Printable View
Some people here seem to have the same problem as Holder, Napalitano, and the President.
So I will save you some effort. All you have to do is read this, easier than health care, I promise!
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
Some are criminals?? What part of the term illegals eludes you? That in and of itself makes you criminal!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
You mean the kind of think that protects others from parasites. Like the coyotes that charge exorbitant fees to move them across the border, maybe, and treat them as less than human. After all, what are coyotes? Aren't they SCAVENGERS?
"the people who did come to US legally will be affected by this law" Please explain how this is so??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lion
I can make a difference between vile thugs who extort, abuse, steal, rape or murder and impoverished individuals who are god-fearing, moral and for the most part, law-abiding. I would send the former back to the pits they crawled out of, but I would welcome the latter with open arms. They have, after all, done nothing more than intrude upon land that does not belong to them. And they offer more than they will take.
In England and Wales, trespass is not a crime, for very good reasons. Unfortunately for these people, trespassing beyond a national border is.
So you can pull me up for making a false distiction between "illegal" and "criminal" but, in fact, there is one.
As for imprisoning the illegal aliens, we bang them up for months, not just one, and we keep their kids in gaol too. And we're not above separating mother from child, even to the exgtent of deporting one, but not the other. It doesn't work, so forget it.
And that's besides the highly trained (at some poorer country's expense) doctors and other experts who keep the NHS going so we don't have to spend money training them.Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
And, of course, plenty of what such ranters think of as "immigrants" are actually third generation citizens. Eric Pickles was a hard-right Conservative, but when his party started to talk about "sending the Asians back where they came from" he brought them down to earth by pointing out that in his constituency, you could send most of them back where they came from with a bus ticket.
And of course you can tell just by looking at them, right? Something in their eyes, perhaps?Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
They have illegally crossed an international border. That's against the law anywhere in the world. And they take more than they can repay. Many, perhaps most, send funds out of the country for their families, an admirable thing perhaps, but still an additional drain on the economy. They don't pay taxes, yet they consume resources intended for citizens.Quote:
They have, after all, done nothing more than intrude upon land that does not belong to them. And they offer more than they will take.
It's a crime everywhere! Try crossing into Russia, or Iran, or China without a visa or passport. See what it will get you.Quote:
In England and Wales, trespass is not a crime, for very good reasons. Unfortunately for these people, trespassing beyond a national border is.
Sorry, but there really isn't. There may be varying degrees of criminal behavior, but it's criminal nonetheless.Quote:
So you can pull me up for making a false distiction between "illegal" and "criminal" but, in fact, there is one.
I see no reason for doing something like that. You just spend more money keeping them in prison, feeding them and their families, providing them medical care. Just send the whole family packing.Quote:
As for imprisoning the illegal aliens, we bang them up for months, not just one, and we keep their kids in gaol too. And we're not above separating mother from child, even to the exgtent of deporting one, but not the other. It doesn't work, so forget it.
I just don't understand why people don't see the problem. Would you be okay with your neighbors just walking into your home and helping themselves to your food and property, sleeping in your beds, taking your money and sending it to their relatives next door? That's what this is about, isn't it? Regardless of their reasons, regardless of their problems, they are stealing from the citizens of this, and your, country. Why should we not do all in our power to stop them?
What if they had first been knocking for quite a few years begging for a bite to eat and a drink of water and your response was to pull the shade down in their face? Do you think that makes them less hungry or less desperate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Do you know how long it can take to wait for a proper visa? What if you were about to die while waiting? What if your children were about to die while waiting, and you knew there was food enough in that house for all, the people inside and also yourselves?
I can tell you they wouldn't be trespassing inside your house if you welcomed them in, what a funny idea. And no, they aren't "stealing" the bread, most of them work their asses off for it. And though you would be correct to say that it is wrong for them not to pay their taxes, they still worked for the money they earned so it's not "stealing".
And though yes, there are people starving here in America, that is a distribution problem; we have enough to go around, we have plenty enough to feed ourselves and plenty extra besides, so don't try to claim that what "illegals" are taking means that an American won't have enough. Yes they will; we are the richest country in the world, and our unwillingness to share doesn't make it right.
Does that make what they are doing any more legal? I don't see their leaders starving. Why don't they get it from them? Or replace them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
We do welcome some 300,000+ every year. My own great-grandparents were immigrants, who came here legally and worked their butts off to make a better life for their children.Quote:
I can tell you they wouldn't be trespassing inside your house if you welcomed them in, what a funny idea.
What they are "stealing" are the medical and social services which my taxes are helping to pay for. My medical bills go up to cover the costs of treating indigents and illegals. My health insurance costs go up for the same reason. My taxes go up as well. And everything that once made this country great is declining, crumbling, turning to crap, because we are spending so much money on people who don't do their share.Quote:
And no, they aren't "stealing" the bread, most of them work their asses off for it. And though you would be correct to say that it is wrong for them not to pay their taxes, they still worked for the money they earned so it's not "stealing".
And though yes, there are people starving here in America, that is a distribution problem; we have enough to go around, we have plenty enough to feed ourselves and plenty extra besides, so don't try to claim that what "illegals" are taking means that an American won't have enough. Yes they will; we are the richest country in the world, and our unwillingness to share doesn't make it right.
