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.
LOL Yes, his answer is no, and for a ridiculous reason when one is considering a sovereign nation, and all that it entails.
Oh, and in case you couldn't guess, MY answer is yes.
Care to go into why it's ridiculous, or should I just trust you've actually thought this through...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph_N_1962
False premise. The question isn't about natural rights it's about putting citizens first vs non citizens. Of course an illegal has natural rights but that doesnt mean they. Should be prioritized equal to citizens.
All you're doing is saying govt should prioritize w/o saying why. That doesn't make my premise false. It also isn't my premise, it's the premise of everyone who treats the Constitution as infallible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003
Well, it's "unalienable", not "inalienable". And it's in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.
So, try again.
The FF also used inalienable, which is the correct word, so I'll opt to use that bc I'm not an idiot. You can keep using unalienable and sound unarticulate and point out my unaccuracy. Live your life. Regardless, your counter was unadequate and my point still stands. Before you go cracking into anyone for unadvertent mistakes, go pick up a grammar book.
But no, the US ALWAYS shouldn't put US citizens first when you consider all the conceivable scenarios. If an asteroid was coming to Earth, I would expect the US to make preparations for its citizens and throw a lot of resources at stopping it. Is that putting US citizens first? Or splitting it up between US citizens and humanity?
But no, the US ALWAYS shouldn't put US citizens first when you consider all the conceivable scenarios. If an asteroid was coming to Earth, I would expect the US to make preparations for its citizens and throw a lot of resources at stopping it. Is that putting US citizens first? Or splitting it up between US citizens and humanity?
It's quite obvious that stopping such an asteroid is helping US citizens.
I didn't say "put US citizens first, unless it also helps others, and if it does, don't help US citizens".
I can't think of a single scenario where the US shouldn't put US citizens first.
When it comes to legal rights and protections and benefits under the law, yes. At least generally speaking. But the government should protect, for instance, everyone under its jurisdiction, to include illegal immigrants via the police state and basic human rights if you are incarcerated for a crime or being held for deportation. This should happen without regard for citizenship status.
Because I believe the question is too simple and my answer is more nuanced than the selection applies, I didn't vote.
We should take care of everyone who contributes to our country regardless of their status.
If everyone is contributing, why do we need to take care of them?
Is this one of those "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need (please ignore the overt sexism in this quote - it's from the 19th century)" beliefs?
If everyone is contributing, why do we need to take care of them?
Is this one of those "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" beliefs?
Why are we taking care of our citizens who contribute nothing.
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.
