortunate about their "black sheep" sibling. ----------- Besides, if "Religion" was the problem, why did the USA DESTROY the only secular, maybe even atheist, group in the Middle East? (aka: Iraq Saddam Hussein and the Ba'athists). Reason: the world is complicated. And thinking about it in terms of Religion only is a mistake. ISIS for example is a combination of yes, Wahhabism, but ALSO has the support of former Ba'athists. And the Ba'athists believe in Secularism and secular law. They seemed to have joined in the ISIS fun not because of religious reasons, but because they wished to take over Iraq and saw aligning themselves with the fundamentalist Wahhabists as the best path forward and creating a unified Arab State. So yes, we are fighting secular (arguably an atheist) groups in the Middle East. The world is a very complicated place. Yes, we have enemies some places, but Muslims exist across the entire world. You can't paint the issues of one region as a blight on all Muslims. Even then: I'd imagine that we should welcome the many Iraqis who have helped the USA and are now getting targetted by ISIS in their country. We have friends in the region and we are turning them away with our immigration policies. We've turned our back on our closest supporters of that region, and I wouldn't be surprised if a large number of them have died because of their pro-US support or actions. TL;DR: Immigration policy is hard.
- skissane 8y ago
  > Nigerians are primarily Muslims. Nigeria is split close to 50-50 between Muslims and Christians. The north is majority Muslim, the south is majority Christian.
- raverbashing 8y ago
  > Nigerians are primarily Muslims. More like 50%/50% > What about Indians? Who are usually either Hindu or Muslim? Most are Hindu or Sikh
  - dragontamer 8y ago
    > Most are Hindu or Sikh Oh right, Pakistan is where the Muslims come from. Apologies, its sometimes hard to remember everything about the world. But yeah, neither of those are Christian. Both are IIRC Polythistic religions, about as different from Christianity as possible. Muslims for example believe in Abraham and the existence of Jesus. Their story is... very different but Allah is clearly the God of Abraham / Yahweh. So if anything, Muslims are "closer" to the mainstream religion of the USA than Hindu's or Sikhs
    - raverbashing 8y ago
      (removed)
      - dragontamer 8y ago
        > driving trucks over people This hurtful stereotype doesn't even work for the majority of the Bin Laden family (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family), let alone the majority of Muslims. I think that MAYBE a case can be made against the Wahhabi philosophy / sect (and similar sects). Maybe, but that's the furthest I'd go towards deriding a religious group in its entirety. Things are especially complicated because a large number of pro-Wahhabi Saudi princes are working very closely with the USA on this issue.
        raverbashing 8y ago
        You're right. But it's a fact. Do you know what works for a significant number of them? Antisemitism. Homophobia. Ingrained misogyny. Hate towards atheists.
kaitai 8y ago
You may not have read a lot about the contentious history of Catholicism in the US. Until the 1960s, many Protestant Americans still considered Catholic Americans "not really American" because of their alleged allegiance to an extra-governmental power, the Church (and in particular the Pope). As recently as the 1950s Protestant-Catholic intermarriage was truly frowned upon in many parts of the country and Catholics were prohibited from joining various civic institutions.
adamsea 8y ago
> didn't have a religion that promoted extremism and placed them at odds with the existing inhabitants. You mean like European Christian colonizers and the indigenous peoples of North and South America?

by magduf 8y ago

dragontamer 8y ago

> and certainly didn't have a religion that promoted extremism Lets cut through the code words then and have a direct counterexample to what you're trying to say. Nigerians are primarily Muslims. They are also highly educated and among the most entrepreneurial immigrants to the USA. And while there's a "Nigerian prince" joke every now and then, they really are doing relatively well in the USA. Like, "better than Asians" with regards to college education statistics. https://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-most-educated-in-the-U-S-1600808.php https://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-m... Nigerians are basically the perfect counterexample to the "Religion" (aka: Islam) problem that is so often brought up. High rates of college completion, high rates of business / entrepreneurs, high-rates of integration. Overall, clearly net-positive to the USA. > Other Asian immigrants in the US were also either not religious, or (like with Koreans and Filipinos) adopted the same religion as the dominant culture. What about Indians? Who are usually either Hindu or Muslim? Indians are also highly educated and start a large number of businesses. I'm personally Catholic. I'd obviously prefer it if immigrants would come with the same Religion as me, but the statistics are in. Nigerians, Indians, and a whole host of other immigrants kind of do perfectly fine in America. There's no need for them to be Christian or otherwise "mainstream". Indeed, bringing in immigrants on the basis of religion is severely anti-American IMO. America is certainly big enough to sustain Hindu, Muslims, and other religious groups. Especially if those people are coming in highly-skilled, highly educated, and overall are a benefit to our society.