You want to let illegals into the country? Fine. But don't force me to pay for their health care. Don't force me to pay for their children's educations. Don't force me to provide them with free meals. Don't force me to place notices in every language because they aren't interested in learning mine. And if it makes you happy to have illegals swarming across the border, I suggest that YOU go down and live along that border. You can welcome them with open arms. Just make sure you wear your flak jacket.
I guess for me "legality" isn't as important as "humanity". Labeling a person a "criminal" doesn't take away the fact that they are still human, and still deserve human rights. Why, once they step across that line, does it irk you so to help them if they need it? Are they not people like the rest of us?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Take a look at your taxes. Do you know where they go, what they pay for? If we "eliminated" every last illegal person, do you think they would go down? By how much? Enough to make our indifference towards the suffering of others worth it?
Not for me.
To me, all people are worth the same. If I saw a person, say, who was hit by a car dying in the road, I would call an ambulance for them. I wouldn't care if they had the right papers.
So to me, when they take those taxes out of my paycheck, it's the same exact thing: I'm helping somebody, somewhere, who needs it more than I do. Could be an elderly American in a nursing home. Could be a hard-working construction worker who's on unemployment; it could be an illegal immigrant who's life could be saved by a bottle of antibiotics.
It doesn't matter who it is because they're all human and they all deserve it. I'm sorry but the "I don't like paying taxes" argument doesn't justify phrases like "send them back" "kick them out". They are us; and one is not more important than the other; neither does one deserve better than the other.
I would have to disagree; I think this country is great, and is constantly improving all the time.Quote:
And everything that once made this country great is declining, crumbling, turning to crap,
I never said they didn't deserve human rights. Only that they don't deserve the rights of a citizen, until they become one. A citizen who breaks the law will go to jail, regardless of his motives. Why should a non-citizen be treated differently?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
No, they are not! They are illegal aliens, not citizens of the United States! I don't care what color they are. I don't care what their religion is. I don't care which country they come from. They are breaking the law! That's all I care about!Quote:
Why, once they step across that line, does it irk you so to help them if they need it? Are they not people like the rest of us?
I know that every dollar we spend easing the suffering of non-citizens is one dollar we cannot spend easing the suffering of our own citizens.Quote:
Take a look at your taxes. Do you know where they go, what they pay for? If we "eliminated" every last illegal person, do you think they would go down? By how much? Enough to make our indifference towards the suffering of others worth it?
Agreed. First you treat them. THEN you figure out how they're going to pay for it. For my part, once they are well enough, you send them back home to their own country and send that country the bill. Let them figure out how to collect.Quote:
To me, all people are worth the same. If I saw a person, say, who was hit by a car dying in the road, I would call an ambulance for them. I wouldn't care if they had the right papers.
Maybe they do deserve it. That doesn't mean that I deserve the hardship that comes with paying for it. Forced charity isn't charity. It's blackmail.Quote:
It doesn't matter who it is because they're all human and they all deserve it.
I never said one word about not paying taxes. My concern is for how that tax money is used. I don't like the idea of using it to benefit criminals. Whether they are illegal aliens or politicians or big business.Quote:
I'm sorry but the "I don't like paying taxes" argument doesn't justify phrases like "send them back" "kick them out".
They are criminals! Yes, they are poor. Yes, they are sick. Yes, their country is broken. Maybe the solution is to annex Mexico and integrate it into the US. Then the problem is solved. Or maybe instead of flocking to this country they should take back their own from their corrupt politicians and leave us alone to take back ours from our corrupt politicians!Quote:
They are us; and one is not more important than the other; neither does one deserve better than the other.
LOL - I've missed arguing with you, Thorne
Yes, I can tell. Not from the look in their eyes, but from their actions. The first group commit crimes of a heinous nature, the second group break the law out of necessity - a law which says, they're of less value than the rest of us are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Agreed ... but a bad law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
First point is false. On balance they contribute more than they take (in UK anyway - and we're more generous than you).Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I would venture to suggest that the amount of money leaving the UK to go to foreign families is far less than the money that leaves UK to supplement the coffers of the Coca-Cola Company or McDonalds or General Motors, etc. So what's your point here?
We alll know the wealthy don't pay taxes while the poor do. But that aside, the people employing these illegals are also avoiding taxes and other duties while they manufacture cheap goods in illlegal sweat shops that you and I glady pay for in preference to the pricey but legitimate goods that would be the alternative. You just close your mind to the fact that goods are made illegally.
And they only consume what they can buy from the pittance they get from their Masters (the slavery metaphor is not accidental): they can't get state support - they're illegal, they'd be declaring their presence!
I concur absolutely. See comment aboveQuote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
A crime is a crime, absolutely, but a tort isn't. Trespass, which is what I was comparing illegally entering a nation with, is a tort in England.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
The reason is to make sure that no-one is denied a right to stay if they have one. But the way they are treated borders on inhumane.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I don't understand why you see it as a problem. Illegal aliens do not, as a rule, walk inot people's houses and take over - it would attract far too much attention. They don't take my money unless I give it to them to buy something they have had to make illegally, so that makes me complicit. That's not stealing. As every American can see, it's free enterprise. And as for "stealing" your country ... don't start me off on that ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I've missed you, too!Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
No, the law says they cannot enter the country without due process, which I consider a just law. It says nothing about their value, only about their rights. And ours.Quote:
Yes, I can tell. Not from the look in their eyes, but from their actions. The first group commit crimes of a heinous nature, the second group break the law out of necessity - a law which says, they're of less value than the rest of us are.
