Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Merriam-Webster describes an immigrant as, "a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence." Can you elucidate as to how permanent illegal immigrants (since illegal is an adjective and modifier of the noun "immigrant") fail to meet those criteria?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
Your other posts indicate why it is impossible to discuss this issue with many pro-illegals. Rational opposition to criminal law breakers who cost most Americans far more than they bring the table is condescendingly dismissed as mere racism.
This is a strawman fallacy. Promotion of ethnic conspiracy theories was specifically distinguished from other anti-immigration arguments and positions, and was neither "condescendingly dismissed" nor described as "mere racism." Rather, I claimed that promotion of these ethnic conspiracy theories was a tactic used among both white supremacists and certain members of the non-supremacist anti-immigration movement, and demonstrated certain affinities (not identical similarities) between them as fellow travelers in some regards, at least partially headed in the same direction if not the same destination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
No one here is a white nationalist.
This is another strawman fallacy. There has been no claim advanced that anyone on this forum is a white nationalist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eleanora1
No one here is certainly more racist than the morons at La Raza or Roberto Menendez and his belief that people from NJ should be forced to provide for poor people from Latin America just because Roberto happens to be Latino himself.
There is no "Latin American" or "Latino" race, so the concept of "racism" in that regard is incoherent. There are multiple racial and ethnic groups in Latin America as there are in Anglo-America. "Latin America" is also an excessively broad categorization when most immigrants' point of origin is southern Mexico. A region of a country is not equivalent to an artificially defined group of countries.
It may be the case that leaders at the National Council of La Raza and other major Hispanic advocacy organizations engage in a certain form of white supremacist activism themselves, however, since they tend to have benefited from the ethnic hierarchy that stratifies whites above Indians and blacks, and promote Eurocentrism in some ways, as argued by Ian Haney Lopez in White Latinos (http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/llr/vol6/lopez.pdf - broken link): "In this context, many Latino leaders believe they are—and are understood to be—white by virtue of class privilege, education, physical features, accent, acculturation, self-conception, and social consensus."
Yeah it does. Funny how we never hear anything even remotely condemnatory of organizations like La Raza.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhymetime
Right, only the ones we LIKE are the TRUE immigrants!
Yeah silly us.
Shame on Americans for disliking criminals who disobey our immigration laws, drive without license or insurance, work off the books so they don't pay taxes and then have the unmitigated nerve to demand that we pay the bills for their health care and education. Heaven forbid we should prefer people who come here with permission, without communicable diseases, with the pledge not to commit crimes or go on welfare and obey our laws to become American citizens. How silly of us to prefer people who like our society enough to learn our language and demonstrate knowledge of the society they want to join!
Merriam-Webster describes an immigrant as, "a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence." Can you elucidate as to how permanent illegal immigrants (since illegal is an adjective and modifier of the noun "immigrant") fail to meet those criteria?
How you can be permanent if you can be legally asked to leave at any moment? Immigrant implies legal permission. Illegals, by definition, do not have that permission. At best they're temporary residents.
Quote:
This is a strawman fallacy. Promotion of ethnic conspiracy theories was specifically distinguished from other anti-immigration arguments and positions, and was neither "condescendingly dismissed" nor described as "mere racism." Rather, I claimed that promotion of these ethnic conspiracy theories was a tactic used among both white supremacists and certain members of the non-supremacist anti-immigration movement, and demonstrated certain affinities (not identical similarities) between them as fellow travelers in some regards, at least partially headed in the same direction if not the same destination.
Go make those arguments in the immigration forum then. This is the forum dedicated to discussing illegal immigration. Your implication and that of many people who unfortunately agree with you on this issue is that anyone dares make any argument at all against illegal immigration is simply a racist.
The fellow traveler argument is one that I could easily make about pro-illegals since they share the same aims as racist organizations like La Raza.
FYI, define destination. Do you think the whole world should be allowed to come here?
