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.
As far as my opinion of speaking in another language in public, who cares. If it doesn't concern me then no big deal. Now I do think there's situations where it's rude, such as co-workers speaking another language or if you're at someone's house and a group of people start speaking in another language excluding you. I've been in those situations and it's uncomfortable and IMHO, rude.
I agree with both parts of this. That seems like a pretty solid compromise position for interpersonal relations.
The trickier part is when language leads to self-segregation on a societal level. Obviously overt discrimination is wrong..period. But, if people society voluntary segregates along preferred language lines that clearly will have some negative ramifications.
They are only citizens by a PC policy it's not based on the writings of our Constitution. Either way, they are still a "product" of illegal immigration and are "naturally" costing us billions of dollars. If their parents hadn't come here illegally they wouldn't be giving birth on our soil.
Mute point and again wrong. How they got here is not the issue and please read the first line of the 14th amendment which is commonly called the citizen clause.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
So your argument that its not based on "constitution" is false.
In Ecuador, where I used to live, English is taught almost universally in schools. Their kids are better at English than our kids in a second language, generally. English is useful to tour guides, bureaucrats, etc. not to mention immigration. So they're happy to practice it. They're also relieved and happy when foreigners can speak reasonably well in Spanish.
My wife of 18 years is a naturalized U.S. citizen from Ecuador, with a heavy accent. She had to pass a U.S. and Arizona Constitutions test for a certificate. It was hard. She studied a lot, two books in particular, and passed. She blows me away on Constitutional knowledge now. If these guys heard her talk in WalMart, they'd think, "Illegal." Can't make it up. Just incredible. They think they're talking about generic people, that nobody knows in real life.
Interesting. When did this universal English language instruction become a part of the curriculum? No one knew English, when I was working there. Is that something Correa initiated? Now the populace can understand the conversation all the North American expats in Ecuador have with each other, lol.
I think everyone who moves to a country with a language different from theirs should make every effort to learn the language of that country. However, not everyone can learn at the same rate. Also, it can be very fatiguing trying to speak only in a new language. Finally, nobody is the language police with authority to harass someone else for speaking his or her native tongue. That’s horrible and abusive.
It’s also funny coming from Americans who are notorious the world over for being able to speak only one language. Some of that inability is not their fault, but some of it is.
I agree with this first paragraph and have said similar comments in prev. posts. If a person has been living in a foreign country (Englishman barely knows Japanese while living in Japan, for example) for over a year and barely can hold a basic conservation using 1 of that country's main languages, they might have some low priorities.
Interesting little fact, our Founding Fathers thought about making an official national language. We would have had English, German, and French as national languages. We'd all end up having to know three. They decided that it was unwise to have a national language though.
Anyway, I still contend making the speaking of foreign languages illegal would violate the First Amendment. Arguments that it's a matter of national security or even protect us from crime are basically making the same argument that those who want to ban guns make. It's a slippery slope and it's unconstitutional.
As for it being rude or irritating, that's a personal thing. There are a lot of things I find rude and irritating, but I don't think it's a good idea to make them illegal. I don't want to live in a country where the government is breathing down my back making rules about every little thing someone might be offended by. Less government intervention into people's personal lives, the better.
Those who want to make it illegal are having an emotional reaction. Stop and think about it. Aside from violating the Constitution, have you thought about how we are going to pay to enforce such a law? Are we going to have listening devices all around to listen in and ticket people who are talking another language? Hire more police to monitor people? And who is going to pay? Where is the money coming from? Laws don't enforce themselves. If it's really a matter of illegal immigration wouldn't the money be better spend on boarder security than snooping into people's personal conversations on the streets? Would you take money from boarder security to give to the language police.
And where do you draw the line? Is it foreign languages? Is, say German in Pennsylvania where the Amish speak German considered "foreign" even if they've been using it all their lives for generations? Do they get dinged for speaking German to themselves when walking to Church (they would be in a public space)? What about people who are speaking English, but it's so technical or full of jargon and slang that it can't be understood by a layman? Does that count as foreign because it sounds like gibberish or you can't understand it so it may be a security threat?
