Ethics Assignment #2

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban/
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38781302

Donald Trump's travel ban. Yes, I had to do it. On January 17th the president signed an executive order to bar the entry of refugees and immigrants from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, and Libya. This order was made on the premise of "terror and keeping our country safe."

This law is ridiculous and following it means absolutely nothing in terms of terror and national security. Let's take a look at some facts:
Going back to the hijackers in the September 11 attacks were 19 men who had affiliation with Al-Qaeda. 15 were citizens of Saudi Arabia. 2 were from the United Arab Emirates. 1 from Egypt and 1 from Lebanon. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_attacks)
Osama Bin Laden was born in Saudia Arabia. He was found and killed in Pakistan. (source: http://www.biography.com/people/osama-bin-laden-37172)
Looking at more recent events Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in the marathon bombings was born in the U.S. (source: http://www.biography.com/people/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-21196765)
Paris attacks in 2015. Mastermind Abdelhamid Abaaoud, Belgian national. All of them were born in Brussels with the exception of a couple of French nationals.
(source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34832512)
Pulse nightclub shooting in 2016 Omar Mateen who pledged allegiance to ISIL was born in the U.S. to Afghan parents. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Mateen)
The Nice attack in France 2016 was done by Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel who was a Tunisian resident of France.

Based on these facts how am I supposed to get behind the idea that this order was made with the good of the people in mind when all of the terror attacks mentioned above have NONE of the countries and their affiliations in the executive order's listed countries. This law is nothing but a message that serves to marginalize a group of people/countries as a scapegoat target against "terrorists." Martin Luther King describes an unfair law as one that undermines human personality. In this case, we're undermining entire cultures and countries by using the law as a weapon to target them for the sake of making an irrational statement. Another point Martin Luther King makes and can be applied is "difference made legal" where one person made it legal to stop entry from immigrants and refugees who already went through legal process.

I posted my own sources above because I like to make points in facts. One thing I would like to make note of is Martin Luther King describes a just law as "man made and squares with moral law" where I find morals hard to argue in terms of facts. This leaves much room for opinions and making a case with opinions can be a bit messy. An example of this would be had the travel ban targeted those exact countries with direct terror affiliations then it could be argued that this law is morally right because it is for the greater good of the American people despite closing doors to entire countries. Even though I don't actually agree with that morally it is an argument that can be presented without real world evidence. Just laws morally will vary widely between each individual.