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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-02-2007, 07:04 PM
 
Location: California
3,432 posts, read 2,158,301 times
Reputation: 138

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Political Fanatic View Post
N o, the Brits do not hate our guts at all. Yes, a few do but so what?

You want to speak Spanish? Then move your butt to a Spanish speaking country and stop trying to change our coiuntry into a third world cesspool.

Wow, how ignorant you are. Since when has the Spanish language turned the United States into a third country cesspool. I know mannnnyyy White people who speak Spanish. Spanish was one of the first foreign languages to enter the U.S.

 
Old 11-02-2007, 07:09 PM
 
Location: new mexico
447 posts, read 706,092 times
Reputation: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Choctaw2 View Post
From CWHA: Become a citizen
[SIZE=+2]Are there English Language requirements for becoming a citizen?[/SIZE]
Yes. You must speak and understand English to become a citizen of the Unties States. The only exceptions to this rule are people who are at least fifty years old and have been lawful permanent residents for twenty years or more, or fifty-five years old and lawful permanent residents for at least fifteen years.




Language Legislation in the U.S.A.
[CENTER]Issues in U.S. Language Policy

Language Legislation in the U.S.A.

[SIZE=3]English Only legislation first appeared in 1981 as a constitutional [/SIZE][SIZE=3]English Language Amendment[/SIZE][SIZE=3]. This proposal, if approved by a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate and ratified by three-quarters of state legislatures, would have banned virtually all uses of languages other than English by federal, state, and local governments. But the measure has never come to a Congressional vote, even in committee. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Since 1981, 23 states have adopted various forms of Official English legislation, in addition to four that had already done so. Subtracting [/SIZE][SIZE=3]Hawai'i[/SIZE][SIZE=3] (which is officially bilingual) and [/SIZE][SIZE=3]Alaska[/SIZE][SIZE=3] (whose English-only initiative has been declared unconstitutional) leaves a [/SIZE][SIZE=3]total of 25 states[/SIZE][SIZE=3] with active Official English laws. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Official English legislation is being considered in [/SIZE][SIZE=3]additional states[/SIZE][SIZE=3]. These measures are unrelated, however, to the process of amending the U.S. Constitution. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]A decade ago, English Only advocates changed their strategy. Recognizing the long odds against ratifying a constitutional amendment, they began to promote a statutory form of Official English. Such a bill would apply to the federal government alone and would require only a simple majority vote in Congress (as well as the President's signature) to become law. Several versions of so-called [/SIZE][SIZE=3]"Language of Government"[/SIZE][SIZE=3] legislation have appeared since that time. One of these bills, [/SIZE][SIZE=3]H.R. 123[/SIZE][SIZE=3], passed the House of Representatives but not the Senate in 1996. So the measure failed to become law. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Similar legislation is pending in [/SIZE][SIZE=3]Congress[/SIZE][SIZE=3]. If enacted, it would amend the U.S. Code in the following ways: [/SIZE]
  • [SIZE=3]English would be designated the official language of the U.S. government indeed, the only language that federal employees and officials, including members of Congress, would be permitted to use for most government business. [/SIZE]
  • [SIZE=3]The English Only mandate would extend to federal "actions, documents, policies ... publications, income tax forms, informational materials," records, proceedings, letters to citizens indeed, to any form of written communication on behalf of the U.S. government. [/SIZE]
  • [SIZE=3]Exceptions to the ban on federal use of other languages would be permitted for purposes that include national security, international trade and diplomacy, public health and safety, criminal proceedings, language teaching, certain handicapped programs, and the preservation of Native American languages. [/SIZE]
  • [SIZE=3]An "entitlement" would be created, ensuring the "right" of every person to communicate with the federal government in English in effect, a guaranteee of [/SIZE][SIZE=3]language rights[/SIZE][SIZE=3], but for English speakers only. [/SIZE]
  • [SIZE=3]Civil lawsuits to enforce the law would be permitted by persons claiming to have been "injured by a violation" of it a "right of action" that could give virtually any taxpayer the standing to sue in federal court. [/SIZE]
  • [SIZE=3]Naturalization ceremonies would be specifically restricted to English only. [/SIZE]
  • [SIZE=3]Bilingual provisions of the Voting Rights Act, which guarantee minority-language voting materials in certain jurisdictions, would be repealed. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]Much uncertainty remains about the practical impact of Official English bills on a spectrum of language services, from bilingual education to Social Security pamphlets to sign-language interpreting. If passed, its interpretation would almost certainly be determined by the courts. The 1996 House [/SIZE][SIZE=3]floor debate[/SIZE][SIZE=3] on the bill offers various views on its pros, cons, and potential effects. The Clinton Administration strongly opposed this legislation (see [/SIZE][SIZE=3]Justice Department[/SIZE][SIZE=3] letter). The Bush administration has yet to take a formal position, although as governor of Texas, George W. Bush spoke out against Official English and anti-bilingual-education proposals[/SIZE][/CENTER]


