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 06-04-2010, 12:26 AM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,611 posts, read 10,975,847 times
Reputation: 3084

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Creole View Post
I'll run circles around you in English and Spanish. I think it's time you learn how to spell in English. Aren't you an immigrant yourself?
There's a difference between a typo and a spelling mistake, but I can't expect you to know that.

Yes, I am a LEGAL migrant.

Next?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:28 AM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,611 posts, read 10,975,847 times
Reputation: 3084
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
Not necessarily in all cases. There are cases where federal law will dominate. I'm not saying this is necessarily one of them; that is to be determined by lawyers and judges. It can require a lot of knowledge of Constitutional law and precedents. The point is just that these things are not necessarily as black and white as you may think.
well that was why I said in parentheses federal/state conflicts being equal yada yada
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:32 AM
 
53 posts, read 21,109 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie View Post
There's a difference between a typo and a spelling mistake, but I can't expect you to know that.

Yes, I am a LEGAL migrant.

Next?
An immigrant complaining about other immigrants. Someone with poor grammar complaining about grammar. Unbelievable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:35 AM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
12,920 posts, read 10,254,348 times
Reputation: 11569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie View Post
well that was why I said in parentheses federal/state conflicts being equal yada yada
In that case, it should be obvious to you why the federal government would DARE to challenge the law. This is the case of a federal/state conflict. The boycotts are just sensationalist window dressing; the real Constitutionality and federal-state precedent should and will be determined in court.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:40 AM
 
351 posts, read 395,267 times
Reputation: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by borderlord View Post
WRONG !

Separation of church and state was mentioned in a letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists....not the Constitution.

And of course, Article 1, section 8 ( I believe) does mention "states rights" and the limitations of the feds...so I'll do some research on "states rights" to see what they are...

BL
Article I Sec. 8 are enumerated powers to Congress. The 10th Amendment "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." is the basis for "state's rights".

Naturalization is an enumerated power: "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization..." Therefore, there are no states rights with respect to immigration. Federal supersedes and preempts states laws.

It is pretty clear that the intent of the Establishment clause was to keep government out of the business of the church and not prefer one faith over another. It did create a separation between church and the state and that's been to the benefit of the church. Look at how the church has grown here and the religiosity expressed in daily life. Regular church attendance is much higher here than in most industrialized western nations because the church and state have been separated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:43 AM
 
Location: Spokane via Sydney,Australia
6,611 posts, read 10,975,847 times
Reputation: 3084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kid Creole View Post
An immigrant complaining about other immigrants. Someone with poor grammar complaining about grammar. Unbelievable.
Yet again, your logic is flawed - a LEGAL immigrant adding to the weight of opinions regarding ILLEGAL aliens.

You're not that bright are you?

As far as my grammar goes, this is a forum not an academic dissertation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:50 AM
 
53 posts, read 21,109 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie View Post
Yet again, your logic is flawed - a LEGAL immigrant adding to the weight of opinions regarding ILLEGAL aliens.

You're not that bright are you?

As far as my grammar goes, this is a forum not an academic dissertation.
Bright enough to know that legal immigrant = resident ALIEN, past or present. Be careful the words you throw around, they might apply to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:54 AM
 
Location: California
706 posts, read 797,569 times
Reputation: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by mauiwowie View Post
Article I Sec. 8 are enumerated powers to Congress. The 10th Amendment "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." is the basis for "state's rights".

Naturalization is an enumerated power: "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization..." Therefore, there are no states rights with respect to immigration. Federal supersedes and preempts states laws.

It is pretty clear that the intent of the Establishment clause was to keep government out of the business of the church and not prefer one faith over another. It did create a separation between church and the state and that's been to the benefit of the church. Look at how the church has grown here and the religiosity expressed in daily life. Regular church attendance is much higher here than in most industrialized western nations because the church and state have been separated.
My original post stands...Separation of church and state was mentioned in a letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists....not the Constitution.

The kid has yet to respond.

While Your response is much more informitive, and a worthy one at that...it leaves others to respond to a statement made by kid troll....He should be able to back up his/her posts of supposed facts.

But, thanks anyway

Regards,

BL



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:58 AM
 
53 posts, read 21,109 times
Reputation: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by borderlord View Post
My original post stands...Separation of church and state was mentioned in a letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists....not the Constitution.

The kid has yet to respond.

While Your response is much more informitive, and a worthy one at that...it leaves others to respond to a statement made by kid troll....He should be able to back up his/her posts of supposed facts.

But, thanks anyway

Regards,

BL


The first Amendment of the Constitution explicitly prohibits the state from establishing any religion. Anyone with a half a brain understands this to mean separation of Church and state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2010, 12:59 AM
 
Location: Fort Wayne
470 posts, read 963,150 times
Reputation: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie View Post
How DARE these other states (or even the POTUS for that matter) seek to bring down another state's sovereign rights to govern as they see fit?

It is up to the Arizona legislature to make laws to govern their own citizens. It is not up to other states to do this (all federal/state conflicts being equal yada yada) and these protests and so called boycotts just serve to make those states look foolish in the extreme.

Perhaps Az should start telling oh, let me think, Ca and others how to run THEIR states?

There was a war..and a series of laws in the 1960's that handled that.
Perhaps you missed the memo...
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