Times Square Another Argument for Restricting Muslim Immigration

/Moderate+Banner.egg_98129.png">






http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/100504

On may 4th, only two days after the failed bombing on Times Square in New York City, former executive director for the Idaho Values Alliance and current writer for renewamerica.com, Bryan Fischer wrote a piece calling for the restriction of Muslim immigration. Within the context of his piece, Fischer makes an argument concerning the danger of Muslims to the American people, which is one of his key arguments supporting the restriction of Muslim immigration. Fischer’s argument reads as follows:

“Let's also not forget that the SUV containing the bomb was parked right outside a movie theater showing a family movie, "The Lion King," guaranteeing the deaths of innocent children had the explosion been successful. When Muslims set out to kill, there are no conscience restraints of any kind in place. In Muslim thinking, there are no innocent civilians.”

This argument can be paraphrased as follows:

Premise: The SUV carrying the bomb was parked in front of a movie theater playing a family movie, guaranteeing the deaths of innocent children had the explosion been successful.

Premise: When Muslims set out to kill, there are no conscience restraints of any kind in place.

Conclusion: In Muslim thinking there are no innocent civilians.

When Bryan Fischer wrote his article proposing the restriction of Muslim immigration he committed a serious fallacy in one of his most important arguments. When speaking of the dangers of Muslims to the American people he committed some fallacious statements. The fallacious statements read as follows: “When Muslims set out to kill, there are no conscience restraints of any kind in place.” And, “In Muslim thinking, there are no innocent civilians.”

In these two statements Fischer commits a hasty generalization against the Muslim race. Most Muslims do not set out to kill Americans. Most Muslims have conscience restraints in place when making a decision that could harm someone. And last but not least, most Muslims believe that there are innocent civilians. This argument is in moderate condition because it could be fixed by replacing “Muslims” with “radical Islamic terrorist groups.” Radical Islamic Terrorist groups don’t have conscience restraints in place. Radical Islamic terrorist groups do set out to kill Americans. And furthermore, they do believe that there are no innocent civilians when it comes to planning an attack on the United States of America. If Fischer had specified in his argument that he was speaking of Radical Islamic terrorist groups instead of just "Muslims" he would have had a solid argument. However this does not mean that his proposition to restrict Muslim immigration should be carried out.