-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Unrestricted Immigration
- Thread starter Ultimatum
- Start date
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Against. There has to be a screening and application process prior to any entry.
You don't want just anyone crossing the borders unrestricted. That could prove detrimental not only for compatibility by which one could function in a society but health and safety needs to be considered as well.
Also if a country is near or at capacity there will come a time where the doors will need to be shut.
You don't want just anyone crossing the borders unrestricted. That could prove detrimental not only for compatibility by which one could function in a society but health and safety needs to be considered as well.
Also if a country is near or at capacity there will come a time where the doors will need to be shut.
Can it not be to provide help to those who need it?
MD
qualiaphile
You've obviously never lived in a ghetto immigrant neighborhood
Nope. But my dad's an immigrant. And just because certain neighbourhoods are bad, doesn't mean we can't help people by letting them in settle in our countries.
Sees
Dragonslayer
Definitely against. The U.S. is already in much debt and it's pretty hard for people to get a decent job. Too much of a good thing (willing and able worker-bees) is plain dumb. There is no entitlement which folks from elsewhere have that requires us to keep the gates freely open.
It's better for the U.S. and their home countries if they strive to fix up "back home." A win-win situation. Ideally if they need refuge, some type of test is passed to ensure they don't bring the baggage with them which caused what they had to escape from.
It's better for the U.S. and their home countries if they strive to fix up "back home." A win-win situation. Ideally if they need refuge, some type of test is passed to ensure they don't bring the baggage with them which caused what they had to escape from.
fiat lux
Member
Thomas Malthus warned that unchecked population growth always exceeds resource growth, leading to catastrophic overpopulation. This occurs because population grows exponentially while food and all other resources are forever finite.
Without population control, the population would be reduced by catastrophes such as famine, war or pestilence.
This concept allowed Darwin to see the pattern of evolutionary survival
Without population control, the population would be reduced by catastrophes such as famine, war or pestilence.
This concept allowed Darwin to see the pattern of evolutionary survival
GoodbyeDave
Well-Known Member
In the 1940s, the population of the UK was 46 million. With food imports largely stopped by the War, they could barely be fed, even with strict rationing. Today, the UK has 63 million and would starve without food imports. If that doesn't indicate that the country is full up, I don't know what would.
I don't think we need to be self-sufficient in food. It's a globalised world.
fiat lux
Member
We can extend the Malthusian concept to things beyond food (though that is serious enough); to the facilities for education, health, transportation, housing and more. The UK is in particular, noticeably overcrowded already.
It's an unsustainably globalized world. Globalization won't last. Self-sufficiency is in everyone's best long-term interest. Collapses will happen. The only question is exactly when, not if. Immigration is both necessary and detrimental to self-sufficiency. Depends on context as others have mentioned. The problem I see is that we make all this excessively complicated. In general, I think modern civilization makes human living excessively complicated.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Whether you support it or not, because of globalization you need to get used to it. People today are moving around at rates never seen before, and eventually easier immigration and moving around will become an issue, not over fear of immigrants, but out of a necessity to get around even easier.
I can only speak for the US, in part but cautiously for some other countries such as India, UK, Australia and Canada. Probably not at all for others ...
... though the invasion of jihadee types into the EU is a big problem.
But just speaking for the US, it is my observation (and I will be proven historically accurate) what we have right NOW (verse the past) is not an unrestricted immigration problem but favortism for one demographic - illiterate "Hispanics" from South of the Border who most cannot even read or write in their own language and many are gang bangers - over all other peoples of the world.
It isn't immigration nor even unrestricted immigration. It is a purposeful and planned invasion of one demographic, favortism for that demographic that will be paid to invade and be paid to vote Democrat because they are the exact illiterate, fascist oriented suckers of "free bread" politics, that the Democrats want to turn the demographics of Texas from Red to Blue and thus steal the 2016 electoral college for the Presidency via the invading hordes in the millions of these "hispanic" foreigners as part of what is voter fraud.