magduf 8y ago
Ok, then what is the problem then? It's not racism; Nigerians are a lot darker than Arabs. Maybe it's a cultural problem, combined with religion: you never hear of Nigerian Muslims committing terrorist acts in the West. Islam is a big, big religion, and Muslims from some cultures simply don't have any kind of bad reputation (I'm thinking Malaysia here), while others certainly do. So maybe it is religion, just not the whole religion, but rather particular sects. All Christians are not like the Pentecostals or the Mormons, and similarly all Muslims are not the same.
- dragontamer 8y ago
  Its certainly a problem that's specific to particular sects. The sect of Osama Bin Laden was "Wahhabism", which is relatively rare outside of Saudi Arabia. And even then, the Saudi Princes who work with the USA are often pro-Wahabbism, so the USA can't even deride that sect (even if its the primary sect of Al-Qaeda). Because there's still "good guys" who follow that particular sect. Note that the "Bin Laden" family was a very rich and entrepreneurial group of people. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family) Some of them were huge investors in the US before their "black sheep" messed up their family name forever. The Middle East is complicated. Like, super super complicated. Honestly, the bin Ladens in general (aside from the infamous one) should be welcome to the USA. A bit unfortunate about their "black sheep" sibling. ----------- Besides, if "Religion" was the problem, why did the USA DESTROY the only secular, maybe even atheist, group in the Middle East? (aka: Iraq Saddam Hussein and the Ba'athists). Reason: the world is complicated. And thinking about it in terms of Religion only is a mistake. ISIS for example is a combination of yes, Wahhabism, but ALSO has the support of former Ba'athists. And the Ba'athists believe in Secularism and secular law. They seemed to have joined in the ISIS fun not because of religious reasons, but because they wished to take over Iraq and saw aligning themselves with the fundamentalist Wahhabists as the best path forward and creating a unified Arab State. So yes, we are fighting secular (arguably an atheist) groups in the Middle East. The world is a very complicated place. Yes, we have enemies some places, but Muslims exist across the entire world. You can't paint the issues of one region as a blight on all Muslims. Even then: I'd imagine that we should welcome the many Iraqis who have helped the USA and are now getting targetted by ISIS in their country. We have friends in the region and we are turning them away with our immigration policies. We've turned our back on our closest supporters of that region, and I wouldn't be surprised if a large number of them have died because of their pro-US support or actions. TL;DR: Immigration policy is hard.
skissane 8y ago
> Nigerians are primarily Muslims. Nigeria is split close to 50-50 between Muslims and Christians. The north is majority Muslim, the south is majority Christian.
raverbashing 8y ago
> Nigerians are primarily Muslims. More like 50%/50% > What about Indians? Who are usually either Hindu or Muslim? Most are Hindu or Sikh
- dragontamer 8y ago
  > Most are Hindu or Sikh Oh right, Pakistan is where the Muslims come from. Apologies, its sometimes hard to remember everything about the world. But yeah, neither of those are Christian. Both are IIRC Polythistic religions, about as different from Christianity as possible. Muslims for example believe in Abraham and the existence of Jesus. Their story is... very different but Allah is clearly the God of Abraham / Yahweh. So if anything, Muslims are "closer" to the mainstream religion of the USA than Hindu's or Sikhs
  - raverbashing 8y ago
    (removed)
    - dragontamer 8y ago
      > driving trucks over people This hurtful stereotype doesn't even work for the majority of the Bin Laden family (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family), let alone the majority of Muslims. I think that MAYBE a case can be made against the Wahhabi philosophy / sect (and similar sects). Maybe, but that's the furthest I'd go towards deriding a religious group in its entirety. Things are especially complicated because a large number of pro-Wahhabi Saudi princes are working very closely with the USA on this issue.
      - raverbashing 8y ago
        You're right. But it's a fact. Do you know what works for a significant number of them? Antisemitism. Homophobia. Ingrained misogyny. Hate towards atheists.

kaitai 8y ago

You may not have read a lot about the contentious history of Catholicism in the US. Until the 1960s, many Protestant Americans still considered Catholic Americans "not really American" because of their alleged allegiance to an extra-governmental power, the Church (and in particular the Pope). As recently as the 1950s Protestant-Catholic intermarriage was truly frowned upon in many parts of the country and Catholics were prohibited from joining various civic institutions.

adamsea 8y ago

> didn't have a religion that promoted extremism and placed them at odds with the existing inhabitants. You mean like European Christian colonizers and the indigenous peoples of North and South America?