I don't think we disagree here. Just strange phrasing
We've already come far from the point about what is humanist. Clearly, this is not synonymous with what Trump is.
-
-
Well, Obama did exactly the same thing in 2011. There is precedent.
@Zacnaloen -
Are we arguing whether there is precedent or whether this is humanist?
-
Not sure where 'humanist' comes into the equation. This is a question of legality.
-
This is the tweet I retweeted.https://twitter.com/sjzara/status/825609433694756864 …
-
I addressed the 'rights' part of that. Humanism is neither here nor there in the argument.
@Zacnaloen@sjzara -
Its an argument about what is humanist! By an Englishman. US laws cannot refute it!
-
There is nothing to refute. US law is a legal framework. Humanism is not.
@Zacnaloen@sjzara -
So maybe US law doesn't apply to English people talking about what is humanist?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
There's what is constitutional and what is humanist. I'd rather they target individuals they have intelligence on.
-
Yes, exactly. So 'its reasonable to hold these views cos humanist' is not countered by US immigration rules.
-
You are also suggesting he legally can't. In fact, legal code I just tweeted gives wide leeway "Any Class of Alien"
-
I thought that had been established. Is it now claimed this indicates it is constitutional to discriminate by relig?
-
Non-citizens don't get constitutional protections and never have so why would it apply to them in the first place?
-
-
As I said, until tested in court it's all opinion.
-
Obv, it will need to be argued out by constitutional lawyers but Trump's backtrack matches current consensus.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.