Obama to illegals "Don't forget who your friends are" (employment, Reed)
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.
I don't think you understand Caucuses. Membership in a Caucus does not mean that you advocate only for a specific cause. For heaven's sake, there was a 4-H Caucus. I don't think the Congressmen who belonged to that Caucus advocated only for 4-H members. Here's a list of the literally hundreds of Caucuses that have been formed by Congressional members.
I understand what Caucuses are and how many there are. However, if you read what the Hispanic caucus states, (here I'll copy it again), then I don't agree that any good can come from it:
The function of the Caucus is to serve as a forum for the Hispanic Members of Congress to coalesce around a collective legislative agenda. The Caucus is dedicated to voicing and advancing, through the legislative process, issues affecting Hispanics in the United States and Puerto Rico.
You can read the whole racist (or ethnic) thing here:
Welcome Message | Representative Nydia Velazquez | Representing the District of (http://chc.velazquez.house.gov/about/welcome-message.shtml - broken link)
This is what makes America a very divisive nation and creates polarization within the country. It's not about being an American, it's about being specifically Hispanic in the United States and Puerto Rico. This group is about Hispanics in Congress advancing Hispanics. And yes, Hispanics are also Americans, but not all Americans are, or can (nor should they have to) become, Hispanic. That is what makes it divisive.
Last edited by AlabamaStorm; 09-16-2010 at 06:03 PM..
Reason: sp
I understand what Caucuses are and how many there are. However, if you read what the Hispanic caucus states, (here I'll copy it again), then I don't agree that any good can come from it:
The function of the Caucus is to serve as a forum for the Hispanic Members of Congress to coalesce around a collective legislative agenda. The Caucus is dedicated to voicing and advancing, through the legislative process, issues affecting Hispanics in the United States and Puerto Rico.
You can read the whole racist (or ethnic) thing here:
Welcome Message | Representative Nydia Velazquez | Representing the District of (http://chc.velazquez.house.gov/about/welcome-message.shtml - broken link)
This is what makes America a very divisive nation and creates polarization within the country. It's not about being an American, it's about being specifically Hispanic in the United States and Puerto Rico. This group is about Hispanics in Congress advancing Hispanics. And yes, Hispanics are also Americans, but not all Americans are, or can (nor should they have to) become, Hispanic. That is what makes it divisive.
Excellent post! Another thing I might add is that these Hispanic Caucuses and advocacy groups are aligning themselves with illegal aliens of like ethnicity rather than with their fellow Americans and the laws of this country. You're right it is dividing our country along ethnic lines.
No, I'm not mixing apples with oranges. There are hundreds of Caucuses. The only thing a Caucus needs is for people to have something in common. Do you have a problem with an Irish Caucus? Or a Baptist Caucus? Or a Left-Handers Caucus?
What I have a problem with is ethnic/race based organizations. A Baptist nor a left-hander encompasses a certain ethnic/racial group.
What I have a problem with is ethnic/race based organizations. A Baptist nor a left-hander encompasses a certain ethnic/racial group.
A Baptist group certainly wouldn't encompass Catholics or Presbyterians or Hindus or any number of other religious groups. I would think that since your argument tends to be about eliminating bias from government, that you would actually be concerned about any bias. But evidently it is ONLY racial/ethnic bias that causes you concern. Not religious bias. Not political bias. Not sexual bias. This doesn't seem logical to me. What makes ethnic bias worse than religious bias? It's about advancing one group's interests over those of other groups, isn't it? That's bias, right? So if it was the Gay Rights Caucus, is that acceptable? More acceptable or less acceptable than the Baptist Caucus? How about the Men's Health Caucus? Shouldn't they be equally concerned with EVERYONE's health? Is the Scottish Caucus worse or better than the Hispanic Caucus?
A Baptist group certainly wouldn't encompass Catholics or Presbyterians or Hindus or any number of other religious groups. I would think that since your argument tends to be about eliminating bias from government, that you would actually be concerned about any bias. But evidently it is ONLY racial/ethnic bias that causes you concern. Not religious bias. Not political bias. Not sexual bias. This doesn't seem logical to me. What makes ethnic bias worse than religious bias? It's about advancing one group's interests over those of other groups, isn't it? That's bias, right? So if it was the Gay Rights Caucus, is that acceptable? More acceptable or less acceptable than the Baptist Caucus? How about the Men's Health Caucus? Shouldn't they be equally concerned with EVERYONE's health? Is the Scottish Caucus worse or better than the Hispanic Caucus?
The difference it that ethnic/race advocacy groups smacks of "racist" bias. Gay Rights, Bapitists or none of the others you mention has anything to do with race or ethnicity as anyone can be gay or a Baptist.
I would classify the Scottish Caucus as being as biased as the Hispanic Caucus. We don't need the diviseness of race/ethnicity in this country. You are confusing ideas, religion and lifestyle with race/ethnicity.
The difference it that ethnic/race advocacy groups smacks of "racist" bias. Gay Rights, Bapitists or none of the others you mention has anything to do with race or ethnicity as anyone can be gay or a Baptist.
I would classify the Scottish Caucus as being as biased as the Hispanic Caucus. We don't need the diviseness of race/ethnicity in this country. You are confusing ideas, religion and lifestyle with race/ethnicity.
No. I'm asking you why religious bias is okay, but ethnic bias is not okay?
You are evidently giving some biases a pass, and others not. I'm asking why?
Is it okay to discriminate on the basis of religion? On the basis of gender?
No. I'm asking you why religious bias is okay, but ethnic bias is not okay?
You are evidently giving some biases a pass, and others not. I'm asking why?
Is it okay to discriminate on the basis of religion? On the basis of gender?
I already answered your question. Religion and gender have nothing to do with race/ethnicity. Therefore there is no race bias in them as all races/ethnicities are included in them. I don't know how to make it any clearer for you.
I already answered your question. Religion and gender have nothing to do with race/ethnicity. Therefore there is no race bias in them as all races/ethnicities are included in them. I don't know how to make it any clearer for you.
Agreed, religion bias and gender bias have nothing to do with race/ethnicity.
And asking again, don't know how to make it any clearer to YOU, is religious bias and gender bias okay?
Why is religious bias okay, but ethnic bias is not?
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.
