Why did Schumer cry for the banned muslims

dancingqueen

Tue, Jan 31 2017, 11:51 pm

Fox wrote:

This is precisely the attitude that many of us reject. Not just us random chattering Imamothers, but the people on the ground who do the real work helping immigrants and refugees.

Here's the thing about the people who are really working to help those facing horrific circumstances of various types: they don't spend a lot of time feeling bad for the people and they tend not to talk about it unless they're trying to raise money.

I've listened to a number of interviews over the past few days with people who work aiding immigrants/refugees in various ways, and while they don't necessarily support the executive order, neither do they see it as a show-stopper.

I mentioned in a post above that I most recently listened to an NPR story on Iranian LGBT refugees. It included an interview with a representative of the IRQR (Iranian Railroad for Queer Refugees). He talked about the immediate effects of the executive order, but then he launched into a discussion of all kinds of previous immigration policies enacted in the U.S. and Canada that impacted the population he works with. The executive order was just the latest roadblock of many that his organization has faced.

Feeling bad about someone's circumstances is worthless unless you take some action. In fact, it's even worse than not caring -- it allows people to feel good about themselves for no reason whatsoever.

If you are concerned about immigrants, give your cleaning lady a raise or help her find a better job. Point her toward a good immigration lawyer if she's here illegally. Heck, learn how to greet to the Chinese fruit-and-vegetable guy or the Egyptian librarian in their native languages, if that's all you can muster.

Feeling a certain way doesn't give anyone the moral high ground. That's reserved for people who actually act in ways -- however small -- to ameliorate the problem that upsets them.

Fox I know several lawyers and other volunteers IRL who went to the airports to help people being detained there because of the recent EO. They are all pretty horrified by the EO and have been speaking out against it on social media. Talk doesn't mean there is no action.

ora_43

Wed, Feb 01 2017, 1:57 am

SixOfWands wrote:

"Iraqi jihadists should stay in Iraq" is very different from "people trying to escape Iraqi jihadists should stay in Iraq," or "all Iraqis must be jihadists, who cares."

Yes, those are different statements. And FF said the first one, not the latter two.

Quote:

And you have to recognize that "I don't want them in my country, they're taking over and changing its very nature" is exactly what the Palestinians say of Israel. They're wrong. But you have to recognize when you use the same words and arguments that they do.

So are we assuming here that borders and citizenship are completely irrelevant concepts? Wanting to limit entry to non-citizens and wanting to expel citizens of a foreign country *from their own country* are the same thing?

A person who says "I don't want Mexicans to immigrate to America" and "I think Mexico is on American land, and we should expel the Mexicans and turn it into states 51-65" are saying the same thing?

(Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the first statement is problem-free. But for goodness' sake. These are not even a little bit close to being the same things.)

wondergirl

Wed, Feb 01 2017, 6:08 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

wondergirl wrote:
Schumer is a New York politician. He is obligated to support, defend, and protect his constituents who are law abiding American citizens. Where is his sadness when New Yorkers are evicted from their homes and end up homeless?

Schumer, Gillibrand Announce Over 14 Million in Federal Funds to Support Homeless Vteran Families in NYC and Long Island
https://www.schumer.senate.gov.....ong-island

Schumer, Cantwell Push National Plan to Increase Federal Resource in NYC for Affordable Housing and to Fight Homelessness

https://www.schumer.senate.gov.....its-in-nyc

wondergirl wrote:

Where is his sadness when New Yorkers get rejected from CUNY schools in favor of foreign or illegal students?

Actually, every NYC resident is guaranteed --GUARANTEED admission to a CUNY. It may not be the one that you want, but its a given. As to admissions of foreign students, (1) it helps pay the bills, since they pay higher tuition; and (2) it makes the school more prestigious.

wondergirl wrote:

Where is his sadness when kids join gangs and kill each other over it?

Schumer to offer gun control bill

http://thehill.com/regulation/.....ntrol-bill

Schumer Unveils Comprehensive Plan To Crack Down On Gangs And School Violence With Violent Crime Up 10 Percent And Schools On Edge After Recent Rash Of Shootings

https://www.schumer.senate.gov.....-shootings

wondergirl wrote:

Where is his sadness when New Yorkers are forced to take out loans to pay for college because they couldnt get financial aid for whatever reason?

https://www.schumer.senate.gov.....ordability

wondergirl wrote:

Where is his sadness when New Yorkers need lawyers to help them but the money goes to lawyers who aid and abet illegal aliens?

"Aid and abet" undocumented aliens? You mean represent them in deportation hearings? You do know that Congress bans Legal Services Corp from working on immigration cases, although they have done so by exploiting loopholes. There was also a proposal for a small amount of money to be used for representation of children who entered the US illegally, and without parents.