A matter of opinion.Quote:
Agreed ... but a bad law.
I'd love to see you prove that. I'm not just talking about money, or food, either. I'm talking about services, medical care, all the benefits citizens gain by paying taxes, which the illegals gain without paying.Quote:
First point is false. On balance they contribute more than they take (in UK anyway - and we're more generous than you).
But Coca-Cola, McDonalds and General Motors pay taxes on the money before it is sent! They pay wages to their employees, who also pay taxes.Quote:
I would venture to suggest that the amount of money leaving the UK to go to foreign families is far less than the money that leaves UK to supplement the coffers of the Coca-Cola Company or McDonalds or General Motors, etc. So what's your point here?
No, that's what some people want us to think. They may not pay what you consider their fair share, but they do pay taxes, or they go to prison. (cf. Bernie Madoff, or Al Capone.)Quote:
We alll know the wealthy don't pay taxes while the poor do.
No, I don't ignore that. I have stated, repeatedly, that the best way to stop the flow of illegals is to crack down on those who hire them. And I mean crack down with a vengeance! Long prison times and very steep fines. That should be the first step in any attempt to control illegals.Quote:
But that aside, the people employing these illegals are also avoiding taxes and other duties while they manufacture cheap goods in illlegal sweat shops that you and I glady pay for in preference to the pricey but legitimate goods that would be the alternative. You just close your mind to the fact that goods are made illegally.
I'm not talking about food or goods, here. I'm talking about services. At least in the US the illegals routinely receive medical and social services which are supposed to benefit legal residents. As I stated earlier, every dollar spent to benefit an illegal alien is a dollar unavailable to help a citizen.Quote:
And they only consume what they can buy from the pittance they get from their Masters (the slavery metaphor is not accidental): they can't get state support - they're illegal, they'd be declaring their presence!
I'm not a lawyer, but I doubt that crossing an international border without proper authorization can be equated with simple trespass.Quote:
A crime is a crime, absolutely, but a tort isn't. Trespass, which is what I was comparing illegally entering a nation with, is a tort in England.
I agree, there is no justification for that. They should be treated humanely, but that does not mean that their crimes should be ignored.Quote:
But the way they are treated borders on inhumane.
I would suggest that you also go and live along the US/Mexican border and see just what the illegals are doing. It's my understanding that people there are afraid to go out at night for fear of being attacked by mobs of illegals, and they cannot leave their homes unattended because they will be ransacked and/or burned if they do.Quote:
I don't understand why you see it as a problem. Illegal aliens do not, as a rule, walk inot people's houses and take over - it would attract far too much attention. They don't take my money unless I give it to them to buy something they have had to make illegally, so that makes me complicit. That's not stealing. As every American can see, it's free enterprise.
You may also want to take a look at this.
I said nothing about stealing my country. I said they were stealing from the citizens of our countries.Quote:
And as for "stealing" your country ... don't start me off on that ...
A matter of opinion .. oh, you're just about to say that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
yup ... I prefer mine
I can't - I'm repeating what I have been informed by people who do know. The Independent, for example, tells us that if the illegals were able to pay taxes (and they would if they were allowed to work legally) we would be £1bn better off http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...uk-472164.html. That's a significant sum, even if it's an American billion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Furthermore, if we deported them, it would cost us £4.7 bn while leaving them where they are gets the nasty, filthy jobs done cheap and still provides a £6bn boost to the economy (I suppose that includes the £1bn quoted above). A net profit of £1.3bn.
As for the benefits paid for by tax payers, they are not obtainable without proof of elegibility ... at least not here. So illegals can't claim them and the suggestion that they are stealing such benefits from honest tax-payers is just a low lie.
If we choose to give them help, that's an entirely different matter.
True, but my point is, the amount of money sent home by the illegals - who are barely paid enough to keep their own body and soul together - is a tiny amount by comparison. It simply doesn't matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Madoff didn't go to gaol for tax evasion. And wasn't it he who said his secretary paid more tax than he did?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
You're right about the wealthy not paying their fair share, and the country can only tolerate it because the poor pay more.
If you're determined to deprive your nation of the benefits it could gain, I agree that this would be the way to start. But if you let them work legally, the slave drivers would not be able to exploit them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
They are cured of their ills and given vast amounts of dole before being allowed to melt back into obscurity to continue sucking off the state and conducting their nefarious practices, are they? It must suck to be an honest tax-payer over there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
LAW.COM (an American site) defines illegal alien as "an alien (non-citizen) who has entered the United States without government permission or stayed beyond the termination date of a visa".Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
It defines trespass as "entering another person's property without permission of the owner or his/her agent and without lawf ul authority ..." Can you see the similarity?
"... and causing any damage, no matter how slight." Most illegals don't cause any damage to America, in fact, as argued above, they provide a benefit.
It goes on, "[Trespass] is a civil wrong (tort) ..." Just like English law - not a crime.
What crimes? Those inmates might have a legal right to stay ... they just look like people we don't want in this country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
If it is decided they have no right to stay, they will go.
