[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And can you really call any of those groups, 'moderate'?

Therefore every member of one of those groups that has extreme views should be excluded from Canada?

And those extreme views would be things like wanting all of the Jews killed, believing that their identity group should rule over everyone, and promoting violence against people with different beliefs?

Weren't you just chiding Beave for listening to the voices in his head that were writing a false narrative of what you were saying?

So why are you now doing it to me?

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Naturally, you see where I'm going with this, right?

Saw it a long time ago. But I made myself pretty clear:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Everyone has a right to believe whatever they like. It's not my job, nor the governments' to police what people think...

[BartSimpson]

I'm not playing Beave's game, I'm being sarcastic and you know it.

That said, it is the duty of the government to screen people from entering our countries who demonstrate an inclination to either do it harm or cause harm to our fundamental values.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'm not playing Beave's game, I'm being sarcastic and you know it.

No I wasn't sure you were. Good to know though.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That said, it is the duty of the government to screen people from entering our countries who demonstrate an inclination to either do it harm or cause harm to our fundamental values.

Ahh! There's the twist! An inclination. Thoughts are one thing, actions are quite another.

The two do not always coincide. Wasn't it two years ago now everyone here was freaking out that Trudeau was letting 50,000 Syrian refugees in? "Jihad!" they said. "Shaira Law!" they said.

What's actually changed? The economy is a little better off. That's it.

[BartSimpson]

An inclination can be expressed as an actuarial table.

What people are most at risk to commit various types of crime?

Once that's identified it's up to your government to sort them out so they don't do harm.

So if you filter white extremists for their racial and religious views then you need to do the same for other extremists.

That's what I'm trying to get to here.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

That's what I'm trying to get to here.

I'm not opposed. I'm just saying that some actuarial tables may be disproportional to the risk.

Some people would have not allowed those refugees entry. As it turns out, they would have been wrong not to.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Some people would have not allowed those refugees entry.

Since there's no longer a 'Canadian identity' (per your Prime Minister) then I suppose it doesn't matter what kind of people you allow in.

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Some people would have not allowed those refugees entry.

Since there's no longer a 'Canadian identity' (per your Prime Minister) then I suppose it doesn't matter what kind of people you allow in.

Why did you suddenly start believing what politicians think??

Law and order is still a big part of who we are, but it's balanced by the willingness to help those who need help.

[Vbeacher]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Everyone has a right to believe whatever they like. It's not my job, nor the governments' to police what people think

But it is the government's job to import the very best people to Canada, the ones who will not only be the most economically successful but the most culturally flexible and adaptable and fit in well in their new home. That is not served by bringing in violent religious fanatics.

[Vbeacher]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Ahh! There's the twist! An inclination. Thoughts are one thing, actions are quite another

You're aware this is a democracy, right? If you bring in a million extremists who believe gays should be executed you'll have a million voters who think gays should be executed. Is that okay with you? What about ten million? Okay still? No problem?

At what point does this group start to influence the political equation?

If you bring in millions of people who think women are whores who need to be beaten and kept in line, at what point do the women in Canada get the right to object to this continuing stream of misogynists entering and voting?

[DrCaleb]

Vbeacher Vbeacher:

But it is the government's job to import the very best people to Canada, the ones who will not only be the most economically successful but the most culturally flexible and adaptable and fit in well in their new home. That is not served by bringing in violent religious fanatics.

Do you actually think fanatics would admit their views on an immigration screening?

Vbeacher Vbeacher:

You're aware this is a democracy, right?

Yup. And ____________ ?

Vbeacher Vbeacher:

If you bring in a million extremists who believe gays should be executed you'll have a million voters who think gays should be executed. Is that okay with you? What about ten million? Okay still? No problem?

At what point does this group start to influence the political equation?

If you bring in millions of people who think women are whores who need to be beaten and kept in line, at what point do the women in Canada get the right to object to this continuing stream of misogynists entering and voting?

That right there is called "reductio ad absurdum". A logical fallacy that relies on the extreme or absurd case to appeal to logic.

What is in place to keep people from doing this now? Oh yea, the law! That's why it doesn't happen every day already, because we have laws that stop it, and we have a constitution that prevents laws from allowing it, and we have a Queen that would veto any attempt to change the Constitution to allow it. Hence my argument, and the reason for this thread - Toronto Man CHARGED . . .

And what does any of your argument have to do with this being a democracy?