Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
Number of debaters are not what make it "fair". It is debating from a common set of definitions.
Oh, and thanks for missing me. Or did I just come in late?
So sorry, Duncan! You hadn't said anything for awhile, so I thought you were gone. Bad assumption on my part.

You are not arguing from a position of logic but a position of heart.
Well of course it's a matter of heart. I have both a heart and a mind 100% of the time; I can't just shut off one or the other. Neither can anyone, so don't pretend your heart doesn't affect how you think.

While logic has it's place, so do emotions, and you need both reasoning and emotions to make good decisions.

[quote] Do you really believe that human rights trump legal rights?
Um...of course they do. No law can be written that can remove a person's humanity, nor remove their rights to the basic necessities of life. Though I suppose one could argue over what basic necessities are, they obviously include food, water, safety from death, etc.
But we are not discussing "human rights" but "legal rights" Two completely different things!
Not at all. There isn't a person anywhere who can stop being human for a moment; so therefore, human rights always apply, and in this country we believe that a person's human rights should be protected by their legal rights. And no, that is not granted to only citizens. It is granted to all who stand on our soil (in theory).

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?
Clearly, for you, the US citizen is somehow more important than the illegal immigrant; that the US citizen somehow deserves help more than the illegal immigrant.

There are those of us who believe that both people are equal, no matter how laws might be written or how you wish to label people. So yes, while it is a shame that there is not enough aid for all, it is an equal tragedy for the aid to run out for either person. One person is not better than another, and labels and laws can't change that.

So wouldn't it be better if an illegal immigrant would be able to work on the books and contribute towards society? I do not understand why we would desire to prevent them from contributing their taxes by creating laws that force them to work off the books.

What does it say that my closest chain supermarket has made it impossible for me to conduct business with the person employed behind the meat counter. I was incapable of ordering a specific cut of meat cut to my specification since the person behind the counter could not understand; "I'd like two pounds of sirloin cut in 1/4" slices." It took nearly three minutes just to get any kind of communication across and although I did get my meat, since I was able to point, I do not believe I was well served. This is just wrong. Add to that I have not one clue before actual contact that there would be any difficulty!
Hey? Does that mean that this meat cutting job was an illegal job?
I agree; that was an aggravating experience for you; I also have had similar circumstances happen to me. But the blame is squarely on the shoulders of the supermarket, who obviously put a person in a position they were not qualified for and did not train properly. However it is most likely that this person was legally allowed to work in the US, if something like a grocery store hired them. So this person had every right to do a poor job at serving your meat to you. Of course that is terrible customer service, but that's all it was.