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.
1- Are those my only two choices? Funny that those are the ONLY two possible conclusions that you can allow me.
Some of OUR immigration laws COULD be wrong...along with SOME of our MANY other laws. I believe that's why our constitution allows for some change (if I'm not mistaken). Sorry, my answer was not either "A" or "B", but "D" "none of the above". But thanks for trying to help me figure out MY answers to your questions!
I care about poor and hungry American's as much as I care for poor and hungry everybody.
Maybe "we should put illegal foreginers above our own citizens according to some", but I bet those "some" are a lot less than you suspect. And I am not ONE of those "SOME".
It's interesting to me, what you choose to ignore from my posts and what you choose to focus on.
Just what did I ignore in your posts? You can care about all the world's needy you want and that is fine but it still comes down to a choice. Do we retain or import millions of foreigners if it means a negative impact on our own? You apparently have ignored that part of "my" posts.
Yes, laws can be changed but what would be the reason to change our immigration laws/quotas since they are already based on what I stated? Giving amnesty to any of these illegals would negate our already sensible and sane quotas/policies. Our immigration laws also take into account our population growth. All of your views are based on the needs of foreingers rather than our citizens. Is it possible that you aren't a citizen of this country or have an ethocentric interest in this? Just asking.
Speaking of only offering one option. Why is your option only to grant them amnesty rather than them returning to their homelands to fix them instead? Since your views are based strictly on compassion for foreingers how many more do you think we can take in in order to not be called heartless? 20 more million, 50 or even more? When does it end?
Last edited by chicagonut; 12-08-2011 at 03:18 PM..
Hopefully my last post on this topic, just to answer the questions that were asked of me.
I think I may have gotten SoEdible confused with some other members when I came to the conclusion that he is a biggot.
I don't agree that being black means a person isn't capable of being a biggot, but that's a whole other subject.
And to answer the question about where I came up with the question about gay marriage...The trigger word for me was "special treatment". I may have had that topic on my mind already, and then I saw those words, which I've seen used in the passed by people who object to gay marriage. So, that's how I came up with that. If I was off base on that, again, I apologize.
I don't like it when people make quick assumptions, so I need to be able to apologize, when I get called out after I've been guilty of the same.
You don't have to apologize. I just didn't think it was right to assume that I was against gay marriage. Yeah, we pretty much are very open about our opinions in this sub-forum.
Hispanic is a very poor identifier for the group you are referring to. We are not homogeneous and fact quite fractured based on culture and racial origins. We are not blacks who have fairly well fused a common identity by virtue of skin color.
No Hispanic would accept a Latino as part of their category and the latter are the actual group in question who raise the illegal immigration related issues.
I'm going to ignore your comment about "Blacks."
But anyway, ...
I am using the definition and concept of "Hispanic" that the writer of that article and the mainstream U.S. society uses. The truth is that the majority of the U.S. doesn't understand the term Hispanic.
So, I already know about the whole Hispanic-as-a-term debate and I know about it because I am very familiar with Hispanic people and grew up around many different groups who would be considered Hispanic.
I am not equating to anything. I am saying that people tend to vote for issues that they deem important int their live. That is what it is regardless of how you feel or what you think. Some people do believe to give legal residency to these people. That is they right think that way whether you or I disagree. That is the point, not arguing the status of them. Take care.
And that is my point. Answer the question of: Why is immigration (ILLEGAL immigration) important for these so-called "Hispanics?"
Answer that and you will see that it is race-centered. We don't really have Hispanics that are the ones who care about that the most. Let's be honest and say that it is Mexicans ... El Salvadorians, Guatemalans. These are the ones who are leading the pro-illegal immigrant fight.
It is lobbying based on race. Like I said earlier, I don't think that is right for any group. The country should promote that. Why do the politicians accept votes as they race-bait? President Obama (whom I don't agree with politically, but respect) goes to the Black Caucus and says ONE THING, then he goes to the Hispanic Caucus and says another. I think all of that is wrong.
