Republicans are wrong to support Trumponian plan to ban Muslim immigration

"...survey finds broad sympathy for Muslims in the United States..."

Even the egotistic Donald Trump has a genealogy. In his DNA, his genetic makeup., he's likely the composite of lots of different ethnic groups. It's even possible a Muslim is somewhere in his Y chromosome genetic code.

Nearly every world citizen has an ancestry that originates somewhere other than where they currenly live. In other words, practically every world citizen is descended from immigrants.

Therefore, Donald Trump has no credibility by calling for a ban on all Muslims who apply to immigrate to America.  

Although Trump says the Muslim immigration ban would be temporary, I doubt any executive order would be "temporary". Moreover, just enacting such a cold hearted ban would create chaos with Muslims who are American citizens and live peacefully among us.

Immigration is the thread that sews all Americans together:
Immigration is the movement of people into a destination country to which they are not native or do not possess its citizenship in order to settle or reside there, especially as permanent residents or naturalized citizens, or to take-up employment as a migrant worker or temporarily as a foreign worker.

It's wrong for Americans, who are descended from immigrant ancestors, to stop others from entering our nation. It's plainly wrong. Moreover, to ban an entire group based on their Islam faith is, quite likely, unconstitutonal. Nevertheless, Republicans have again set themselves apart from the entire world by politically supporting Donald Trump "The Chump", when he calls for blocking all Muslim immigration into the US, just based on their religion.

Scott Clement reports in The Washington Post
The Post-ABC poll was conducted Dec. 10-13 among a random national sample of 1,002 adults reached on conventional and cellular telephones. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage pointPla

A majority of Republicans support presidential candidate Donald Trump’s call to temporarily block Muslims from entering the United States, even as a clear majority of the public overall rejects the idea in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

The survey finds broad sympathy for Muslims in the United States following recent terrorist attacks in Paris and California. The poll shows that more than seven in 10 adults think Muslims in the United States face discrimination for their religion, with nearly six in 10 saying such discrimination is not justified. 

Fewer than three in 10 say mainstream Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims, a similar finding to surveys conducted before the recent violence.

Trump’s outrageous proposal shook the presidential race, drawing rebuke from nearly all corners of the nation’s politics, as well as from leaders of U.S. allies abroad and legal experts who said the proposal runs against the Constitution and American values. 

Nevertheless, Trump stood by his position, arguing that many Muslims worldwide sympathize with terrorists and that a temporary ban on migrants is necessary. And other polls show little sign that Trump’s support for the nomination has decreased because of his comments.

Sixty-percent of Americans say Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims who are not U.S. citizens is the wrong thing to do, while 36 percent support it in the new poll. Nearly twice as many strongly oppose Trump’s proposal as strongly support it, 48 percent to 25 percent.

The results underscore the stark divide between a GOP base that is skeptical of Islam and the views of the American public more broadly.

Republicans endorse Trump’s proposal by a margin of 59 percent to 38 percent, with significant appeal across large swaths of the GOP electorate. For Republicans and GOP-leaning independents, support for Trump’s idea is especially strong among those who lack college degrees — a group that has been particularly supportive of Trump in general. Sixty-three percent of those respondents support Trump’s plan, while it falls to 44 percent among college graduates.

Republicans’ support for Trump’s proposal comes despite widespread criticism from GOP leaders and nearly all of his competitors for the nomination. Trump will face another challenge to his national security policies in a Republican debate Tuesday night, beginning the final six weeks before the Iowa caucuses in a contest that has refocused on national security and terrorism in response to the Islamic State’s rise and growing terrorism fears.

Support for Trump’s plan falls to 38 percent among political independents and to 17 percent among Democrats. His proposal also receives varying support across religious lines. Fewer than one-quarter of Americans with no religious affiliation support a ban on Muslims, 24 percent, compared with 40 percent of all Christians and 54 percent of white evangelical Protestants.

A 54 percent majority of Americans say mainstream Islam, excluding fringe elements and extremists, is a peaceful religion. Twenty-eight percent say mainstream Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims, similar to 31 percent in 2010 but down from about one-third in 2003 and 2006. More than six in 10 of those who say Islam encourages violence support Trump’s proposal blocking Muslims from entering the United States, while more than seven in 10 who say Islam is peaceful oppose his plan.

A 73 percent majority in the poll say Muslims living in the United States experience discrimination because of their religion, and the vast majority of this group says such discrimination is not justified. A smaller share, 14 percent of all adults, perceive discrimination against Muslims but say it is justified.

