Parking lot at 2AM is different than inside the bar at 10PM, kinda know a little about this, as I actually OWNED one of the bars in question. **** the refugees, send them back they ARE a DRAIN. Hell one even got mad we didn’t take EBT.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Eric Holcomb pushing for refugee resettlement in Indiana?
- Thread starter TheDude
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
Immigrants aren’t ****ing refugees, and no one here has said NO Immigration, only ENFORCED immigration just like every other country in the ****ing world. We have a system, you have to provide your OWN support and be able to prove it, and go through the steps to citizenship! Of those Fortune 500’s how many were founded by illegals?
Ahh so your only gripe is that the fights, which all start inside the bar, aren't getting relegated to the parking lot quickly enough?
Lots of people here are saying no immigrants at all. No refugees either. No one is argueing in favor of more illegal immigration.
No my gripe is actually with no loads such as yourself who feel it’s ok to use other people’s money, but when asked to do it yourself, “you can’t afford it”. Weren’t those your words? I’m done.
You must have grew up in a much bigger town if you had "bars".
Ive come to prefer none at all. I know it will never happen sadly. But if we must have it then we must only have the best and brightest and they must become true americans
Hard turn. I've said previously I give money to different charities I believe in but something like refugee resettlement, by it's very nature, has to go through the state department and will involve govt. Funds.
The fact that I dont have a refugee sleeping on my couch right now isn't an argument. Itd be akin to me telling you you're a hypocrite if you advocate for and financially support Riley's childrens hospital, but don't personally go administer chemo to the kids.
We support Riley at every possible opportunity. We were involved with organizing the first ride for Riley that has grown beyond measure. Donate every year. along with a group of like minded peoples. It feels good.
Just saw an opportunity and had to take it.....
Carry on.
Yup. These silly kids are lost to this.
I have been alluded to being a racist, white supremacist, Ignorant and so on in this thread. I am none of those things so take a big smooch on the "X".
Assimilate you silly people. Assimilate. Become part of the culture or do not come here.
These arguments made are just idiotic and people arguing just for the sake of arguing.
This thread is done.
Last edited:
OK. It has been brought to my attention that in the way I closed this thread it was only to shut down differing opinions. Nothing could be farther from the truth here.
I shut it down as to race baiting and idiotic diversions from topic. Also being personally called out as several things that I am not. I see I just need to moderate those who use these tactics to hold what they see as the moral high ground. People, this has not a damned thing to do with race. So leave that out of this conversation.
It is also obvious this is a serious hot button. It is with me and from direct personal interactions with some people that cause direct impact on my life and my family's lives.
In this I am standing back. I will be
.
Cross the racial lines and expect to loose privilege's.
I shut it down as to race baiting and idiotic diversions from topic. Also being personally called out as several things that I am not. I see I just need to moderate those who use these tactics to hold what they see as the moral high ground. People, this has not a damned thing to do with race. So leave that out of this conversation.
It is also obvious this is a serious hot button. It is with me and from direct personal interactions with some people that cause direct impact on my life and my family's lives.
In this I am standing back. I will be
. Cross the racial lines and expect to loose privilege's.
I have some catching up to do. Just a general statement, it would be good to stop inferring the motives of other people. There are plenty of reasons not to agree with you on a given topic other than that the other side is ignorant, racist, whatever. I mean, sometimes, maybe it's you who's full of ****.
I don't think that's the general claim made by most people who are critical of our policies on immigration and specifically refugees. US citizens have a stake in how that's done, and they get to say that they should not be negatively impacted, and they should have a choice in how their own communities are impacted. To me that seems to be the crux of the issue. It's not the broad moral precipice that you're making of it.
Okay, so about what I said earlier...
I was replying to what you said, that immigrants can just as well be part of the solution. That doesn't seem to be the case, at least not without impacting existing cultures. Look how that affected Virginia? A mostly red state has been turned blue because of high concentrations of new immigrants from countries who align with blue values. So now bat**** crazy policies are being imposed on them because this influx of immigrants in the urban areas around DC have changed the political dynamics.
And, maybe some of you think that's well and good; another red state turned blue. But it certainly gives people a reason not to like immigration. At least if we increase populations naturally by ****ing, Overton's window will progress naturally instead of in a way that has caused the culture war.
Maybe there is a way that immigrants can just as well be part of the solution, but it seems that in practice, no one who has a say in it is all that interested in not impacting existing cultures. Now if you're making a "should" argument, yeah, fine. It would be better for all if we could be practically compassionate without imposing foreign values on existing cultures. It should be that way. But that's not the way it is.
I don't think that's the general claim made by most people who are critical of our policies on immigration and specifically refugees. US citizens have a stake in how that's done, and they get to say that they should not be negatively impacted, and they should have a choice in how their own communities are impacted. To me that seems to be the crux of the issue. It's not the broad moral precipice that you're making of it.
Okay, so about what I said earlier...
I was replying to what you said, that immigrants can just as well be part of the solution. That doesn't seem to be the case, at least not without impacting existing cultures. Look how that affected Virginia? A mostly red state has been turned blue because of high concentrations of new immigrants from countries who align with blue values. So now bat**** crazy policies are being imposed on them because this influx of immigrants in the urban areas around DC have changed the political dynamics.
And, maybe some of you think that's well and good; another red state turned blue. But it certainly gives people a reason not to like immigration. At least if we increase populations naturally by ****ing, Overton's window will progress naturally instead of in a way that has caused the culture war.
Maybe there is a way that immigrants can just as well be part of the solution, but it seems that in practice, no one who has a say in it is all that interested in not impacting existing cultures. Now if you're making a "should" argument, yeah, fine. It would be better for all if we could be practically compassionate without imposing foreign values on existing cultures. It should be that way. But that's not the way it is.
