U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
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 12-27-2006, 01:42 PM
 
1,313 posts, read 5,655,883 times
Reputation: 1924

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hotcity View Post
Steve, what's your view on interracial relationship and interracial marriage?
No problem with it. The very term "interracial" seems a bit antequated to me -- something from my father's era. Racial and ethnic categories are constantly changing as humans become more internationally mobile. Most are really just social identity groups that have no biological validity. All humans differ genetically and even people who perceive themselves as being of the same "race" may have radically different genotypes (but similar genotypes aren't desireable anyway if offspring are involved). They may also have radically different cultural upbringings.
It seems to be mostly the African-American/Anglo relationships that get characterized as "interracial". Where I live on the West Coast there are a lot of marriages between Asians, Anglos, Native Americans and Hispanics that aren't really seen as "interracial" -- especially since many people have an ethnic makeup that defies simple categorization to begin with.
Some people tend to be naturally color-blind and others will make distinctions out of the most subtle differences. The Emperor's New Clothes are real for those who want to see them, I guess. In the Minnesota of my father's era, there was no such identity group as "white" or "Anglo". People were keenly aware of who was Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, German, Polish or Irish and tended to marry within those identity groups. My maternal grandfather was Swedish and my maternal grandmother was Danish. That was considered a "mixed marriage" back in those days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-27-2006, 02:02 PM
 
101 posts, read 177,682 times
Reputation: 17
Steve, you got kids?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 02:20 PM
 
1,313 posts, read 5,655,883 times
Reputation: 1924
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotcity View Post
Steve, you got kids?
I'm afraid I don't understand the relevance of this line of questioning to the thread topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 03:29 PM
 
101 posts, read 177,682 times
Reputation: 17
Steve, you have answer much more personal question that this before, so, why hesitate now? It's relevant. Do you have kids?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 03:48 PM
 
1,313 posts, read 5,655,883 times
Reputation: 1924
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotcity View Post
Steve, you have answer much more personal question that this before, so, why hesitate now? It's relevant. Do you have kids?
Let's assume that I do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 03:53 PM
 
Location: The Big D
14,874 posts, read 36,242,086 times
Reputation: 5787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve97415 View Post
I wish it were that simple. I would call due process a "civil right" and aliens, legal or otherwise are entitled to due process and equal protection under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. In actual fact, the Constitution reserves only a few rights for citizens, among which are: the unencumbered right to depart and enter the U.S., the right to vote, and the right to occupy the Office of the President. If you look at the wording of the 14th Ammendment I quoted earlier, you'll notice the problem: "No state shall deny to any person under its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The Supreme Court has always maintained that the phrase "any person under its jurisdiction" applied to visitors and aliens, so, no, you don't have to be a citizen to enjoy certain Constitutional protections. This was clarified in Plyler vs. Doe, 1982 (which came out of Texas). The ruling reads, in relevant part:

Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term. This Court's prior cases recognizing that illegal aliens are "persons" protected by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which Clauses do not include the phrase "within its jurisdiction," cannot be distinguished on the asserted ground that persons who have entered the country illegally are not "within the jurisdiction" of a State even if they are present within its boundaries and subject to its laws. Nor do the logic and history of the Fourteenth Amendment support such a construction. Instead, use of the phrase "within its jurisdiction" confirms the understanding that the Fourteenth Amendment's protection extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches into every corner of a State's territory. Pp. 210-216.

I know and am very aware of such. It just gets old hearing and seeing such stories.


BTW, I'm also wondering what relevance your having children or not is playing into this thread now?


As for your maternal grandparents marrying someone "different", lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 04:03 PM
 
5,019 posts, read 12,468,097 times
Reputation: 6952
Quote:
Most are really just social identity groups that have no biological validity. All humans differ genetically and even people who perceive themselves as being of the same "race" may have radically different genotypes
Explaining genome research to racists is kinda like talking quantum physics with your cat. Only...you'd probably have better luck with the cat.
Meow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 06:10 PM
 
101 posts, read 177,682 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve97415 View Post
Let's assume that I do.
You either have kids or you don't. Let's assume that you don't. Does that play some role in your lack of sympathy for your kids in class?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 07:22 PM
 
1,313 posts, read 5,655,883 times
Reputation: 1924
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotcity View Post
You either have kids or you don't. Let's assume that you don't. Does that play some role in your lack of sympathy for your kids in class?
I can't answer your question because the premise it is conditioned on happens to be false. But it doesn't matter. Your line of thinking involves a fallacy of logic known as argumentum ad hominem.
I encounter it frequently because I sit on a land-use hearing board where we have to decide whether or not various land-use applications meet certain lawful criteria for planning requirements. Often a representative will start talking up an application by tellings us that the applicant is "an upstanding member of the community, a family man, someone whose family goes way back in the history of our county...", and if he continues much more along those lines I will have to interrupt him and say, "excuse me, Mr. Smith, but argumentum ad hominem is not admissible as relevant testimony. It is the merits of the application, not the virtues of the applicant, that will determine burden of proof." Dragging attributes of a known person's life into an argument that is entirely conceptual in order to favorably or disfavorably color the outcome is a common, but lame trick of the debating trade.
As to sympathy, I, like every other educator -- and I would add, like every successful parent -- long ago learned to impose hard-nosed policy with consistency even while feeling sympathy for the afflicted. This is something widely referred to as emotional intelligence. If I didn't have it, I'd never be able to give failing grades to students with whom I have a good relationship...something that it is my moral imperative to do, however reluctant I may feel about doing it.

Here's a little philosophy lesson for you, hottie. Belief systems that underly our views of the world are constructed from six epistemologies (reasons why we tend to believe that anything is true or valid): intuition, experientialism, authoritarianism, rationalism, emotionalism and assimilation. Most of us use all six to some extent but we all have a dominant epistemology. I'm a rationalist: I believe in doing what makes sense. You're an emotionalist: you trust your feelings above anything else. It isn't that I don't have feelings, but I've learned it's frequently necessary to subjugate them to the demands of reason. And it isn't that you're incapable of reason...but simply that reason gets clouded by emotion and, in the end, is often defeated by feelings. The prime motive of emotionalists is to preserve personal relationships at all costs. This, too, is something I encounter often at work. Instructors are supposed to assess students impartially through the application of clear and objective criteria. But there are a certain number who cannot do so because they are emotionalists. They cannot bring themselves to "hurt" a student they have come to have affection for, so they look they other way at grading time and hit a computer key that misrepresents the student's academic performance. They have falsified an official record in order to mollify their own emotions. To do so is dishonest and self-indulgent, but emotional intelligence is something they've never come to terms with.
Immigration policy is no different. My heart goes out to the immigrant kids. I stay long hours after school helping them complete the homework in their other classes. I often use my own salary money to buy them lunch at school. But I'll just as readily write them up for detention or report them to the truancy officer if that's what policy requires. My good relationship with them has no effect on doing what makes sense. And maintaining a reasoned view of public policy and Rule of Law has no effect on how I feel about students as individuals...whatever their place of origin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2006, 07:46 PM
 
101 posts, read 177,682 times
Reputation: 17
Steve, I like to push buttons and I sucessfully done so by pulling information out of you that you otherwise might not reveal.

One thing I have observed is that you have some legal background; I thought it was either you went to law school or worked with lawyers. Another thing I have observed is that you're sharper than many high school teachers I've met. Why did you choose your current profession (not that there is anything wrong with it in any way or form)? So, how many kids do you have and how old are they?
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
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