[SIZE=3] continued at the link[/SIZE]

thanks choctaw i was searching for justthe same things you have provided, and am impressed that you have done what i in my anger could not.....kudos to you!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Old 11-02-2007, 07:21 PM
 
Location: new mexico
447 posts, read 706,092 times
Reputation: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by raelynn View Post
Did you honestly know that English not the official language of the US. People its not so stop saying illegals should learn it cause honestly we don't have an official language. I'm sure people would love think that English should be but until Puerto Rico is not associated with the US anymore I don't think its going to happen.

I'm posting this thread because I've been looking through some others and notice a lot of people say.... They should learn english and maybe people wouldn't mind as much, or They should learn english because thats what everyone else speaks, or They should learn english becasue this or this.

I think that english is a really hard language to learn. Hell some Americans can not even get it right!! I know that i have a hard time making things come out right. I do speak english and spanish and its a lot easier for me to live in the world knowing both.

So people please stop saying that illegals from any country should learn english because simply its not our official language!!!


seems as if i sense a troll here...are you trying to convince people to be on your side about this issue or are you trying to anger the anti illegal crowd?
i have read some of your posts and it seems to me that you are angry that all people dont think like you...you even sound as if in your original post that you want to pick a fight.
my mama, a native okie told me when i was a young girl that you can attract more bees to honey than you can to vinegar...being mean spirited isnt the answer...and if you want to attack me again like you did in the last thread you started, then by all means, go right ahead, these shoulders are strong, they are american and i do believe that english should be the official language, for many reasons, maybe you in your youth cannot understand.
so the question i ask is this, are you looking for an argument, or are you looking for a solution? seems you dont even know.
enquiring minds would like to know.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 07:27 PM
 
Location: new mexico
447 posts, read 706,092 times
Reputation: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by raelynn View Post
I think that you should check your facts because my significant other is in fact LEGAL! He was born in the US, has a social security card, he pays his taxes without appyling for anything like an id number or whatever. I don't need to apply for a hardship waiver because my boyfriend and I are not expericing any hardships!!!

DE FACTO means in effect but not formally recognized.

Yes, English is the DE FACTO language of the US but google it and do some research. There are over 300 languages spoken in the US everyday. Research this and really try to come back with something better then that.