We have rubbish dumps and illegal tippers too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
I happen to live in Leicester, which is destined to become the first city in the UK where the white population will be a minority by 2012. I am quite relaxed about this, and I can assure you that the streets of Leicester are safer than those of Manchester, Birmingham, Nottingham or Glasgow (to name 4 cities at random)
The above statement is to me re-phrased:Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
As I stated earlier, every dollar spent to benefit a [human being] is a dollar unavailable to help [another human being].
I know it's a pity there aren't enough dollars to go around to help everyone who needs it, but why should we make distinctions that say one deserves it more than the other?
Based on who pays taxes? Because I've worked my share of off-the-books jobs in my lifetime, so count me out, then.
Based on where I was born? I didn't choose where I was born; neither did you. Neither did anyone; so it's not justification to say who deserves more than who.
How lucky and blessed your great-grandparents were, that their visas came in time. Does that make you better than their neighbors, whos visas did not come?Quote:
My own great-grandparents were immigrants, who came here legally and worked their butts off to make a better life for their children.
Did you family have a plan B in case the visas did not come?
Not sure where you live, but on the front door of my country we hung up a sign that says:Quote:
Yes, they are poor. Yes, they are sick. Yes, their country is broken.
"Give me your tired, your poor/ Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free/ The wretched refuse of your teeming shore./Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,/I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" (by Emma Lazarus, part of the poem engraved inside the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty).
Her poem does not add at the end "If you have the right documents."
How is that? Only something like 60% of illegal immigrants are from Mexico, so annexing Mexico doesn't solve the problem. Unless of course, you're only trying to keep out Mexican illegal immigrants, and illegal immigrants from Cuba or Europe or Asia are alright.Quote:
Maybe the solution is to annex Mexico and integrate it into the US. Then the problem is solved.
You know there is another term for those "anchor babies" (babies born in the United States)- it' s called American.Quote:
Originally Posted by roxi.slut
Whether or not you like their parents, those babies are as American as you or I, so yes, you are paying for Americans to be born in American hospitals. So sorry about that. And that baby deserves all the same care that any other American baby deserves; regardless of the reasons behind why they were born, or who their parents are.
Then after they're born and they go to school they're still American, even if they don't speak English. That is what they are. American. Even if their parents are "illegals", any child born here belongs here. So yes, we'll feed and clothe them if their parents won't. We shouldn't have to; their parents should be able to support them, but if we kick their parents out and make them orphans...well, then we have to feed and clothe them. Because they are our own.
And if you're born in America and therefore are American, you deserve to go to school, just like any other American born in America, regardless of your parentage.
Perhaps it would do us better to make it so that people could find a better way to stay here than to create a life they can't support.
And now we come down to one of the fundamental lines that divide people's basic philosophies of life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
If you answer "yes" - yes, all people deserve the same basic rights regardless of who they are or what they may have done - you are on one side of the line. (Hi!) If you answer "no" - no, some people don't deserve the basic rights I consider an absolute right for me and mine, because they're the wrong sort of people - you're on the other. It doesn't matter whether you define their wrongness as being black, gay, Muslim, terrorist-suspect, illegal-immigrant or whatever. It's the belief that human rights only apply to the right sort of humans that determines where you are going to stand on every important issue.
Believing that human rights are absolute doesn't make you a liberal pushover, though you will of course be accused of it. You can be as aggressive as anyone in defending your own rights: you just recognise the challenges in doing so without violating others'.
Classing your enemies as unpeople makes everything simpler, which is one reason it's so popular. But we all know where it leads in the end.
I suppose most of those who would place themselves in the 'Yes' group would classify me as being in the 'No' group, but it isn't that simple at all. I'm not advocating denying anyone their basic human rights. But my interpretation of those rights may be quite different from yours. I don't claim that my human rights are any better than someone else's human rights, either.Quote:
Originally Posted by leo9
However, as a US citizen I have certain rights guaranteed to me under the Constitution which are not necessarily guaranteed to non-citizens. And those rights come with certain responsibilities. Allowing those same rights to non-citizens without insisting on them accepting the responsibilities that come with them cheapens those rights.
Most rational people, I think, would agree that criminals, defined as those who break the law, lose some of those rights by doing so. As a citizen, I have the right to apply for a driver's license, and once receiving one I have the right to drive my vehicle on public roads. If I commit a crime, such as driving to fast or driving while intoxicated, I could have that right revoked. I could have my freedom restricted, at least temporarily. And no one would complain about my being profiled or mistreated because of who I am. After all, I've committed a crime!
So why is it that when someone crosses the border illegally they are considered, by some, to have more rights than I have? How can anyone claim I am profiling if I send someone back for breaking the law? Aren't they subject to the same restrictions and laws as everyone else? Their color, language or homeland are not the issue! Their human rights are not the issue! The issue is that they are breaking the law! Therefore they are subject to the penalties for breaking that law, which can involve incarceration and deportation. That's not profiling.
If an illegal alien were to drive a car without a valid license, and he were to kill an innocent pedestrian, would you consider it wrong for the police to arrest him? Would they be wrong to hold him in jail? Would it be profiling to try him in a court of law for his crime? And if convicted, would we be violating his rights by sending him to prison? I think few would answer 'Yes' to any of these questions. Yet some of you seem to believe it's a violation of his rights to ask for his ID after he's struck and killed that person.