Then you have your groups like La Raza and it all becomes obvious that these so-called Hispanic groups are rallying for political, social and economical control for "their people." That is a threat. That promotes and encourages separation, that is a threat to all others. When you have millions of illegal immigrants who will join that party, that's a problem.
Thank you for bringing the topic back to your original question. I hear what your saying about lobbying based on race. And it's refeshing to see someone that isn't hypocritical on an issue, by saying you think it's wrong for any group. I can see where you might thing it's a bad think, but I'm still not sure that I can completely agree.
First, we all know that this is the way it is. I don't think that pointing out the flaw will ever change it (but I know that's beside the point - just felt the need to say it).
I am trying to think of how to explain why I feel that special interest groups might not always be a bad thing. Forgive me for being so middle of the road here, but to my way of thinking situations are rarely "always" good or bad, right or wrong etc.
I think that these small but vocal groups can be a postive thing, because sometimes they are able to bring attention to things that might otherwise be ignored or overlooked.
I don't doubt that sombody will come along and tear apart my example, but the first thing that comes to my mind is the handicap population. I don't know how it evolved, but because somebody had the intitiative to make a big deal about it, we now have handicap accessible buildings and parking spaces. I know there are probably some people out there who object to this, but personally I think it's a good thing.
"Special treatment"? Maybe. So what? I genuinely do not have an issue with some people getting "special treatment" in certain situations.
chicagonut,
My apologies I will have to get back to your questions tomorrow. I answered them earlier, but must have hit a wrong button, because I lost everything I had typed out. I got frustrated, then had to make dinner for my family, and now it's time to take a break.
Y'all enjoy your evening. These arguments and problems will still be here in the morning!
I will quickly answer 1 question now. I was born and raised in the United States. I know how to speak a little bit of Spanish. I have no close relatives in any Hispanic countries, but I am sure I have some distant relatives there. 2nd or 3rd cousins.
Thank you for bringing the topic back to your original question. I hear what your saying about lobbying based on race. And it's refeshing to see someone that isn't hypocritical on an issue, by saying you think it's wrong for any group. I can see where you might thing it's a bad think, but I'm still not sure that I can completely agree.
First, we all know that this is the way it is. I don't think that pointing out the flaw will ever change it (but I know that's beside the point - just felt the need to say it).
I am trying to think of how to explain why I feel that special interest groups might not always be a bad thing. Forgive me for being so middle of the road here, but to my way of thinking situations are rarely "always" good or bad, right or wrong etc.
I think that these small but vocal groups can be a postive thing, because sometimes they are able to bring attention to things that might otherwise be ignored or overlooked.
I don't doubt that sombody will come along and tear apart my example, but the first thing that comes to my mind is the handicap population. I don't know how it evolved, but because somebody had the intitiative to make a big deal about it, we now have handicap accessible buildings and parking spaces. I know there are probably some people out there who object to this, but personally I think it's a good thing.
"Special treatment"? Maybe. So what? I genuinely do not have an issue with some people getting "special treatment" in certain situations.
chicagonut,
My apologies I will have to get back to your questions tomorrow. I answered them earlier, but must have hit a wrong button, because I lost everything I had typed out. I got frustrated, then had to make dinner for my family, and now it's time to take a break.
Y'all enjoy your evening. These arguments and problems will still be here in the morning!
I will quickly answer 1 question now. I was born and raised in the United States. I know how to speak a little bit of Spanish. I have no close relatives in any Hispanic countries, but I am sure I have some distant relatives there. 2nd or 3rd cousins.
Your analogies are mind boggling. Nothing you have posted yet equates to advocating for illegal aliens in our country. Illegal aliens nor those who advocate for them should get any special treatment. Our immigration laws are in place for a reason. There is no justification for breaking them or defending those who do.
Your analogies are mind boggling. Nothing you have posted yet equates to advocating for illegal aliens in our country. Illegal aliens nor those who advocate for them should get any special treatment. Our immigration laws are in place for a reason. There is no justification for breaking them or defending those who do.