I support unrestricted immigration - which can only be contribution based immigration open to the entire world equally and not having one demographic with the luck of being camped right on the southern border enmass horde in and take "all the seats" and resouces away from everyone else in the world such that there is now no room on the boat. That means to be fair to all, you cannot allow one demographic to cut in line shoving everyone else aside and trampling over them to die under their feet, you must secure the southern border, then let others from all over the world go through actual immigration which means health checks and assess what contrubutiona they will bring to diversity instead of this NON-immigration and favortism of illegal aliens invading and over running and trampling to death all others so that the Democrats can try and save even more loss in 2016 by turning Texas into Mexico for a few more million votes for whatever government class despot they are running now.
Personally, I want to offset these hordes of illiterates carrying disease and importng poverty and low wages with millions of Russians, Hungarians, more Japanese if possible, Indians, maybe some Middle Eastern, more Jews, and such. Secure the border now, and stop Obama's illegal and unconstitutional and despot executive orders and actions.
By the way, India has it's own problems as well with illegal aliens from Bangladesh coming into West Bengal, being used in voter fraud by some politicians, many of these Bangladeshi illegal aliens who supposedly "do the jobs Indians won't do" are nothing but car theives and many are Islamic terrorists.
... though the invasion of jihadee types into the EU is a big problem.
But just speaking for the US, it is my observation (and I will be proven historically accurate) what we have right NOW (verse the past) is not an unrestricted immigration problem but favortism for one demographic - illiterate "Hispanics" from South of the Border who most cannot even read or write in their own language and many are gang bangers - over all other peoples of the world.
It isn't immigration nor even unrestricted immigration. It is a purposeful and planned invasion of one demographic, favortism for that demographic that will be paid to invade and be paid to vote Democrat because they are the exact illiterate, fascist oriented suckers of "free bread" politics, that the Democrats want to turn the demographics of Texas from Red to Blue and thus steal the 2016 electoral college for the Presidency via the invading hordes in the millions of these "hispanic" foreigners as part of what is voter fraud.
I support unrestricted immigration - which can only be contribution based immigration open to the entire world equally and not having one demographic with the luck of being camped right on the southern border enmass horde in and take "all the seats" and resouces away from everyone else in the world such that there is now no room on the boat. That means to be fair to all, you cannot allow one demographic to cut in line shoving everyone else aside and trampling over them to die under their feet, you must secure the southern border, then let others from all over the world go through actual immigration which means health checks and assess what contrubutiona they will bring to diversity instead of this NON-immigration and favortism of illegal aliens invading and over running and trampling to death all others so that the Democrats can try and save even more loss in 2016 by turning Texas into Mexico for a few more million votes for whatever government class despot they are running now.
Personally, I want to offset these hordes of illiterates carrying disease and importng poverty and low wages with millions of Russians, Hungarians, more Japanese if possible, Indians, maybe some Middle Eastern, more Jews, and such. Secure the border now, and stop Obama's illegal and unconstitutional and despot executive orders and actions.
By the way, India has it's own problems as well with illegal aliens from Bangladesh coming into West Bengal, being used in voter fraud by some politicians, many of these Bangladeshi illegal aliens who supposedly "do the jobs Indians won't do" are nothing but car theives and many are Islamic terrorists.
Last edited:
Koldo
Outstanding Member
I am against unrestricted immigration.
You can't just let an undefined number of people get into a country and let them sort it out by themselves. A massive immigration will have effects on food supply, housing, transport, etc. There needs to be certain rules in place.
Immigration can't be unrestricted, of course. But then neither can vegetative growth, and that is a much higher priority.
Focusing on immigration is more than a little short-sighted IMO.
Focusing on immigration is more than a little short-sighted IMO.
True. I've had my times as an anarcho-primitivist. But it just isn't practical to try and simplify human society once it's complexified, IMO. I believe globalisation's here to stay
But birth rates are going down, globally. We're already at 2.5 children per woman, with 2.1 being the replacement. Obviously it takes a while for this to filter up the generations, but still...