Believe me, nothing would please me more than for the entire world to be united under one flag, one government, one economy, so we could all travel anywhere we wished without worrying about borders. All people would be equal, there would be no hoarding of resources, and peace would reign over the Earth. I think it would be wonderful if we could all live together without laws to restrict our freedoms. But right here, right now, the world doesn't work that way. And allowing criminals to get away with their crimes just because you feel sorry for them isn't going to make the world a better place. Quite the opposite, I'm afraid.
Who is Jennifer Williams? I think I've fallen in love with her.
Well said and eloquently expressed, Thorne.
I don't buy a word of it.
Illegal imigrants do not have the same rights that you have. They can't do a legitimate job, they can't get a driver's licence, they can't get an education, they can't get medical aid or food stamps, because, if they apply for them, they get noticed, rounded up, processed through a gaol and deported to their homeland ... where they might starve, or be tortured or killed by their government.
Everything they do, they do illegally. If American air is for the esclusive use of US taxpayers and their dependants, then these immigrants would break the law by breathing. But they have to breathe - they have no choice.
Many of them have little or no choice when they leave their country, so why should it matter to them that they step beyond some badly policed fences marking the US border? What harm do they do? You brand them as "criminals": men, women, children alike just because their presence offends you. How many were criminals in their home nations.
The US constitution might consider aliens to be unworthy, but it wsas itself drafted by people committing a much more serious criminal act ... and you idolise them.
You don't have to, my friend. I dispense it for free. If you are paying for it then someone is ripping you off.Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
Not in the US. While they may not be able to get a driver's license, their children can be sent to schools, and they are eligible for both free breakfasts and lunches. They get medical aid simply by showing up in a clinic or emergency room. I don't know about food stamps, off hand, but there are other social services that they can apply for without having their names turned over to the INS. Unless I have been badly misinformed, there are some places where it is illegal to turn them over to the Feds unless they actually violate a law. (Other than being illegal in the first place, that is.)Quote:
Illegal imigrants do not have the same rights that you have. They can't do a legitimate job, they can't get a driver's licence, they can't get an education, they can't get medical aid or food stamps, because, if they apply for them, they get noticed, rounded up, processed through a gaol and deported to their homeland ...
Yes, some are branded as criminals in their home countries, and there are laws here to protect such refugees. Cubans, in particular, are generally protected from deportation, provided they can safely reach the US. Other nationalities can also apply for refugee status, which is different than immigration. If there is a recognized threat of persecution for those being sent back, they will not be.Quote:
Many of them have little or no choice when they leave their country, so why should it matter to them that they step beyond some badly policed fences marking the US border? What harm do they do? You brand them as "criminals": men, women, children alike just because their presence offends you. How many were criminals in their home nations.
Still trying to get the colonies back, are you? Just remember, while the rebellion was a criminal act in England, the cause was just. Obviously. Because they won. Twice.Quote:
The US constitution might consider aliens to be unworthy, but it wsas itself drafted by people committing a much more serious criminal act ... and you idolise them.
You know what they say: Those fighting for me are freedom fighters, those fighting against me are terrorists.
I'm me, that's who I am ;) A better question is who are you? Your profile is all blank...Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
And I'm so glad to have a debater on my side; I feel a little bad for Thorne, he needs another person on his side to make this fair.
Leo9 hit the nail on the head:
I am of the opinion that there is no criteria that makes another group of people "less good", including criminal status. Evan a criminal is a human being, which is why we don't just chop off their heads like was done in the old days.Quote:
some people don't deserve the basic rights I consider an absolute right for me and mine, because they're the wrong sort of people - you're on the other.
So call them criminals if that makes you feel better; they are still not an "other", it is still wrong to ignore their miserable circumstances and try to justify why you deserve better than they do.
We're feeding hungry children! Oh, the horror! Oh, right, they're someone else's children. Well let them starve, then, carry on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Last time I checked, that was what an emergency room or clinic was for. You'd get help if you showed up in an emergency room...oh, wait, you get to stand on the "I'm more human than you are." line.Quote:
They get medical aid simply by showing up in a clinic or emergency room.
1) Go to Europe. Almost every sign there is multi-lingual. Society has not fallen apart.Quote:
Don't force me to place notices in every language because they aren't interested in learning mine.
2) The United States does not have an official language. And we shouldn't. Many countries have several prominant languages (like Canada is both English and French and a few others, I believe). They run just fine.
3) My guess is you haven't bothered to personally get to know any of "these people." I get to know a lot of all sorts of people in my job, and when the same person comes back over a span of time and they're here for longer and longer, guess what? They learn English! Most of them are working their butts off to learn our language- it's just that so many of them are new that to the outside observer who doesn't bother to get to know the individual people, and sees them only as a mass group, it would appear that they aren't learning English.
Talk to some of them sometime, if you dare. Become friends with them, learn who they are. See if the ones who have been here for five months can speak English (could you?), who have been here for a year, who have been here for five years.
Maybe you'll even learn some of their language. Unless, of course, you think one language is better than another.