And also before you start talking trash about anything you should research it before you start talking!!


ok..there you go again...making my blood boil...but thats ok, because my forefathers and my immediate family memeber have fought and died to give you your right to free speech...but as i respect your rights, i also believe you should respect others rights to beleive what they do and their right to free speech.
what i have seen here is not that.
maybe you should google some facts too.
peace be with you...and also to you.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 07:29 PM
 
Location: new mexico
447 posts, read 706,092 times
Reputation: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by raelynn View Post
this act also complies with the post of choctaw2


Overview of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [SIZE=2]Title VI, 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., was enacted as part of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964. It prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. As President John F. Kennedy said in 1963: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Simple justice requires that public funds, to which all taxpayers of all races [colors, and national origins] contribute, not be spent in any fashion which encourages, entrenches, subsidizes or results in racial [color or national origin] discrimination.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]If a recipient of federal assistance is found to have discriminated and voluntary compliance cannot be achieved, the federal agency providing the assistance should either initiate fund termination proceedings or refer the matter to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal action. Aggrieved individuals may file administrative complaints with the federal agency that provides funds to a recipient, or the individuals may file suit for appropriate relief in federal court. Title VI itself prohibits intentional discrimination. However, most funding agencies have regulations implementing Title VI that prohibit recipient practices that have the effect of discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]To assist federal agencies that provide financial assistance, the wide variety of recipients that receive such assistance, and the actual and potential beneficiaries of programs receiving federal assistance, the U.S. Department of Justice has published a Title VI Legal Manual. The Title VI Legal Manual sets out Title VI legal principles and standards. Additionally, the Department has published an Investigation Procedures Manual to give practical advice on how to investigate Title VI complaints. Also available on the Coordination and Review Website are a host of other materials that may be helpful to those interested in ensuring effective enforcement of Title VI. [/SIZE]


ok...once again, i tell you, none of these rights are afforded to illegals...only to natural born citizens and legal immigrants...so your response to choctaw 2 is mute.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 07:34 PM
 
Location: new mexico
447 posts, read 706,092 times
Reputation: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean34597 View Post
And it shouldn't be. Personally, I think we'd all be a lot better off speaking Spanish. We'd be able to communicate better with our 600 million neighbors to the south. We'd probably stop meddling in their internal affairs as much. And we'd be able to travel there with much more confidence.

Hell, I mean, the Brits hate our guts anyway. What's the point with continuing with this "English" charade? Speaking Spanish would help us in our daily lives and represent a gigantic middle finger aimed at London. Folks, that's called a win-win.

fyi: britain and america are allies...and most brits love americans....this is a nation built by immigrants, many from all kinds of countries, yes, but the first settlers(my family who immigrated here in 1639 included) were from england, and spoke english.


if you think spanish should be the official language, then maybe you should move to a spanish speaking country...just an opinion...dont care if you like it or not, dont care if you respond or not.


whatever.
 
Old 11-02-2007, 08:54 PM
 
Location: Mesa, Az
21,148 posts, read 36,622,458 times
Reputation: 3785
What would be guaranteed to enrage the La Raza crowd would be if us Americans (of all races/ethnicities) decided to read and write Cherokee instead of English.

As we all know: a Cherokee family reunion IS the United States of America------they 'loved' everybody!
 
Old 11-02-2007, 09:04 PM
 
8,973 posts, read 14,615,066 times
Reputation: 2983
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArizonaBear View Post
What would be guaranteed to enrage the La Raza crowd would be if us Americans (of all races/ethnicities) decided to read and write Cherokee instead of English.

As we all know: a Cherokee family reunion IS the United States of America------they 'loved' everybody!
I think Sam Houston, once an American, who took Mexican citizenship in Texas, also was made a honorary Cherokee at one point in his life....Don't know the rest of his career, though...
 
Old 11-02-2007, 10:44 PM
 
8,973 posts, read 14,615,066 times
Reputation: 2983
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProLogic View Post
Wow, how ignorant you are. .
I've often been accused of being both IGNORANT, and APATHETIC....but is this true? Frankly, I don't KNOW---and I don't CARE....
 
Old 11-02-2007, 11:02 PM
 
Location: Dallas, Texas
3,589 posts, read 2,974,016 times
Reputation: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Political Fanatic View Post
No, the Brits do not hate our guts at all. Yes, a few do but so what?
Uh...it's more than a few. When's the last time you went to the UK? I lived there for years.
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.


Closed Thread

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