Under the US legal system, you pay your attorney, unless its a criminal matter and you can't afford counsel. Do you really want to change that? People oppose universal health care; you want free legal care?

Thank you for posting these articles, I appreciate it. I have not had time to read all of them completely so I will respond more fully at another time. I have skimmed through some of them though so I will address it briefly based on my initial thoughts.

First, gun control wont help anyone in a gang since gangs typically get their guns in the black market and not through legal means. Additionally, Schumer speaks of wanting a program to prevent gangs but states that there is no money or resources for it.

He wants to help people who have student loans but there is no money to just forgive the loans so that they wouldnt have to pay it back. There is no money for them to get financial aid either so they have no choice but to take out loans.

And while you say that illegal aliens are banned from getting pro bono legal assistance (do you have sources for that?), they are getting free legal services at the expense of tax payers who cannot even get pro bono lawyers for their own needs. And the illegal aliens are getting these pro bono lawyers for non-criminal needs such as immigration, housing, etc. which even low income citizens have a difficult time getting as it is pro bono legal agencies are overworked and underpaid.

That means that with perhaps the exception of the funding for veteran housing, there is not enough money or resources for anything else. So how exactly do we have money to pay for the needs of foreign refugees if we cannot afford to cover the needs of our own citizens?

Oh, and please provide me with the sources that New York residents are guaranteed entrance to CUNY senior colleges and graduate schools. Thanks

SixOfWands

Wed, Feb 01 2017, 6:26 pm

wondergirl wrote:

Thank you for posting these articles, I appreciate it. I have not had time to read all of them completely so I will respond more fully at another time. I have skimmed through some of them though so I will address it briefly based on my initial thoughts.

First, gun control wont help anyone in a gang since gangs typically get their guns in the black market and not through legal means. Additionally, Schumer speaks of wanting a program to prevent gangs but states that there is no money or resources for it.

He wants to help people who have student loans but there is no money to just forgive the loans so that they wouldnt have to pay it back. There is no money for them to get financial aid either so they have no choice but to take out loans.

And while you say that illegal aliens are banned from getting pro bono, they are getting free legal services at the expense of tax payers who cannot get pro bono lawyers for their own needs. And the illegal aliens are getting these pro bono lawyers for non-criminal needs such as immigration, housing, etc. which you even low income citizens have a difficult time getting as it is pro bono legal agencies are overworked and underpaid.

So with perhaps the exception of the funding for veteran housing, there is not enough money or resources for anything else. So how exactly do we have money to pay for the needs of foreign refugees if we cannot afford to cover the needs of our own citizens?

Oh, and please provide me with the sources that New York residents are guaranteed entrance to CUNY senior colleges and graduate schools. Thanks

Well, the fact that there's not enough money for programs is hardly Schumer's fault alone. He's at least tried.

I never said there was guaranteed admission to CUNY graduate schools. That would be ridiculous. There is guaranteed admission to a CUNY undergraduate program. I don't have time to find a source for you, but I heard it directly from the CUNY director of admissions on more than one occasion. That may be a 2-year college, but its still guaranteed.

I also want to refer to gun control. While guns are purchased on the "black market," virtually every gun used in a crime was legally purchased in the US at some point. And most are purchased by friends or families of the criminal. That mythical "smart gun" technology that dyed in the wool liberals like me think is possible, and the NRA fights tooth and nail, would be key to stopping this. As would tracing and limitation of ammunition purchases. But its never going to happen. I put so much hope in Obama in this regard, and he failed miserably.

wondergirl

Thu, Feb 02 2017, 9:12 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Well, the fact that there's not enough money for programs
is hardly Schumer's fault alone. He's at least tried.
I never said there was guaranteed admission to CUNY graduate schools. That would be ridiculous. There is guaranteed admission to a CUNY undergraduate program. I don't have time to find a source for you, but I heard it directly from the CUNY director of admissions on more than one occasion. That may be a 2-year college, but its still guaranteed.

I also want to refer to gun control. While guns are purchased on the "black market," virtually every gun used in a crime was legally purchased in the US at some point. And most are purchased by friends or families of the criminal. That mythical "smart gun" technology that dyed in the wool liberals like me think is possible, and the NRA fights tooth and nail, would be key to stopping this. As would tracing and limitation of ammunition purchases. But its never going to happen. I put so much hope in Obama in this regard, and he failed miserably.