There are a lot of things in this world that may irritate someone. You might think it's rude and wish people didn't do it. That's your business and you have every right to think and feel that way. I don't really listen to or pay attention to what other people are talking about to their family and friends when I am at the mall, but I personally hate people it when people walk too slow in those places. I find it very rude when people all walk abreast walking the speed of 90-year-old ladies (when they aren't 90-year-old ladies). I just suck it up. It's irritating, sure. Is it worth passing laws, enforcing them, infringing on people's rights, spending tax payer money to do so just so I am not triggered, no. There are more important things to worry about in this country. Same with language people are speaking.
Mute point and again wrong. How they got here is not the issue and please read the first line of the 14th amendment which is commonly called the citizen clause.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
So your argument that its not based on "constitution" is false.
So now this "PC"??
Your clue is "and" subject to the jurisdiction". Illegal aliens aren't subject to our jurisdiction they are subject to their own country's jurisdiction. Yes, it is an issue that illegal aliens come here and give birth on our soil and their kids are allotted our birthright citizenship by PC policy only. Not to mention all the costs ensured by it.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.
The correct interpretation of the 14[SIZE=2]th[/SIZE] Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby.
Your clue is "and" subject to the jurisdiction". Illegal aliens aren't subject to our jurisdiction they are subject to their own country's jurisdiction. Yes, it is an issue that illegal aliens come here and give birth on our soil and their kids are allotted our birthright citizenship by PC policy only. Not to mention all the costs ensured by it.
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.
The correct interpretation of the 14[SIZE=2]th[/SIZE] Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby.
Interesting little fact, our Founding Fathers thought about making an official national language. We would have had English, German, and French as national languages. We'd all end up having to know three. They decided that it was unwise to have a national language though.
Anyway, I still contend making the speaking of foreign languages illegal would violate the First Amendment. Arguments that it's a matter of national security or even protect us from crime are basically making the same argument that those who want to ban guns make. It's a slippery slope and it's unconstitutional.
As for it being rude or irritating, that's a personal thing. There are a lot of things I find rude and irritating, but I don't think it's a good idea to make them illegal. I don't want to live in a country where the government is breathing down my back making rules about every little thing someone might be offended by. Less government intervention into people's personal lives, the better.
Those who want to make it illegal are having an emotional reaction. Stop and think about it. Aside from violating the Constitution, have you thought about how we are going to pay to enforce such a law? Are we going to have listening devices all around to listen in and ticket people who are talking another language? Hire more police to monitor people? And who is going to pay? Where is the money coming from? Laws don't enforce themselves. If it's really a matter of illegal immigration wouldn't the money be better spend on boarder security than snooping into people's personal conversations on the streets? Would you take money from boarder security to give to the language police.
And where do you draw the line? Is it foreign languages? Is, say German in Pennsylvania where the Amish speak German considered "foreign" even if they've been using it all their lives for generations? Do they get dinged for speaking German to themselves when walking to Church (they would be in a public space)? What about people who are speaking English, but it's so technical or full of jargon and slang that it can't be understood by a layman? Does that count as foreign because it sounds like gibberish or you can't understand it so it may be a security threat?
There are a lot of things in this world that may irritate someone. You might think it's rude and wish people didn't do it. That's your business and you have every right to think and feel that way. I don't really listen to or pay attention to what other people are talking about to their family and friends when I am at the mall, but I personally hate people it when people walk too slow in those places. I find it very rude when people all walk abreast walking the speed of 90-year-old ladies (when they aren't 90-year-old ladies). I just suck it up. It's irritating, sure. Is it worth passing laws, enforcing them, infringing on people's rights, spending tax payer money to do so just so I am not triggered, no. There are more important things to worry about in this country. Same with language people are speaking.
Just who in this forum has stated that we should make speaking a foreign language in public illegal?
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.
