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.
We've all heard how it ok for illegals to break immigration laws because they're "just trying to make a better life" or "just trying to provide for their family". Well what's the difference between that and stealing cars or mugging people to provide for their family? As long as they're using the money to feed their kids does it make it ok? As long as they're breaking the law for what you feel is a good reason it's ok? Is it ok for me to start robbing banks to provide for my family? It's this same mentality as homeowners getting sued for attacking an intruder, because said intruder was "just hungry" or "needed to steal in order to provide for his family". Explain it to me so I can understand where you're coming from.
We've all heard how it ok for illegals to break immigration laws because they're "just trying to make a better life" or "just trying to provide for their family". Well what's the difference between that and stealing cars or mugging people to provide for their family? As long as they're using the money to feed their kids does it make it ok? As long as they're breaking the law for what you feel is a good reason it's ok? Is it ok for me to start robbing banks to provide for my family? It's this same mentality as homeowners getting sued for attacking an intruder, because said intruder was "just hungry" or "needed to steal in order to provide for his family". Explain it to me so I can understand where you're coming from.
I Agree.. I would also suggest that maybe people should STOP Paying taxes, which would make it easier for folks to "have a better life" and "provide for their families"..
Location: Where laws can be ignored due to political correctness
1,111 posts, read 1,851,480 times
Reputation: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
There is no difference what so ever. At every level "making a better life" for themselves impacts someone else negatively.
But it's racist to argue against such a thing if the perpetrator is illegal and poor (despite the fact that US citizens in the US could never get away with such a thing), right?
We've all heard how it ok for illegals to break immigration laws because they're "just trying to make a better life" or "just trying to provide for their family". Well what's the difference between that and stealing cars or mugging people to provide for their family? As long as they're using the money to feed their kids does it make it ok? As long as they're breaking the law for what you feel is a good reason it's ok? Is it ok for me to start robbing banks to provide for my family? It's this same mentality as homeowners getting sued for attacking an intruder, because said intruder was "just hungry" or "needed to steal in order to provide for his family". Explain it to me so I can understand where you're coming from.
The difference is that car thieves and muggers are not percieved by the public as being members of any certain ethnicity, while illegal mimmigrants are. (They're not REALLY confined to one ethnicity, but they're PERCIEVED that way).
As a result of the percieved "ethnic component" in the matter of illegal imigrants, MANY of their detractors base their stance on the fact that they're "sick of.....dislike....distrust..." etc., etc., etc, Hispanics. Likewise, many of those who SUPPORT illegals, or attempt to minimize their offense, do so on the basis of shared ethnicity....or shared culture...or a generally optimistic view of the inevitability of the U.S. becoming a "bilingual" society..(read: English and Spanish). There are ALSO many non-Hispanic supporters who operate from a "guilt" position..(i.e. "we're rich, and they're poor; we can afford more immigrants; we have a TRADITION of immigration". etc etc etc...).....
NEITHER of these 'sides' seems to pay much attention to any non-Hispanic illegals....these people are not the 'focus' of either side....(unless it's to point out they "aren't HATED like the Hispanics are"...or they "don't ACT like the Hispanics do")... Illegal immigration, in large measure, has become for all practical purposes an ethnic war....so far, MOSTLY a war of words and ideas. Virtually without exception, BOTH sides of the 'illegal' debate quickly gravitate from discussing illegal immigration, to discussinf the 'pros and cons' of Hispanic culture, whether 'Hispanic' is, or is not, a 'race', and how the Spanish language degrades, or improves, life in America. Illegal immigration, for BOTH sides, concerns 5% 'legality', and 95% 'ethnicity'. "You wouldn't hate the illegals if they were WHITE", roars one side. "If they were WHITE, they wouldn't BE in that position", counters the opposition....BOTH sides seeing the debate as an ethnic one.
This "ethnic" angle simply doesn't exist in most criminal discussions....and there's no "squabble" nearly as contentious, unreasonable, or bitter as an "ethnic squabble". There's no "mugger support group", and there's no "defenders of the rights of drunk drivers" lobby, either....these crimes aren't seen as having any ethnic component. Illegal immigration is.....rightly or wrngly.
Location: Where laws can be ignored due to political correctness
1,111 posts, read 1,851,480 times
Reputation: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok
There's no difference. Illegal is just that - illegal. It has nothing to do with ethnicity despite those who will so passionately argue that it does.
Undeniably true, BUT if you want to suppress or discourage any discussion on the criminal aspects of illegal immigration (which is, my goodness, a crime) it's always good to pull out the race card or accuse others of being 'xenophobic' or discriminative on some superficial or cultural basis.
The difference is that car thieves and muggers are not percieved by the public as being members of any certain ethnicity, while illegal mimmigrants are. (They're not REALLY confined to one ethnicity, but they're PERCIEVED that way).
As a result of the percieved "ethnic component" in the matter of illegal imigrants, MANY of their detractors base their stance on the fact that they're "sick of.....dislike....distrust..." etc., etc., etc, Hispanics. Likewise, many of those who SUPPORT illegals, or attempt to minimize their offense, do so on the basis of shared ethnicity....or shared culture...or a generally optimistic view of the inevitability of the U.S. becoming a "bilingual" society..(read: English and Spanish). There are ALSO many non-Hispanic supporters who operate from a "guilt" position..(i.e. "we're rich, and they're poor; we can afford more immigrants; we have a TRADITION of immigration". etc etc etc...).....
NEITHER of these 'sides' seems to pay much attention to any non-Hispanic illegals....these people are not the 'focus' of either side....(unless it's to point out they "aren't HATED like the Hispanics are"...or they "don't ACT like the Hispanics do")... Illegal immigration, in large measure, has become for all practical purposes an ethnic war....so far, MOSTLY a war of words and ideas. Virtually without exception, BOTH sides of the 'illegal' debate quickly gravitate from discussing illegal immigration, to discussinf the 'pros and cons' of Hispanic culture, whether 'Hispanic' is, or is not, a 'race', and how the Spanish language degrades, or improves, life in America. Illegal immigration, for BOTH sides, concerns 5% 'legality', and 95% 'ethnicity'. "You wouldn't hate the illegals if they were WHITE", roars one side. "If they were WHITE, they wouldn't BE in that position", counters the opposition....BOTH sides seeing the debate as an ethnic one.
This "ethnic" angle simply doesn't exist in most criminal discussions....and there's no "squabble" nearly as contentious, unreasonable, or bitter as an "ethnic squabble". There's no "mugger support group", and there's no "defenders of the rights of drunk drivers" lobby, either....these crimes aren't seen as having any ethnic component. Illegal immigration is.....rightly or wrngly.
And that’s it in a nutshell. Attach “race” to an issue, and it takes on a whole new meaning.
But it's racist to argue against such a thing if the perpetrator is illegal and poor (despite the fact that US citizens in the US could never get away with such a thing), right?
To hear the mostly 'brown' Mexican illegal aliens say it: yes------------us Americans are indeed racist
To hear the mostly 'brown' Mexican illegal aliens say it: yes------------us Americans are indeed racist
Insolent losers
Because this country has become very politically correct, the U.S bends over backwards to accommodate the language needs of these illegal immigrants from Mexico/Central America who speak little to no English, so that they don't feel culturally isolated while living in this country illegally. So they have alot of nerve labeling Americans as a whole as being racists. If the U.S is so extremely racist than the "no hablo Ingles crowd" should pack their suitcases and move back to their country of birth. But they won't because they are a bunch of hypocrites.
Last edited by John McClane; 05-30-2009 at 08:48 PM..
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.