Quote:
This is another strawman fallacy. There has been no claim advanced that anyone on this forum is a white nationalist.
Those are the implications of your words. That accusation has certainly been repeated ad nauseum by illegal advocates here.
Quote:
There is no "Latin American" or "Latino" race, so the concept of "racism" in that regard is incoherent. There are multiple racial and ethnic groups in Latin America as there are in Anglo-America. "Latin America" is also an excessively broad categorization when most immigrants' point of origin is southern Mexico. A region of a country is not equivalent to an artificially defined group of countries.
It may be the case that leaders at the National Council of La Raza and other major Hispanic advocacy organizations engage in a certain form of white supremacist activism themselves, however, since they tend to have benefited from the ethnic hierarchy that stratifies whites above Indians and blacks, and promote Eurocentrism in some ways, as argued by Ian Haney Lopez in White Latinos (http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/llr/vol6/lopez.pdf - broken link): "In this context, many Latino leaders believe they are—and are understood to be—white by virtue of class privilege, education, physical features, accent, acculturation, self-conception, and social consensus."
That is your opinion and your opinion only. As long as the man sworn to represent me in the senate continues to refer to himself as a Latino I will continue to think of him that way. As long as he continues to advocate policies that harm non-Latinos I will continue to refuse to vote for him.
Shame on Americans for disliking criminals who disobey our immigration laws, drive without license or insurance, work off the books so they don't pay taxes and then have the unmitigated nerve to demand that we pay the bills for their health care and education. Heaven forbid we should prefer people who come here with permission, without communicable diseases, with the pledge not to commit crimes or go on welfare and obey our laws to become American citizens. How silly of us to prefer people who like our society enough to learn our language and demonstrate knowledge of the society they want to join!
No. Of course not.
So would you support a law change that allowed immigration for anyone who passes a background and health screening?
That would address all of your concerns. There is no official US language or culture so those "concerns" are just bias.
So would you support a law change that allowed immigration for anyone who passes a background and health screening?
That would address all of your concerns. There is no official US language or culture so those "concerns" are just bias.
Not right now, no. You may not be aware of this but we have a lousy economy. We have no jobs for own citizens. Why should open the doors for people who are likely to take jobs Americans need? Why should any American want a neighbor who not only doesn't speak his language but ridiculously whines of bias and bigotry when we ask him to do so?
You're directly asking to me personally to support policies that are extremely contrary to my interests. Doesn't that strike you as nonsensical? Or is self interest, to paraphrase Orwell, only reserved for some animals and not others?
Other than your misguided belief that our immigration laws are somehow racist (which they aren't) you have yet to make a convincing argument to the contrary.
So would you support a law change that allowed immigration for anyone who passes a background and health screening?
That would address all of your concerns. There is no official US language or culture so those "concerns" are just bias.
We don't need any new laws. We have the largest immigration of any other country, in fact more than all others combined. We have enough unskilled uneducated, non-English speaking people who drag down the rest of us now.
We need no more CRIMINALIENS. After all, it is a gateway crime. They prove it when they cross the border.
So basically, for you, freedom and equality take a back seat to greed. Is that about right?
Your definitions of freedom, equality and greed make as much sense as Agnapostate's defintion of immigrant. Orwell would applaud and then probably give a bitter little laugh.
So would you support a law change that allowed immigration for anyone who passes a background and health screening?
That would address all of your concerns. There is no official US language or culture so those "concerns" are just bias.
I would support it as long as it also included proof of financial security. For example 20G in a bank acct for more than 6 months. Or if they had a profession or education that was in demand here . Nurse or Doctor for example.
No money? No education? No profession that we need?
We dont need you.
Let me explain why. We kep hearing how if an immigrant is sponsored via fiancee or spousal VISA how easy it is for them. Well I had to provide financial proof that I could afford to sponsor. Immigrants should be held to the same standard as a citizen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
