Critiquing the boarder wall for ( Br John . )

Br. John wrote: ...We are debating if Trump's Big Beautiful Wall is a good or bad idea....

When reading your comments about the beauty of a death machine designed to discriminate on the basis of ethnicity and national origin it becomes very clear that you are the one who does not understand.

Do you really think the members of the temple are not capable of seeing through the manner in which you've crafted your argument? Do you think they don't understand why?

You have made value judgements ( the beauty of proposed wall) which make it very clear that you support a society which violates the doctrine of this order.

Darkside much?

KerouacsGhost wrote:

Br. John wrote: ...We are debating if Trump's Big Beautiful Wall is a good or bad idea....

When reading your comments about the beauty of a death machine designed to discriminate on the basis of ethnicity and national origin it becomes very clear that you are the one who does not understand.

Do you really think the members of the temple are not capable of seeing through the manner in which you've crafted your argument? Do you think they don't understand why?

You have made value judgements ( the beauty of proposed wall) which make it very clear that you support a society which violates the doctrine of this order.

Darkside much?

Read much? I did not start this topic. Throughout this debate I've shown why the wall is a bad idea for many reasons.

What posts do argue for a wall in? List the post numbers

Trump calls it "A big beautiful wall", idiot. That's why I say Trump's big beautiful wall. Nowhere have I argued for it

Malicious, I'm curious what was the intended meaning of the title you made for this topic?

"Critiquing the boarder wall for (Br John .)"

Did you make this post for Br. John?

Do you really think the members of the temple are not capable of seeing through the manner in which you've crafted your argument? Do you think they don't understand why?

You have made value judgements ( the beauty of proposed wall) which make it very clear that you support a society which violates the doctrine of this order.

Darkside much?

What...?

I think this is one of those "not even wrong" moments....

anyway -

What we are discussing here is: assuming the goal is to keep someone from illegally (unauthorized) crossing the Mexico US border, a wall along the [entire] border is the best way. It's not if someone should be allowed to cross the border which is a different discussion.

A wall seems like a terrible method of achieving that goal, by almost any metric.

I know you want to keep the premise as is, for the sake of the discussion - I can't say I know enough about USA politics, or policy to truly understand what the the claimed issue is, or how a wall will resolve it-

Lets just assume that the problem is Boogeymen literally walking across the 'border' - my first suggestion would be something like the TARS (that I believe is already partially in use?)

Wikipedia (What? I'm not a friggen' expert) suggests they have a 400km range - so you need one of these every 800km - so four of these will cover the whole border.

Set up a monitoring centre, link it into to local law enforcement (or a specialised task force, or the national guard for all I care) to react/investigate as need be.

I'd probably want someone who knows more about them to explain to me why that's not a good idea, and even then I would not necessarily can it altogether, just come up with something to address the shortfalls.


Edit: Plan B - Privatise the issuing of border-crossing permits, making every unauthorised crossing a loss of profit for a private company, and let them be motivated to fix the problem for you....

So you don't support discrimination based on ethnicity or national origin and you do believe in the sanctity of the human person, oppose cruel and unusual punishment including death? In other words, you believe in the force and the inherent value of all life within it...even immigrants attempting to cross the southern boarder of the united states?


Jedi Believe

In the Force, and in the inherent worth of ALL LIFE within it.
In the SANCTITY OF THE HUMAN PERSON. WE OPPOSE the use of torture and CRUEL or UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, INCLUDING the DEATH penalty.
In a society governed by laws GROUNDED IN REASON and COMPASSION, NOT in FEAR or PREJUDICE
In a society that DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF sexual orientation or circumstances of birth such as gender, ethnicity and NATIONAL ORIGIN.
In the ETHIC OF RECIPROCITY , and how moral concepts are not absolute but vary by culture, religion and over time.
In the positive influence of spiritual growth and awareness on society.
In the importance of freedom of conscience and SELF-DETERMINATION within religious,POLITICAL AND OTHER STRUCTURES.
In the separation of religion and government and the FREEDOMs OF speech, ASSOCIATION and expression.

www.templeofthejediorder.org/doctrine-of-the-order#JediBelieve

Right JamesSand. I've lived in Texas all my life. We share a border 3,145km (1,254 miles) long. Trump's "big beautiful wall" is a stupid idea. It's an evil idea. That's why all my posts show evidence against it with references. That's why I asked Malicious why he thought it was a good idea? And even if it was to keep people from illegally crossing it's not the best way and it's highly destructive to humans and other living things and the environment.

Why would a Jedi contemplate the best way to discriminate against and cause the deaths of anyone anywhere without even raising the question, as well as attempt to have such questioning be removed from the discussion, about whether or not specific actions/technology were in line with the doctrine of the order of which they are a member?

Right JamesSand. I've lived in Texas all my life. We share a border 3,145km (1,254 miles) long. Trump's "big beautiful wall" is a stupid idea. It's an evil idea. That's why all my posts show evidence against it with references. That's why I asked Malicious why he thought it was a good idea? And even if it was to keep people from illegally crossing it's not the best way and it's highly destructive to humans and other living things and the environment.

Oh aye, I reckon I have a reasonable handle on your personal view, and I'm not a stranger to arguing a matter that I either have an alternate, or no position at all on.

KG on the other hand is mere moments from calling us all hitler....

Why would a Jedi contemplate the best way to discriminate against and cause the deaths of anyone anywhere without even raising the question, as well as attempt to have such questioning be removed from the discussion, about whether or not specific actions/technology were in line with the doctrine of the order of which they are a member?

Because, as per most discussions or debates or symposiums or what have you, the question was put "is a physical wall, from sea to shining sea, the best way to achieve X"

That's the question. It is offered in those terms.

If you want to debate the ethics of that position, well and good and I applaud such a debate - but it's not the question that is put forth in these circumstances.

(Edit: Oh good, you did want to debate the ethics of that position. Yay, a new thread)

A bit like how no one really asks a vegan how to cook steak - steak may or may not be evil, but that's not the question, the question is - assuming we have a steak, and we are going to eat it - then what is the best method.

So now you're equating the continued building of a technology which has already caused discriminatory human death along the lines of a moral code which runs counter to that of the Jedi Doctrine with... eating steak?

Do you really think everyone in this forum/temple is incapable of thinking through this little word problem? Your intent is plain as day.

Your not a Jedi even if you're a member of a church which recognizes you as one.