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 are insecure about what? To want our immigration laws respected and enforced is to be insecure? Guess every country's citizens in the world are insecure then since they want the same thing for their countries.
Someone coming in here flinging the race card should expect to be attacked by the wolves.
Oh, so you use one person's anti-"immigrant" sentiments (link please) as an example of the majority of those who aren't anti-immigrant but anti-illegal alien instead? Of course your side will call Americans who want a reduction in legal immigration as being "anti-immigrant" also. If I am asked to eat 6 apples at one sitting and I can only eat 2 does that make me anti-apples?
If you actually read my post wehre I used the term anti-immigrant, I was not saying anyone here was that or labels themselves that.Here, I will quote myself...
Quote:
regardless of if they fit into Blumenbach's original idea of race based on physical attributes like craniofacial anthropology and such or if you use the definition of race embraced by anti-immigrationist like Stoddard.
The only person I called anti-immigrationist was Stoddard. Yet, instead of reading what I actaully wrote, y'all read the word anti-immigrationist and flipped out. I assumed you were here to debate, meaning you must want to hear the other side. That's what makes this a debate and not a conversation or a back-patting session. But if you refuse to read what I actually write, how can this debate go anywhere?
I didn't fling the race card, nor call anyone racist. Y'all were debating the definition of race and what constitutes racism, and I gave my opinion. Again, stop being so insecure and defensive and start debating.
The open borders crowd generally throws out the race card anytime anyone suggests that people of other countries respect our laws. If someone doesn't want to bring the over 2 billion impoverished people into the USA for the taxpayers to support, the pro-open borders crowd which wants UNLIMITED immigration especially by poor people, considers that it must be racism.
If someone doesn't think all our major cities must be quadrupled in size and our national forests plowed under to build housing projects for all the poor people who want to live the great life in the USA, the unlimited immigration types will claim it's only racism that would make someone not want to see the population of the USA increase ten-fold in a matter of a few years.
To the bolded, that may be so in your opinion, but you can't debate in generalizations. You have to debate what people actually say. Should I generalize you as the anti-immigration crowd? Or shoudl I take you at your word for just being someone who believes that immigrants should come here legally?
I would love to actually debate this issue, but as I have been accused of twisting people's words, the one's twsting anythign are those who continue to debate stereotypes and generalizations rather then what is actually said. Why don;t you stop debating the "types" and start debating the actual people on this thread?
To answer your point, I don't think we should have unlimited immigration and I don't think anyone is racist for not wanting such. I just disagree with where the focus should be in this "war on illegal immigration".
Then turn it around. Exactly why should there be unlimited immigration? How will having the USA be the only nation in the world with no immigration laws, no borders benefit the American people? Especially with our unemployment rates now up to 10%?
Exactly how is it great for people to keep showing up here by the semi-trailers to take jobs at any low wage just to get their foot here and then qualify for food stamps and whatever government handouts needed to maintain large families and their high birth rate?
Should we just send ships out to every continent to load them up with people who want out of poverty? Keep in mind there are over 2 billion impoverished people throughout the world. If getting to the USA is the only answer then isn't it only fair that we provide them all the means to get here?
Tell us exactly why we should be taxed to death to provide the food stamps, the free health care, the free housing and everything the low wage immigrants in unlimited numbers will need in order to live here considering our very high costs of living. And we all know that those coming for the dirt low wages cannot afford their larger than normal families with our costs of living, nor can we expect them to ever learn our language which will keep them at lower wage scales. But again - exactly how does this benefit the American people, especially the American taxpayer?
To the bolded, that may be so in your opinion, but you can't debate in generalizations. You have to debate what people actually say. Should I generalize you as the anti-immigration crowd? Or shoudl I take you at your word for just being someone who believes that immigrants should come here legally?
I would love to actually debate this issue, but as I have been accused of twisting people's words, the one's twsting anythign are those who continue to debate stereotypes and generalizations rather then what is actually said. Why don;t you stop debating the "types" and start debating the actual people on this thread?
To answer your point, I don't think we should have unlimited immigration and I don't think anyone is racist for not wanting such. I just disagree with where the focus should be in this "war on illegal immigration".
Where does it say this is a forum to "debate" an issue of illegal immigration?
How can you have a "debate" on whether laws should be followed or not?
You are either for the rule of law or you're not. Illegal immigration is WRONG - period.
To the bolded, that may be so in your opinion, but you can't debate in generalizations. You have to debate what people actually say. Should I generalize you as the anti-immigration crowd? Or shoudl I take you at your word for just being someone who believes that immigrants should come here legally?
I would love to actually debate this issue, but as I have been accused of twisting people's words, the one's twsting anythign are those who continue to debate stereotypes and generalizations rather then what is actually said. Why don;t you stop debating the "types" and start debating the actual people on this thread?