Allright, then quit wasting both of our time reading my posts. You are FREE to ignore me. That one wasn't directed at you.
Of course you are also FREE to read whatever you want and say whatever you want, but at this point, I've decided that it is definitely a waste of MY time to have a conversation with you, as you are determined ONLY to find fault with anything I post.
Allright, then quit wasting both of our time reading my posts. You are FREE to ignore me. That one wasn't directed at you.
Of course you are also FREE to read whatever you want and say whatever you want, but at this point, I've decided that it is definitely a waste of MY time to have a conversation with you, as you are determined ONLY to find fault with anything I post.
Have a great day.
I find fault with anyone who advocates for the destruction of our country via illegal immigration. It isn't just you. You can't defend or justify your position or address any of my valid points so you don't want to debate anymore. That's fine with me as this isn't the first time a pro-illegal got frustrated knowing full well that they are wrong and couldn't defend the undefensible.
I will give you credit for remaining civil, however. You also have a great day.
I find fault with anyone who advocates for the destruction of our country via illegal immigration. It isn't just you. You can't defend or justify your position or address any of my valid points so you don't want to debate anymore. That's fine with me as this isn't the first time a pro-illegal got frustrated knowing full well that they are wrong and couldn't defend the undefensible.
I will give you credit for remaining civil, however. You also have a great day.
I have defended and justified my position. You choose to read everything anyone has to say on the opposite side of the subject with your bias.
I dont waste my time trying to change the mind of somebody who has no interested in openly "listening" to the other point of view. You list or read long enough to quickly throw out a comback. That's fine. That's your perogitive. If my choosing to to waste my time any longer gives you cause to pat yourself on the back and give you some sense of superiority...Have at it! But please don't think it is because I know "full well that I am wrong".
I clearly don't have as much time to sit in front of my computer as you do, and when i do, I prefer to focus on things that aren't a complete waste of my time.
Usually progress is made when people can listen to eachother and find a working compromise. Not when people are married to their own point of view and refuse to meet eachother half way.
Thanks for the acknowledement of my abilility to stay civil. It can be a challenge sometimes on these forums!
Time to do another chore and run another errand. Enjoy your day.
I have defended and justified my position. You choose to read everything anyone has to say on the opposite side of the subject with your bias.
I dont waste my time trying to change the mind of somebody who has no interested in openly "listening" to the other point of view. You list or read long enough to quickly throw out a comback. That's fine. That's your perogitive. If my choosing to to waste my time any longer gives you cause to pat yourself on the back and give you some sense of superiority...Have at it! But please don't think it is because I know "full well that I am wrong".
I clearly don't have as much time to sit in front of my computer as you do, and when i do, I prefer to focus on things that aren't a complete waste of my time.
Usually progress is made when people can listen to eachother and find a working compromise. Not when people are married to their own point of view and refuse to meet eachother half way.
Thanks for the acknowledement of my abilility to stay civil. It can be a challenge sometimes on these forums! And of course YOU aren't biased, just me, right?
Time to do another chore and run another errand. Enjoy your day.
Your defenses for illegal immigration however are not viable. I can say that red is black but that doesn't make it so. Of course you aren't biased in your views just me, right?
I have listened to the other point of view from you and others like you. Sorry, I can't get past the facts that illegal immigration has caused job losses for Americans, higher taxes, increased crime rates including stolen identities, overcrowded schools, jails and hospitals and the depletion our our natural and other resources. I certainly can't get pass the fact that illegal immigration is against the law and that the last amnesty only increased the number of illegals coming here. If you have a viable argument against all of the above please post it.
If being concerned about the soveirngty of our borders and the safety and livelyhood of my fellow Americans makes me superior then so be it. I take back my compliment of you remaining civil from your above statements. Bye, and have a nice life.
Last edited by chicagonut; 12-09-2011 at 08:22 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.
