U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-30-2011, 07:25 AM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,152,437 times
Reputation: 2130

Advertisements

I wonder when the pro-illegal mantra will stop? When will they all catch on to the fact that these same old arguments don't hold water anymore? For example, "illegals are doing jobs that Americans won't do". My all time favorite is the crop picking one when there are only 3% of illegals picking crops and there are unlimited H-2A visas legal immigrant crop pickers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-30-2011, 07:30 AM
 
1,574 posts, read 789,566 times
Reputation: 124
When will the "unlimited H-2A visas" mantra stop?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 07:57 AM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,641 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhymetime View Post
Really? No. Perhaps you should go look that word up. When people say "children of illegals should not be citizens," or "we should end wet foot/dry foot" or even "we should deport all illegals" they are making normative arguments whether they know it or not.

If everyone were making positive arguments there wouldn't be much to discuss. There is very, very little confusion about what the status quo is (though occasionally they are interesting only because you show how little understanding you have of how things actually are, eg:

Births by U.S. visitors: A real issue?

http://www.city-data.com/forum/20411108-post229.html

etc)
All those phrases have would or should in them, something was missing in your comments to make them normative, (hint: maybe you should quit trying to cover your @ss when you are wrong, your arguments are in no way superior even though you somehow think your intelligence is)

Wow, look at you, reverting back to other topic comments that you somehow believe you are correct on. Here let me try:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhymetime
Likewise, when I hire someone who happens to have been born over on the wrong side of an imaginary line, I'm not harming anyone else. Nobody else owns that job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhymetime
It's a normative statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns
It would have been "normative" had you worded it differently.
Seems there is a word missing from your statement that would have made it "normative" vs it being "positive".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 08:04 AM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,641 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhymetime View Post
When will the "unlimited H-2A visas" mantra stop?
Probably when the farmers begin using it as they should have from the beginning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 08:10 AM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,152,437 times
Reputation: 2130
I find it ironic that the pro-illegals argue that we should change our immigration laws but it is somehow racist for us to want to change birthright citizenship and the wet foot/dry foot policy. Pot, kettle, black.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 08:13 AM
 
1,574 posts, read 789,566 times
Reputation: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Seems there is a word missing from your statement that would have made it "normative" vs it being "positive".
Sorry, I assumed it was pretty obvious and readers with IQs above, say, 85 or so could figure out what I'm doing there. You're acting like there's some sort of UNDERHANDED SUBTERFUGE and there's not. You're either just incredibly bad at reading comprehension or you're just arguing in bad faith.

I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt so I'm assuming you're not too stupid to figure this out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 08:16 AM
 
1,574 posts, read 789,566 times
Reputation: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
I find it ironic that the pro-illegals argue that we should change our immigration laws but it is somehow racist for us to want to change birthright citizenship and the wet foot/dry foot policy. Pot, kettle, black.
Yes, it's totally ironic that people who would argue for more freedom would be against a policy intended to solidify an entitled class and keep outsiders shut out. As in, not ironic at all.

Hint: we're not arguing to change immigration laws just for the sake of changing things. If that were the case, THEN I would agree that resisting change elsewhere would be a pot/kettle situation. But that's not the case at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
25,354 posts, read 16,295,574 times
Reputation: 14080
Quote:
Originally Posted by All American NYC View Post
Do you think these laws are cruel?

If not what are other alternatives?
The fundimental issue is criminal immigration. We have a large number of people that are not citizens or legal residents of this country. They choose to commit an illegal act by violating our immigaration laws. The other laws (targeting employers or others that aid or harbor criminal aliens) are no different than any other laws that serve to punish, and thereby deter, those that aid criminals. If we were discussing other crimes (rape, murder, robbery), would there be sympathy for those that aided and abetted the criminal? Why do some feel that we must reward those criminals that violate our borders and laws? Why would we not punish those that aid them in doing so?

To equate these criminals with blacks during the civil rights era is an insult to blacks. They were discriminated against because of their race, and Jim Crow laws targetted them simply for being black. The laws in question in the OP target CRIMINALS, those that have knowingly and willingly violated the law. Those that equate all blacks to criminals have a warped sense of justice.

Last edited by Toyman at Jewel Lake; 08-30-2011 at 09:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 09:10 AM
 
1,574 posts, read 789,566 times
Reputation: 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
The fundimental issue is criminal immigration. We have a large number of people that are not citizens or legal residents of this country. They choose to commit an illegal act by violating our immigaration laws. The other laws (targeting employers or others that aid or harbor criminal aliens) are no different than any other laws that serve to punish, and thereby deter, those that aid criminals. If we were discussing other crimes (rape, murder, robbery), would there be sympathy for those that aided and abetted the criminal? Why do some feel that we must reward those criminals that violate our borders and laws?

To equate these criminals with blacks during the civil rights era is an insult to blacks. They were discriminated against because of their race, and Jim Crow laws targetted them simply for being black. The laws in question in the OP target CRIMINALS, those that have knowingly and willingly violated the law. Those that equate all blacks to criminals have a warped sense of justice.
You're begging the question. You don't question the laws that MAKE them criminals, you just accept those as unchangeable axioms. But that's the entire crux of the matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2011, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
25,354 posts, read 16,295,574 times
Reputation: 14080
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhymetime View Post
You're begging the question. You don't question the laws that MAKE them criminals, you just accept those as unchangeable axioms. But that's the entire crux of the matter.
So are we getting to the crux of your arguement? That we should have no control over our borders? No decision in who comes into this country? Do you offer the same courtsey on your property? Do you leave your doors open for every random person walking by? I'm sure there are people that would like your warm bed to sleep in. Do you encourage them to take your property, while you get nothing in return? Once these people are in your home, do you offer to feed them, educate them and pay their medical expenses, while they sit on your couch and watch your TV? If you as an individual aren't willling to do this, why would we as a country?

If people are willing to violate our immigration laws, why would anyone expect them to have any more respect for any of our other laws?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top