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.
Civil Rights? Women Suffrage? Good way to completely twist the truth. We are comparing citizens to no citizens not race or gender.
I would like to ask LUIS GUTIEREZ who he would deport. He seems to be against ANY DEPORTATIONS and ANY removals. He is against Secure Communities, against E-Verify....against 287g, against funding border security, against increasing funding for deportations and workplace audits. He is against the Dream Memos stated new deportation goals of Criminals, Fugitive Aliens, Repeat Crossers and newly arrived.
When will this panderer learn the difference between legal and illegal? We have every right to oppose the coddling of illegal aliens without being compared to inhumane bigots. I truly wish they would stop trying to ride the coattails of black Americans. Not to mention, it's an affront for law-abiding citizens to be compared to foreign interlopers, ID thieves, tax evaders, and fraudsters. If they actually had a "just" cause, it would stand on its own merits. But, they don't, which is why they continue this nonsense.
Gutierrez now has illegals believing he's their messiah. Of course, if deported, he wouldn't have as many Hispanics to support him when he pursues his ultimate political goal. In my opinion, Gutierrez doesn't give a damn about illegals. He's just another peddler/profiteer like La Raza. Illegals and their Hispanic supporters are just pawns. He needs them for future votes, and La Raza needs them to secure millions of dollars in funding from the federal government and private corporations.
Sorry, Luis, your attempt to guilt us into supporting this invasion won't work. Rather than whining about the USA, you should be hammering their countries to get their acts together so they can welcome their citizens back home.
It is not an altogether improper comparison. The purpose of the 14th amendment was to clarify that a citizen needn't be white, and the civil rights movement was to fix lingering issues regarding the unequal treatment between citizens. Women's suffrage likewise was dealing with the unequal political rights of men and women. This new movement is yet another attempt to rectify perceived inequalities of political rights.
Whether you agree that these inequalities actually exist or how they should be dealt with is a separate, albeit related, matter. There certainly is a like between all three movements. Or perhaps it'd be better to include the LBGT movement as well? The women's suffrage movement dealt with the perceived inequalities between men and women, but didn't deal with the various other genders or sexual orientations. Gays weren't allowed to legally migrate to the USA until a revision in immigration law in 1990, if memory serves. Even now it is harder for a same-sex couples to sponsor the migration of one of the spouses versus opposite-sex couples.
Oh well. It isn't like Rubio is really a crusader for illegal aliens. He's just testing the waters to see if the Republican party can gain more votes by softening their rhetoric on the issue.
It is not an altogether improper comparison. The purpose of the 14th amendment was to clarify that a citizen needn't be white, and the civil rights movement was to fix lingering issues regarding the unequal treatment between citizens. Women's suffrage likewise was dealing with the unequal political rights of men and women. This new movement is yet another attempt to rectify perceived inequalities of political rights.
Whether you agree that these inequalities actually exist or how they should be dealt with is a separate, albeit related, matter. There certainly is a like between all three movements. Or perhaps it'd be better to include the LBGT movement as well? The women's suffrage movement dealt with the perceived inequalities between men and women, but didn't deal with the various other genders or sexual orientations. Gays weren't allowed to legally migrate to the USA until a revision in immigration law in 1990, if memory serves. Even now it is harder for a same-sex couples to sponsor the migration of one of the spouses versus opposite-sex couples.
Oh well. It isn't like Rubio is really a crusader for illegal aliens. He's just testing the waters to see if the Republican party can gain more votes by softening their rhetoric on the issue.
There's one salient point you have conveniently omitted. All of those people were/are citizens of this country, and entitled to equal rights. For the umpteenth time, illegal aliens have no such rights. How could they? They don't even have a "right" to be here. Again, I consider it an affront to women, black Americans, and gays to be compared to foreign interlopers, ID thieves, frauds, and parasites. So, no, a valid comparison does not exist. They should thank us for our generosity and return home to fight for equality. We have been used and abused enough.
It is not an altogether improper comparison. The purpose of the 14th amendment was to clarify that a citizen needn't be white, and the civil rights movement was to fix lingering issues regarding the unequal treatment between citizens. Women's suffrage likewise was dealing with the unequal political rights of men and women. This new movement is yet another attempt to rectify perceived inequalities of political rights.
Whether you agree that these inequalities actually exist or how they should be dealt with is a separate, albeit related, matter. There certainly is a like between all three movements. Or perhaps it'd be better to include the LBGT movement as well? The women's suffrage movement dealt with the perceived inequalities between men and women, but didn't deal with the various other genders or sexual orientations. Gays weren't allowed to legally migrate to the USA until a revision in immigration law in 1990, if memory serves. Even now it is harder for a same-sex couples to sponsor the migration of one of the spouses versus opposite-sex couples.
Oh well. It isn't like Rubio is really a crusader for illegal aliens. He's just testing the waters to see if the Republican party can gain more votes by softening their rhetoric on the issue.
Accept illegals are not afforded any political rights.
As for Rubio....I would say spot on, and that his plan is pretty much what Obama just implemented by policy change.
It is not an altogether improper comparison. The purpose of the 14th amendment was to clarify that a citizen needn't be white, and the civil rights movement was to fix lingering issues regarding the unequal treatment between citizens. Women's suffrage likewise was dealing with the unequal political rights of men and women. This new movement is yet another attempt to rectify perceived inequalities of political rights.
Whether you agree that these inequalities actually exist or how they should be dealt with is a separate, albeit related, matter. There certainly is a like between all three movements. Or perhaps it'd be better to include the LBGT movement as well? The women's suffrage movement dealt with the perceived inequalities between men and women, but didn't deal with the various other genders or sexual orientations. Gays weren't allowed to legally migrate to the USA until a revision in immigration law in 1990, if memory serves. Even now it is harder for a same-sex couples to sponsor the migration of one of the spouses versus opposite-sex couples.
Oh well. It isn't like Rubio is really a crusader for illegal aliens. He's just testing the waters to see if the Republican party can gain more votes by softening their rhetoric on the issue.
Frank, I have got to admit it, you can build a damn fine straw man. No doubt about it. lol
It is not an altogether improper comparison. The purpose of the 14th amendment was to clarify that a citizen needn't be white, and the civil rights movement was to fix lingering issues regarding the unequal treatment between citizens. Women's suffrage likewise was dealing with the unequal political rights of men and women. This new movement is yet another attempt to rectify perceived inequalities of political rights.
Whether you agree that these inequalities actually exist or how they should be dealt with is a separate, albeit related, matter. There certainly is a like between all three movements. Or perhaps it'd be better to include the LBGT movement as well? The women's suffrage movement dealt with the perceived inequalities between men and women, but didn't deal with the various other genders or sexual orientations. Gays weren't allowed to legally migrate to the USA until a revision in immigration law in 1990, if memory serves. Even now it is harder for a same-sex couples to sponsor the migration of one of the spouses versus opposite-sex couples.
Oh well. It isn't like Rubio is really a crusader for illegal aliens. He's just testing the waters to see if the Republican party can gain more votes by softening their rhetoric on the issue.
Uh; we're talking about illegal aliens; NOT Americans who had to put up with prejudice. Sheesh!
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.