Which is why some of us are trying so hard to change that. Saying "things aren't perfect so bend to the current way of things." doesn't cut it. If things are wrong, fix them, change them. Maybe perfect world peace is an unreality, however; constantly striving towards it would be a necessary part of our humanity. To simply give up and say "Well, it's good enough." doesn't fly.Quote:
Believe me, nothing would please me more than for the entire world to be united under one flag, one government, one economy, so we could all travel anywhere we wished without worrying about borders. All people would be equal, there would be no hoarding of resources, and peace would reign over the Earth. I think it would be wonderful if we could all live together without laws to restrict our freedoms. But right here, right now, the world doesn't work that way.
I feel this news article is quite relevant to our current debate:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/201005...s/ynews_ts2186
Sounds like something that happened alot in the 70's-80's.
A pregnant Mexican woman would stick close to the rio grande and when she went into labor she would dash across the river and either go to a Hospital or get the police to arrest her and take her to the Hospital, when the Child was born it was an american citizen and the Mother was ipso facto an american citizen.
They changed that law in the 90's (?) and this is where we get the family with a legal American child and an illegal Mexican parent.
I am only an ignorant foreigner without understanding of your Constitution. I had been told that your Declaration of Independence held that "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..." Thank you for explaining that in fact only US citizens are held to have rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Again someone misrepresenting what I said. I agree with you! There are certain basic human rights which all persons have. But there are other rights which are granted to American citizens, just as there are certain rights granted to British citizens, or Canadian citizens, or citizens of any country. These are ADDITIONAL rights, over and above those inalienable rights which all people have.Quote:
Originally Posted by leo9
Don't feel bad for me. I rather enjoy the notoriety.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
Once more, for clarification. I don't deny that criminals have rights. Just that they lose SOME rights as a result of their criminal acts, when they have been convicted and sent to prison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
And another misrepresentation. When did I claim I "deserve" better than they do? All I've said was that they have committed criminal acts and, when convicted, should be punished for those commissions. I would expect to receive the same treatment if I committed a criminal act. How is that claiming I'm better?Quote:
So call them criminals if that makes you feel better; they are still not an "other", it is still wrong to ignore their miserable circumstances and try to justify why you deserve better than they do.
I saw a letter the other day (I can't find it now, sorry) in which the Gov. of Arizona talked about these children. According to her they are receiving these meals because their parents have no DECLARED income, yet the children are far from starving (some are even overweight) and large quantities of this "free" food is discarded every day because they don't eat it!Quote:
We're feeding hungry children! Oh, the horror! Oh, right, they're someone else's children. Well let them starve, then, carry on.
But once more I'm being painted with the wrong brush. My concern is not that we are feeding these children, but that their parents are not putting into the system to help pay for it themselves! When my kids went to school they had to BUY their meals, or bring them from home, because OUR income was on the record. At the same time, my tax money was going towards feeding children whose parents were making at least as much as I was but NOT paying taxes on it.
And again! It's not the services themselves that bother me. I fully agree with treating those who need treatment. But when it comes time to pay the piper, they provide false ID's, false addresses, false everything, and walk off. Meanwhile, you and I, who do pay our bills, are hit with inflated charges to cover these illegals. And the hospitals generally are not permitted to track them down.Quote:
Last time I checked, that was what an emergency room or clinic was for. You'd get help if you showed up in an emergency room...oh, wait, you get to stand on the "I'm more human than you are." line.
It's not doing too well, either.Quote:
1) Go to Europe. Almost every sign there is multi-lingual. Society has not fallen apart.
No, officially we do not have one language. But if you're a business person, try putting up a sign which says, "Spanish Not Spoken Here" and see what happens. This happened several years ago in Philadelphia, I believe. A man running a family-owned business in a neighborhood which was becoming increasingly Hispanic posted just such a sign, since neither he nor his family, who were his employees, spoke any Spanish. The city FORCED him to remove the sign and, if I remember correctly, post signs in Spanish, even though he could not speak the language. I just wonder what would have happened if he'd placed a sign claiming that ENGLISH was not spoken there. My guess is that it would have been all right.Quote:
2) The United States does not have an official language. And we shouldn't. Many countries have several prominant languages (like Canada is both English and French and a few others, I believe). They run just fine.
You're right, I don't know any Hispanics, legal or otherwise. I also don't know any Muslims, or Hindus, or Japanese, or Koreans, or even too many WASPs. I'm a private person and don't make friends. Or even acquaintances.Quote:
Talk to some of them sometime, if you dare. Become friends with them, learn who they are. See if the ones who have been here for five months can speak English (could you?), who have been here for a year, who have been here for five years.
Between high school and college I studied Latin, French and Spanish, and I was terrible in all of them. I had enough trouble with English. And yes, for me, English is a better language. But only because it's the only one I know.Quote:
Maybe you'll even learn some of their language. Unless, of course, you think one language is better than another.
I never said it was good enough. But this is a nation, a civilization, of laws. And these laws should be obeyed UNTIL they've been changed. Ignoring laws you don't like only leads to anarchy.Quote:
If things are wrong, fix them, change them. Maybe perfect world peace is an unreality, however; constantly striving towards it would be a necessary part of our humanity. To simply give up and say "Well, it's good enough." doesn't fly.
Well if we allowed them to work legally in legal jobs, then they could put into the system. As it stands now, it's not allowed for them to work a legal job- it's illegal for them to put into the system! Don't make a law that says they can't put into the system and then complain that they're not putting into the system. It's a catch-22; fix one side or the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Um...let's see...why on earth would the provide false information...what would happen to them if they provided correct information? Might they be living in fear of being deported?Quote:
But when it comes time to pay the piper, they provide false ID's, false addresses, false everything, and walk off.