To answer your point, I don't think we should have unlimited immigration and I don't think anyone is racist for not wanting such. I just disagree with where the focus should be in this "war on illegal immigration".
I believe there are people who feel they would fit with another country - another people and so should relocate. For example, I know former Americans who fell in love with another country (Spain in particular) and so emigrated there.
And there are people who truly desire to be part of the American people. They WANT to be part of our people, they want to learn English, learn our customs, our history. They have the desire and the ability and can adapt to our ways. It's more than about the money or the materialism, they truly like this country and it's people.
So no - I'm not anti-immigrant when it's this kind of immigrant. But there are those who wish to do nothing at all for their own country, they see the money, the materialism, the government programs here, this is the easy life, the love our money but they don't love much else, have no desire to learn our language and adapt to our ways.
To very many immigration to the USA is just a get-rich-quick plan. They intend to keep their own culture and even want us to adapt to their culture.
They believe they should not be expected to abide by our laws, they see no need in an orderly lawful process. They believe they have the right over all others to get here and get theirs. They despise the legal immigrant who patiently follows the legal process and they view him as just some chump - they intend to be given the easy route to US citizenship and all the financial rewards but should not follow any legal process.
To the bolded, that may be so in your opinion, but you can't debate in generalizations. You have to debate what people actually say. Should I generalize you as the anti-immigration crowd? Or shoudl I take you at your word for just being someone who believes that immigrants should come here legally?
I would love to actually debate this issue, but as I have been accused of twisting people's words, the one's twsting anythign are those who continue to debate stereotypes and generalizations rather then what is actually said. Why don;t you stop debating the "types" and start debating the actual people on this thread?
To answer your point, I don't think we should have unlimited immigration and I don't think anyone is racist for not wanting such. I just disagree with where the focus should be in this "war on illegal immigration".
So am I correct in believing you want illegals to be allowed to come in unlimited numbers and demand their reward of citizenship, be moved to the front of the line ahead of all those many would-be legal immigrants?
Illegals are better somehow than legal immigrants? More worthy of instant US citizenship so they can get the good jobs, the free college educations?
Or do you want no limits placed on illegal immigration because they are the cheap labor for the elites and CEO's who don't believe in paying decent wages and benefits to attract workers? In that case, it's the employers who shouldnt' have to abide by laws?
The open borders crowd generally throws out the race card anytime anyone suggests that people of other countries respect our laws. If someone doesn't want to bring the over 2 billion impoverished people into the USA for the taxpayers to support, the pro-open borders crowd which wants UNLIMITED immigration especially by poor people, considers that it must be racism.
If someone doesn't think all our major cities must be quadrupled in size and our national forests plowed under to build housing projects for all the poor people who want to live the great life in the USA, the unlimited immigration types will claim it's only racism that would make someone not want to see the population of the USA increase ten-fold in a matter of a few years.
Again, you are going off on rhetoric which has nothing to do with my comments. I don't remember calling you racist, so did I?? I've called a few people here "quite possibly prejudiced," but only for good reason... I don't think everyone who supports border control is racist, especially considering many of those supporters are foreign-born themselves. But I DO recognize prejudices where they exist, and feel people deserved to be called out in those cases. I don't remember hearing anything specifically prejudiced from you, hence the reason I have not accused you of that. So why are you even arguing with me? I think we agree on more than you realize.
Since everyone here seems to have forgotten the OT, I'll remind you... a woman came on and described a few scenarios, asking for ADVICE on whether these could be perceived as prejudiced. I (and a few others) replied honestly and openly, explaining how a few of them could be seen that way. I never said people who oppose illegal immigration are prejudiced, and I never even stated my exact position on the issue. If you want to rant about immigration in general, you have the WHOLE rest of this sub-forum to do that - but this specific thread is not about that. Okay?
Where does it say this is a forum to "debate" an issue of illegal immigration?
Ummmmm... this is a FORUM, which essentially means a place for debate and open discussion. You can still debate legal issues, in case you haven't noticed from the THOUSANDS of posts on marijuana legalization, abortion, gay marriage - heck, even incest has been debated on the P&OC forum. Abortion is legal, and yet there's a 100+ page debate on that very issue going on right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opyelie
You are either for the rule of law or you're not. Illegal immigration is WRONG - period.
But for everyone who says *insert issue* is WRONG - period, there will be a hundred people ready & willing to explain why they disagree. If you weren't prepared for that, why are you posting on a forum? Why not just read about the topic, and discuss it privately with people who agree with you?
There are certain topics I refuse to debate, like the existence of a god, because I know it's something where I don't care to hear opposing views - plus it's a futile discussion in most cases. Instead I just read about the subject when the mood strikes, and restrict my religious debates to the synagogue. Makes sense to me, but I guess some people like to argue for the sake of arguing.
Last edited by gizmo980; 01-02-2011 at 03:13 AM..
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.