Nearly eight in 10 of those who say Muslims face unjustified discrimination say Trump’s proposal not to let Muslims enter the United States is wrong. Among those who say Muslims do not face discrimination or that discrimination is justified, more than six in 10 support Trump’s plan.

Genealogy and Immigration - Republicans and Their Own Ancestry

Before creating daunting immigration policies intended to undermine the political influence of America's newest citizens, US Republicans might consider figuring their own individual genealogical ancestry.  As individuals and as a group, they will undoubtedly find surprises in their ancestral DNA, the genetic building block of life.  Genetic discoveries should be a reality check to mitigate onerous immigration policies.

Human migrations with racial mixing has overcome eons of taboos and societal norms, now documented through DNA testing.  

In other words, immigration regulations that Republicans are debating, designed to suppress Democratic voters who might be immigrants, is a waste of time, especially considering the surprising diversity of our own origins.  

Genealogy research is becoming increasingly fascinating, as biologists determine the particular origins of certain human genetic markers in our DNA, known as the building block of life.
Although genealogy is typically traced via a series of often complicated charts, saliva testing now determines evidence of ancestral migrations going back thousands of years. 

Two prominent world leaders have fascinating genealogies atypical of their apparent racial status.  

Prince William of England is Caucasian, but he is now reported to have a genetic marker relating him to a Southeast Asian woman.  

President Barack Obama is an African American whose mother was an American Caucasian and father was a citizen of Ghana; yet, Mr. Obama's  genealogy includes an ancestor who was born in Ireland.  

England's Prince William has Asian ancestry.  

Genetic testing from Prince Williams's mother's lineage, a male cousin of Princess Diana, shows the second in line to the British throne and, therefore, future King of England, has a genetic marker from an Asian woman in India.

London (CNN) -- Britain's royal family has long been taunted for its German roots, but now a more exotic lineage can be revealed after evidence emerged indicating that Prince William is the direct descendant of an Indian woman.

The Duke of Cambridge's maternal lineage was revealed on Friday by a genetic ancestry testing company, BritainsDNA, which carried out tests on the DNA of Princess Diana's two matrilineal cousins and compared them to a global database of samples.

Genetic tests reveal that the prince's fourth great-grandmother was the daughter of Eliza Kewark and Theodore Forbes (1788-1820), a Scottish merchant who worked in Surat, north of what is now Mumbai, India.  

Kewark's mitochondrial DNA -- which is only passed on from mother to child -- was then passed down, the company says, through the couple's daughter and female descendants, one of whom, Frances Roche (1936-2004), married Earl Spencer and bore a daughter, Lady Diana Spencer, the prince's mother.

Jim Wilson, chief scientist at Britains DNA, told CNN the discovery means "William probably has a very small amount (of Indian DNA), maybe half a percent will be of South Asian heritage."

President Obama has even more than a genetic marker, as his family tree in Ireland is well researched and his ancestry is documented.

Barack Obama's Irish family tree is traced to the 17th century. Shedding light on his earliest known relatives, researchers from Trinity College Dublin and Irish Origins traced Obama's family history much further back than ever before. Obama's earliest known relative, his 6th great grandfather, was a member of a family of wealthy wig makers who included an Irish politician, Michael Kearney. (It was said that 'no man alive was equally fired with ambition'.) 

A wonderfully entertaining literary example, describing the futility of protecting ancestral purity, is in the writings of American novelist James Michner.  His novels about the American experience are entertaining and historic, while the basis of his 1948 Pulitzer Prize winning Tales of the South Pacific and, much later "Texas: A Novel" emphasized the ridiculous practice of limiting racial (eventually, therefore, political) diversity.  A reader can consume thousands of pages of Michner's novels and come away with one succinct message - ie, diversity happens!

Although genealogy is fascinating and fun, the political reality is that, who we are today, is the result of ancestors who overcame eons of taboos against racial mixing.

Logically concluding, the intention of creating daunting anti immigration policies into the United States, with the purpose of deterring migrations from South America, Latin America and Mexico, are wasted efforts. In fact, if all geo-political systems were equal, it would make sense for Americans to be migrating into the Southern Hemisphere countries.  It's almost counter intuitive to see migrations moving north, rather than south, but Latin American countries have centuries of unstable political histories.

Since economics drives a good deal of human migrations, in every direction, it's a fact that human diversity will follow.  Therefore, Republicans should find the origins of their own genetic tree before creating cruel laws to try and change human nature.