You're causing your own problem here. If they were allowed to stay, they'd have no reason to hide, no reason to lie.
If I was a business person, why on earth would I do this? Why would I prevent people with dollars from spending their money in my store? Most businesses have figured out that a dollar is a dollar, regardless of who's spending it, and so if they can market to both English and non-English speakers and get all of the dollars, they come out richer.Quote:
No, officially we do not have one language. But if you're a business person, try putting up a sign which says, "Spanish Not Spoken Here" and see what happens.
You say that like it's a bad thing, as if there's something wrong with Hispanic people. Or rather that they're fine, so long as they're not in his neighborhood.Quote:
This happened several years ago in Philadelphia, I believe. A man running a family-owned business in a neighborhood which was becoming increasingly Hispanic
They should have let him keep it up- the loss of business he received would have spoken for itself. Apparently dollars from people who speak Spanish are not good enough for him.Quote:
posted just such a sign, since neither he nor his family, who were his employees, spoke any Spanish. The city FORCED him to remove the sign
Oh no, the Spanish is going to get me! Help! Something different from me, ack, get it off, get it off!Quote:
and, if I remember correctly, post signs in Spanish, even though he could not speak the language.
I would sincerely hope not. Discrimination is wrong, regardless of who it's directed at; and most business owners are smart enough not to alienate their customers.Quote:
I just wonder what would have happened if he'd placed a sign claiming that ENGLISH was not spoken there. My guess is that it would have been all right.
Well that was obvious. It might do you better to think of them as "Hispanic people", though, not "Hispanics." Just a suggestion.Quote:
You're right, I don't know any Hispanics, legal or otherwise.
And what if Spanish was the only language you knew? What if learning English was hard for you? And some kind soul thought to put up signs in your language, so you could know where the bathroom was? How is this a bad situation?Quote:
I also don't know any Muslims, or Hindus, or Japanese, or Koreans, or even too many WASPs. I'm a private person and don't make friends. Or even acquaintances.
Between high school and college I studied Latin, French and Spanish, and I was terrible in all of them. I had enough trouble with English. And yes, for me, English is a better language. But only because it's the only one I know.
Which is why we're trying to change the laws, for the better, not for worse, like this Arizona thing. That's why we're not standing for it; because it's wrong and can't be left to stand. It's not the solution to the problem. It won't solve anything; it will only create more fear and anger about the situation.Quote:
I never said it was good enough. But this is a nation, a civilization, of laws. And these laws should be obeyed UNTIL they've been changed. Ignoring laws you don't like only leads to anarchy.
Well you're certainly holding your own, I'd have to say! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
Psst Jen...dont hold your breath...I havent went off yet with what I think...lol
Silly me! I thought that's what the LAW was for!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
Only if they are here ILLEGALLY!Quote:
Might they be living in fear of being deported?
If they were LEGAL immigrants, they would be allowed to stay.Quote:
You're causing your own problem here. If they were allowed to stay, they'd have no reason to hide, no reason to lie.
Why do you assume he was preventing anyone from shopping at his store? The only thing that sign says is that no on there speaks Spanish.Quote:
If I was a business person, why on earth would I do this? Why would I prevent people with dollars from spending their money in my store?
Again, you're assuming a bias that is not evident. The neighborhood was becoming increasingly Hispanic, but no one in the store spoke any Spanish. He was simply informing his customers of that problem, not denying them goods or services.Quote:
You say that like it's a bad thing, as if there's something wrong with Hispanic people. Or rather that they're fine, so long as they're not in his neighborhood.
Still assuming his aim was to keep the Spanish speakers out. But even if it were so, if it is a privately owned business, shouldn't that be his choice?Quote:
They should have let him keep it up- the loss of business he received would have spoken for itself. Apparently dollars from people who speak Spanish are not good enough for him.
These reflexive assumptions of fear and hatred are becoming annoying. Stop putting words into my mouth, please. While it is possible that there was some intolerance going on in the man's mind, there's no proof of it. Why you insist on assuming it is beyond me.Quote:
Oh no, the Spanish is going to get me! Help! Something different from me, ack, get it off, get it off!
The law says that a business cannot refuse service or goods to people because of the race, creed or color. It's a good law, one I support whole-heartedly. Informing people of a largely-Spanish speaking neighborhood that he doesn't speak Spanish does not violate that law. The same would apply if the neighborhood were largely Hungarian, or Swedish, or any other group. Placing signs in your store in the language of the neighborhood is obviously good business. But as far as I know it is not illegal NOT to place such signs. Nor should it be. As you said, if the locals don't feel welcome, it's the business owner who will suffer. That's his problem, not the government's.
I don't care WHAT you want to call them. Hispanics is simply a convenient term I'm using for clarity. It has no discriminatory connotations that I know of.Quote:
Well that was obvious. It might do you better to think of them as "Hispanic people", though, not "Hispanics." Just a suggestion.
I would be grateful, naturally. But I wouldn't consider it discrimination if he did NOT put up such signs. I would, however, make damned sure I learned enough English to be able find the bathrooms, regardless of how difficult it was.Quote:
And what if Spanish was the only language you knew? What if learning English was hard for you? And some kind soul thought to put up signs in your language, so you could know where the bathroom was? How is this a bad situation?
