Morality question

[Wootah]

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?

[Tcg]

Do you honestly believe that bigotry can be erased with education?

You seem to be expressing the fact that you are pessimistic that education can erase bigotry.

What if the problem is sin? Can you erase sin by providing the same education to everyone?

Now you seem to be doubting that education can erase sin.

As for your dilemma, Wootah, I'd try to unite them through Jesus Christ, pointing out to them he loves them both and came to save both. I would point out that in him we are all brothers and sisters. Only the love of Christ can solve the dilemma.

Your solution seems also to be based on education. Education of your choosing of course, but education all the same.

Why do you think your education scheme would work when you seem to doubt that others could?

[DPMartin]

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?

the citizen has right to be treated as such, and a refuge has right of do process of law, but refuges do not have rights to be treated as a citizen.

a resident is a resident, and a guest is a guest. the guest is welcome to stay if, but a resident can stay no matter what, its his home, not the guest's home.

[JoeyKnothead]

From the OP:

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

Now we must also suppose we're us the kings of countries it is, they ain't happy with the Jews.

And that just, I don't get it. What have the Jews, every danged one of 'em, did so bad, I gotta hate me their grammaws and grampaws?

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

'Pends here on the nature of the forcing out. If Jews were "forced out" by better thinking, that's one thing, if they were forced out because they're Jews, well that's a whole 'nother deal.

I'm me the enemy of the Jew's enemy. If a "refugee" came into "my lands", and then set to kill of the Jews "in my land", I'd set me to kill of the killer-offers.

But that ain't how the Jews roll, is it? They understand that differences occur, and they're cool with those differences that don't include "Let's kill us off all them danged Jews".

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?

Kinda both. I have no problem with 'em that'll say such as, "Them Jews got them a goofy religion", but I do have a problem with "and I'm gonna try to blow me up as many of 'em as I can".


Conclusions?

We gotta stop blowing us up some of us, whether some of us are Jewish or not.



I stand with the idea of a Jewish State, as we look at their history, and their accomplishments in the face of such adversity. I might fun around here and there, but I'm here to tell it, I'd rather me die than some pretty Jewish chick.

[jgh7]

If the immigrants hated the Jews in my country and would eventually force them out, then it's an obvious "NO" for me. My citizens well-being comes first.

[oldbadger]

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?

Hello........
All people seeking to enter my country have to undertake a course about our country, its traditions, its cultures and its laws. They have to pass tests on these subjects.
One very powerful law here is our Equality Act of 2010. We do not permit any harassment, victimisation or mistreatment of any person because of their age, marriage status, sexuality, religion, creed, nationality, age, race, skin colour, sexual orientation or culture.
And so we would seek to protect both the Jewish communities and individuals AS WELL AS the asylum seekers and immigrants.

[marco]

And so we would seek to protect both the Jewish communities and individuals AS WELL AS the asylum seekers and immigrants.

What a wonderfully good intention, oldbadger. Angela Merkel expressed the same nice thought and carried out her intention to let millions into Europe and of course into her own Germany. The problem was in determining which of the refugees would rape, steal and kill and which would not. Unfortunately the good intentions did not provide guidance.

Rob Roy's mother said: "It is so easy to set the heather on fire; so hard to put it out."

[Wootah]

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?

Hello........
All people seeking to enter my country have to undertake a course about our country, its traditions, its cultures and its laws. They have to pass tests on these subjects.
One very powerful law here is our Equality Act of 2010. We do not permit any harassment, victimisation or mistreatment of any person because of their age, marriage status, sexuality, religion, creed, nationality, age, race, skin colour, sexual orientation or culture.
And so we would seek to protect both the Jewish communities and individuals AS WELL AS the asylum seekers and immigrants.

Im not sure where you are from but the equality act sounds like your politicians did not have their hand on the wheel in 2010. Most of those laws seem to silence the natives while their countries are transformed.

[TSGracchus]

[Replying to post 25 by marco]

Hey, who said governing is easy? You can't just make laws, you have to make effective laws and then you have to enforce them. And the lawbreakers are never going to entirely go away.
Remember when Benjamin Franklin was coming out of the Constitutional Convention, and a woman asked him what sort of government was being founded? He answered, "A republic... if you can keep it!" You can't just "set it and forget it".

In this hypothetical case I, as monarch, make sure emigrants understand the rules, formerly agree to the rules, and then I strictly enforce the rules. There are times when mercy is no mercy.

[ThePainefulTruth]

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?

He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind.

So, No.

Even more so, why would you accept immigrants whose religion's stated purpose is to establish a theocracy, subjecting everyone to their religion, by violence if necessary.

The problem with socialism, and theocracy (which are related), is that they subvert individual rights in the name of the common good or so-called group rights.

[bluethread]

Suppose you are the king of a country and that country has a small population of jews that you are happy with.

If there were immigrants that really honestly needed your help to survive but they hated the Jews and would overtime force them out.

Is it moral to protect the Jews or moral to save the refugees?

In a proper constitutional government, that is a no brainer. The government has a primary duty to protect the citizenry. It has no obligation with regard to prospective immigrants. Therefore, it should be assured that any immigrant, regardless of personal circumstance, improves the lot of the existing citizenry.