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 05-25-2010, 03:18 PM
 
768 posts, read 935,421 times
Reputation: 337

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by kerrymac View Post
This is a very dumb reply
Do you mean it is not accurate or you just don't like it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-25-2010, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Pa
20,310 posts, read 18,917,032 times
Reputation: 6517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consent Withdrawn View Post
Do you mean it is not accurate or you just don't like it?
In mans history what Nation was not formed under such circumstances?
Today there are immigration laws. Were there laws 200 years ago? 150 years ago?
Did the America's have a recognized government?
You claim that we forced the people out. Which people? They are all long dead. The peoples from Elsalvador? Pretty sure they didn't have a pass to go through comanche land. They would have been slaughtered for trying it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 03:22 PM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,168,220 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consent Withdrawn View Post
First, we acquire land by bloodshed and conquest, then once we have it, we make laws saying that nobody else can cross a line that we obtained by bloodshed and conquest. I'm just pointing out that to me the legitimacy of our borders are in question because of the very way they were obtained.

I don't see any difference if a person beat me up and stole my car and then told me it is against the law for me to try and take my car back. Anything acquired by force is a not morally justified acquisition.
Lands have been acquired by bloodshed and wars throughout history and througout the planet. Is it only the U.S. you have a problem with doing that? Another thing is that we paid 15 million dollars for those southwest territories and forgave Mexico many debts in the agreement. They signed the dotted line just like we did. We could have given them nothing for it but we didn't so don't talk about it being forced.

Once land is acquired it is the new owner's right to put a fence around it and demand that people only come with an invitation. Right now, we have the most generous legal immigration policy of any other country and in fact those from Latino countries get the second highest quotas. Asians only are allotted more by a few percentage points.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2010, 04:07 PM
 
17,286 posts, read 25,015,617 times
Reputation: 8527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Consent Withdrawn View Post
First, we acquire land by bloodshed and conquest, then once we have it, we make laws saying that nobody else can cross a line that we obtained by bloodshed and conquest. I'm just pointing out that to me the legitimacy of our borders are in question because of the very way they were obtained.
Why are the legitimacy of the borders in question?

It's how things are done in the real world. Bought, stolen or conquered, the borders of every nation on earth have been established in like manner, and we respect every nation's right and sovereignty over the land contained in their borders.

Hippie granola notions of a world without borders is cute for drum circles and Freshman sociology classes, but we're dealing with REAL policy agenda and solutions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Consent Withdrawn
I don't see any difference if a person beat me up and stole my car and then told me it is against the law for me to try and take my car back. Anything acquired by force is a not morally justified acquisition.
That's a bad analogy. The Spanish claimed far more land than they could hold on to or truly expect to exert control over (which was gained by bloodshed or untenable proclamation). When the Mexicans WON their independence (through bloodshed) from the Spanish crown, why do they get to keep the stolen land or have claims into perpetuity for that land? Going back before Spanish conquest, American indians of the Southwest are NOT the same as Aztec and Mayan Indians in present day Mexico (who, by the way, also established borders and territory through armed conflict), so that doesn't work to assert a claim to the lands of the American Southwest either.


Again, however, it doesn't mean jack crap. This is NOW, the 21st Century.
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