I can't make a higher-power explanation because that's not my perspective. I look at it in terms of applying all the moral foundations, not just one or two. It's not just caring and compassion. There's also fairness to everyone else who has a stake in it, and a loyalty to one's own nation, as well as others.
In terms of morality--all of it, not just compassion--the first priority should be to find a way to help them live safer, more humanely, in their own land, with their own people. That is the best outcome. If that's not possible, then of course the moral thing to do is relocate them somewhere where they can live better. But if that means here, the next priority should be finding a place which is most culturally compatible for them, where they will impact the communities that absorb them least.
So I would say that if you want people to explain the morals behind turning them away, I think you first need to explain how you plan to accomplish both goals: giving them a better life, and ensuring they don't consume the communities they will inhabit.
C'mon man. You're not enslaved. As far as "immigrants don't belong here" did the first generation in your family tree to immigrate here "belong" here? I don't think the discussion should be whether we should allow people from other countries to come here, but it's fair to put some rules around what what we expect of immigrants once they're here and how we should protect existing cultures from upheaval.
You've made several claims about this and just state it. It would be helpful if you could prove that point, because from where I sit it does not appear it's completely without taxpayer money. Not an exhaustive list of questions, but what does it cost to bring them here? What does it cost to establish them? What does it cost to maintain them, train them? Where does the money come from that pays all that.
Just saying they don't get public aid doesn't do much for me. I know some who are on public assistance of some sort. Maybe that's reimbursed by the UN, or charities. The UN is largely funded by the US. How does that figure in with the bottom line?
In other words, show me the balance sheet. You may think that's ignorant. That because you work with them, that there's no public funding at all. Well. If you're not ignorant on the other side, you should be able to produce the source of your knowledge of it. I mean, all the way down. Or, I would accept you modifying your confidence to say you "believe" that refugees do not get public aid.
As a matter of background, I actually don't have a problem with refugees getting some public aid if it helps them become fully integrated, tax paying, self-sufficient, responsible, English speaking Americans. I've worked along side other engineers who came here as refugees. I'm glad they got the breaks they did. They have a much better life now. And they've more than paid back whatever aid they got. They were well integrated Americans who appreciated their new situation. If that's the final outcome of it, I'm good with that.
Last edited:
This sounds like some pretty idealistically derived nonsense. That's not how it works in the real world. You, personally, may have the temperament to live among them. That can't be scaled because people have widely different temperaments which can't simply be turned off. And where did you get the idea that it's "very un-American" to be an assimilated society? What's nonsensical about that, assimilation is what happens to groups that intermingle naturally. The smaller out-group will eventually assimilate most of the cultural attributes of the larger in-group, while also sourcing some new cultural attributes to the in-group. Well. Until ignorant progressives start whining about cultural appropriation.
Integration with cultures is indeed a melting pot unless there is a drastic difference that makes them intentionally segregate. If you drop a drastically different culture of size into a community, there naturally will be strife between them, and prejudices formed. It's not because people are ignorant. It's not because they're racist. It's because they're humans running instinctive algorithms evolved over very long periods.
To me, saying you would live among them sounds a lot like you're trying to put yourself on a moral pedestal, one which you believe everyone should strive to reach. But there are other moral and social considerations than just yours. What about the people who DO live among them and the cultural differences are too much? It's okay not to like some of the other cultural aspects of others, and it is that dislike that helps resolve cultural conflicts over generations. That's just another form of natural selection. It's okay.
Last edited:
C'mon man. No. That doesn't sound like "communism". What he said reflects human nature. And describing his past doesn't mean he's standing up for the KKK. That's a ridiculously shallow and disingenuous interpretation. But, let's go there for a minute (ETA, I mean concerning radical groups, not CM; a divergence in topic). Everyone has some signal and some noise. Some have more than others, but no one is all signal and no noise, and no one is all noise and no signal. So. There are some underlying truths that are involved in making people who they become. There is at least a little truth behind even reprehensible groups like the KKK, and denying that just because they're morally icky doesn't help reduce the population of people who devolved into groups like that. A signal like, "I feel my way of life is threatened by..." can quickly devolved into a lot of noise if the signal isn't recognized and properly resolved. If people stopped claiming that everything that smells like a resistance to cultural diversity is racism, I think a lot of folks wouldn't devolve into real ass racists. Instead, find the signal, and figure out what that means. Can you even differentiate the difference between signal and noise about your own point of view?
You may not recognize the extent to which you yourself resist cultures you don't like. A point intended for everyone: the other side is not all noise. Your side is not all signal. It's not likely that people will change their minds based on arguing on the internet. The most that can happen is people detect what is true, the signal part, of what the other is saying.
Last edited:
- Status
Site Supporter
Members online
- Cavman
- wesnellans
- Slow Hand
- SnoopLoggyDog
- BP84
- Steve
- NHT3
- led4thehed2
- sailinon
- SEIndSAM
- papa6x
- 2tonic
- loudgroove
- Tradesylver
- jreer25
- drgnrobo
- 9teen56f100
- rdbs505
- ranger04
- DoggyDaddy
- MDpolo
- shibumiseeker
- tv1217
- Dutchmaster
- HoosierHunter07
- jbm1521
- DJM95B
- DDadams
- Steel and wood
- Simon6101
- bwframe
- ROOTS54454
- Brad69
- swamptick
- jamil
- El Conquistador
- Tombs
- Kaden1
- x34822
- jsn_mooney
- Barry in IN
- Engle086
- Rafterman
- josem1257
- Twinks46975
- pharmboy