The bolded is exactly what the problem is to begin with. There is no money for programs that New Yorkers desperately need. Schumer has been saying that for years but now he wants to turn around and somehow help foreigners? Where is he suddenly going to get the money from and why has he not been able to use this money for his own constituents?
He is a fraud and his "tears" are just a political ploy to gain votes from the Muslim population for his next election.

marina

Thu, Feb 02 2017, 10:35 pm

Fox wrote:

I don't know what all your paragraphs here mean, but yes, the people who actualy work with the refugees are horrified.

And there's nothing wrong with what Maya said, which is just hey don't be an ***.

Maya

Thu, Feb 02 2017, 10:47 pm

Fox wrote:

Do you know anything about me, or about what I have or haven't done, that you feel comfortable calling me a random chatterer, and accusing me of feeling absolved from doing anything concrete because I have compassion for people who have it way more difficult than any of us can imagine?

But then again, why do I expect better from someone who exhibits nothing but arrogance and contemptuousness for most opinions expressed on this board.

Fox

Fri, Feb 03 2017, 12:14 am

Maya wrote:

Wait, aren't those Tyra Banks's lines? Actually, I consider all of us random chatterers.

I only know that you often claim your background gives you special insight into the Chassishe veldt. Fair enough. But if that's the case, my background gives me special insight into virtue signaling.

As for my alleged arrogance and contemptuousness, I notice that these qualities are most frequently identified by people who believe that their feelings constitute a logical, evidence-based argument.

But here's how you can shut me down: simply use evidence to prove that feeling compassion for someone is as valuable as doing something. Heck, I'm not picky. Prove that feeling compassion is significantly linked to taking action -- not that people who take action are more compassionate.

See, that wasn't hard. And you don't even have to channel your inner Tyra!

naturalmom5

Fri, Feb 03 2017, 2:44 am

Fox wrote:

Touché
That was awesome Fox

marina

Mon, Feb 06 2017, 12:10 am

Fox wrote:

I'm not sure why I have to again translate Maya, but here I go:

In her first post, Maya advised us not to be @*&#%. You then accused her - with zero basis- of just talking and not doing anything. Maya then told you that she does plenty. YOU STILL CAME BACK to argue that point.

I cannot understand why anyone on an anonymous website would continue making assumptions about other anonymous posters even when told straight out those assumptions were untrue. It's not like you can ever prove your position. It's a completely useless line of arguing.

Sort of like this very post I am typing.

I guess it takes all kinds.

Fox

Mon, Feb 06 2017, 1:23 pm

marina wrote:

You're not "translating," you're changing the subject.

I did not accuse Maya of "just talking and not doing anything." I disagreed with a conclusion she reached that I believe to be erroneous, counterproductive, and wrong-headed:

Maya wrote:

I will not apologize for feeling a level of compassion for innocent women and little children who face the kinds of terrors and fears that neither you nor I, nor anyone on this board, can fathom or comprehend. The insensitivity and cruelty being exhibited by the frum women on this board, and the way some women are showing their true selves, is what's really startling to me. No one's asking you to take any concrete actions to bring in the refugees, but to feel a little sad about their circumstances is too much to ask? That's disgusting.

Her point was that people are insensitive, cruel, and disgusting if they don't feel a particular way.

This has nothing to do with whether any particular individual has or has not "done anything" regarding a particular issue.

It has to do with the opinion that one's feelings can be used as litmus test for morality.

As far as I'm concerned, you, me, Maya, and everyone else on this board could spend 24/6 doing nothing but working to assist immigrants/refugees, and I still wouldn't allow the conflation of feelings and morality to go unremarked.

I happened to have made a relatively simplistic argument: actions don't care about your feelings, and actions are more important in evaluating an individual's morality than his/her feelings. Part of the evidence I gave is that most true activists I've encountered (and I'm talking about people who have sacrificed for causes they believe in, not people who earn a living complaining on behalf of others) are often quite contemptuous of compassion absent anything else.

But we can easily increase the sophistication of the argument: Whether you want to use the Torah as your primary source or rely on the philosophical debates of other traditions, there is ample evidence that feelings are not an adequate way to determine an individual's morality.

Moreover, accepting the premise that a person can be declared "disgusting" because she doesn't feel the correct way begs a slew of addition questions: exactly how much compassion must I have before I'm no longer "disgusting"? And how will we measure it?

Does it make a difference to whom that compassion is directed? Maya mentioned women and children, but what about the gay Iranian men I mentioned? Should my compassion be greater for someone who looks more pitiful but whose probability of experiencing physical danger is random? Or for the Iranian guy who has been singled out for prison, torture, and possible execution because his boyfriend's father turned him in?

Maya may be completely correct. There may be scads of us on Imamother who are disgusting for various reasons. But if so, it will be as a result of complex interplays of beliefs and actions -- not simply that we appear to lack the "right" feelings.