As far as I can determine, this law only gives officials the ability to enforce EXISTING Federal statutes, which the Federal government has NOT been doing. As for whether the laws are bad, I still think that's a matter of opinion.Quote:
Which is why we're trying to change the laws, for the better, not for worse, like this Arizona thing. That's why we're not standing for it; because it's wrong and can't be left to stand.
Oh, and one more thing. Just because I assume the role of Devil's Advocate, don't make the assumption that I'm the Devil himself. I'm not nearly that hot!;)
It's a moot point anyway. ALL traffic violators or law violators, regardless of what the police stop them for are asked a standard question immediately; "May I see your ID?"Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth694
Is that profiling?
Sorry, but if you immigrate from Mexico and CHOOSE to live in the US, my opinion is that you should learn to speak English. My grandfather immigrated from Mexico in 1919 and FORBID family members to speak spanish. He insisted that being an American meant embracing every aspect of America, including the language. I understand being bilingual. No problem there. But simply not learning the language because it's "hard" to learn is ridiculous. Most corporations offer "speakers of another language" courses to empower their workforce. I know the company I used to work for did. As they transitioned over to computer-run machinery and everyone had to be English speaking the courses were continuously offered...and guess what, many chose to quit rather than even try.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
It's absolutely ridiculous to choose to live in another country and then not learn the language. I understand it might take a while to learn it, but eventually immigrants should be able to speak English.
If you chose to move to France and lived in a region that spoke only french, would you learn the language? I know I would, or I would (at the least) continue trying to learn it until I was six feet under.
So basically because it is hard and/or difficult to accomplish you are then advocating non-enforcement of the law? How do you reconcile that with "The most dangerous laws are the ones that are only enforced when the cops feel like it. It means that you depend on the cops' goodwill, so they can do as they please and nobody dares to argue. That way lies bribery and corruption. " (Leo9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI
This business about multi-generation non-natives is a polemic. It is easy to say but as a matter of course here we, technically, have multi-generation illegals. Yes technically since the Constitution grants citizenship under specific circumstances.
But the point is that illegals are illegal. As such that is how they should be treated. We have rules for reasons and a border is one of the rules! I used to work at a place where a person could be fired for picking up a nickle off the floor and putting it in their pocket, no it was not a bank or other commercial sales enterprise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by leo9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorne
If you need any further evidence all you need do is consider the plight of the three student hikers vacationing in Iraq that inadvertently crossed that invisible line.
I don't think you quite understand! I have no requirement to invite ANYONE into my home. It is my choice and if done it is done under my rules. Regardless of your reasons if you choose on you own to enter you have broken the law. Does your example of hunger absolve them from the law? I think not!
We are currently accepting, as permanent residents, some 1% of our population annually. Perhaps that is not enough! But that change is a Government matter not a repudiation of law. I stated somewhat earlier, somewhere, that as the illegals are some 500,000 annually perhaps the permanent visas need to be 1,000,000. But I suspect that would do little to stem the tide.
As for stealing the "bread" I suspect you are being a bit too literal in that. An illegal taking advantage of any service provided in this country IS in effect stealing from the rest of us, at least those of us that may need said service. Then there are those businesses that are treating illegals better than the citizens of this country. They get better deals on credit, don't have to prove who they are, don't need to prove they will pay it back. This is the "bread" in question!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
While I appreciate the support, this might be a bad example. Given the current state of affairs in Iraq, and throughout the region, one has to question the motives of anyone "vacationing" there. And if their motives are pure, I would certainly question their intelligence!Quote:
Originally Posted by DuncanONeil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
Much of what you call human rights are in fact codified in out laws. But by what you say you are in fact dismissing all law, not just those specific rules. Do you really believe that human rights trump legal rights? What about the human rights of the country's citizens that can not get help because an illegal got there first and got the last of the aid?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
Well it might help. But the real problem with taxes are not really the taxes. The problem is the people that are spending the money. What the taxes are and how much, as well as who is paying is hidden in the labyrinth of the Tax Code. The people that spend the money are the ones that make the code! If they could not hide the increases, i.e. an excess profit tax on a business (which said company never pays), things might change. Further there is no indifference to the "suffering" of others. It is just that it is noit the responsibility of the Government to decide for me what I sghould do with my money or assistance!
Not for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
Completely off point!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
Were you able to keep that money what would stop you from personally provide the assistance you appear to be willing to provide. How do you think you would feel if you did aid someone? I suspect that you would fell considerably different that you do when you look at the taxes taken from your paycheck without your permission. It would be much more rewarding as well! You do realize that about 30% of the price of everything is actually taxes?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jennifer Williams
First you have to define what it is that is being deserved. Second not everything is equally deserved by everyone. Following you argument to its logical conclusion would mandate that every person in the country receive the exact same salary. But how do you determine that salary? Even more important what would be the result of everyone having the exact same salary?
I would have to disagree; I think this country is great, and is constantly improving all the time.[/QUOTE]
I must presume, based on your statement, that you are relatively young. How can you believe that spending the country into oblivion is an improvement. How can you believe that moving more and more people off the tax rolls to the detriment of those remaining on those rolls is an improvement? How can you believe that our elected representatives acting as the Lords & Ladies of the land is an improvement?