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.
So, you advocate allowing anyone, at anytime, to just freely enter our country and go where they wish?
The mere existence of a state implies violations of human rights. I'd advocate health screens, background checks, and no quota for a six month visa kind of like I've read others on this board mention. Minimize the government involvement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyanna
Do you also advocate allowing a toddler to play in the street, for the sake of "freedom of movement?"
Do you really see yourself as a toddler and the government as your parent?
Yes, it is. Human rights aren't bestowed on you by a government, they are infringed upon by them. Something that creeps in whenever you have a governing state with borders but who's impact should be minimized according to most libertarians.
"Human rights are "basic rights and freedoms that all people are entitled to regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, race, religion, language, or other status."[1] Human rights are conceived as universal and egalitarian, with all people having equal rights by virtue of being human." From wiki
Immigration laws and policies are also set by our individual governments. Why would they make them if it is in direct conflict with your claim of human rights bestowed by government? All countries have borders and soveriegn rights to protect them from illegal entry. You are mixing apples and oranges here claiming that some so-called human rights nullifies a country's borders.
You'll be another one I will add to my ignore list. I refuse to read this kind of nonsense anymore.
Immigration laws and policies are also set by our individual governments. Why would they make them if it is in direct conflict with your claim of human rights bestowed by government? All countries have borders and soveriegn rights to protect them from illegal entry. You are mixing apples and oranges here claiming that some so-called human rights nullifies a country's borders.
Like I said multiple times, human rights are not bestowed by governments. They are mine by virtue of being human. And nowhere did I say anything about nullifying anything. Other than those misconceptions, I did enjoy the part about the fruit.
Immigration laws and policies are also set by our individual governments. Why would they make them if it is in direct conflict with your claim of human rights bestowed by government? All countries have borders and soveriegn rights to protect them from illegal entry. You are mixing apples and oranges here claiming that some so-called human rights nullifies a country's borders.
I'm not fully disagreeing since I don't believe that natural rights exist, but your bolded is weird.
First, he doesn't believe human rights are bestowed by government. Second, do you really not believe that the government is capable of producing laws that trample on various rights that you believe we either have or should have? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?
I'm not fully disagreeing since I don't believe that natural rights exist, but your bolded is weird.
First, he doesn't believe human rights are bestowed by government. Second, do you really not believe that the government is capable of producing laws that trample on various rights that you believe we either have or should have? Or am I misinterpreting your statement?
I believe chicagonut has me on ignore, bit ten dollars says that when you inevitably bring up slavery as an example she responds with, "That's in the past, those people are dead, I'm not responsible for their actions"
I'd just like to reiterate how surprised a lot of you would be if you found out how far from "typical democrat/liberal" many of the open immigration people in this forum are.
"Human rights are "basic rights and freedoms that all people are entitled to regardless of nationality, sex, national or ethnic origin, race, religion, language, or other status."[1] Human rights are conceived as universal and egalitarian, with all people having equal rights by virtue of being human." From wiki
Basic Human Rights are to be protected by each Government of each Sovereign Nation for its occupants which are Life, Liberty and Security of Person. For the purpose as intended by the wiki link the UNCHR is used. Liberty is the freedom from Slavery and Servitude, while Security of Person merely means that he/she has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
So, let me get this straight. You think the illegals wouldn't jump at a chance to come legally, or were waiting in line when they said screw it my family needs money?
Please cite the source for your assertion that they were waiting in line. And, if true, how does that justify illegal entry?
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.
