Immigration

[Violet]

---

No, because my house is insured, if someone tries to squat, I'm covered for that. So I have to live somewhere else temporarily. So what? I'd much rather that than live the rest of my life as a murderer.

You say this as if the murder of theives is to be discouraged.

And whatever happened to "my house: my rules"? You mean to say that it is infact not your house they broke into, but a government's house, since it is the government you call on to protect it for you. You own nothing that you cannot control. If you fail to adequately control a thing, then that thing is no longer yours (if it even was in the first place).

Secondly, the analogy is flawed anyway. If someone "makes your house their own", you can't live there anymore. Not so with immigration.
Ownership of a house is very simple, by one person. The running of your house can be controlled by you alone. Not so with a country, that's called a dictatorship, and they tend to be rather unpleasant places to live.

You can live in a house that someone makes their own. You live in a house right now, don't you? Do you own that house? I sincerely doubt this. I bet some government owns it and calls it 'property' which you may then borrow from them with money. Money runs out or someone with more money buys it? Good bye house.

Are you seriously advocating killing in the name of protecting an arbitrary line on a map?

Yes. America established that there are infact boundaries, it set where they are, and then it fails to adequately defend them to the point that unsanctioned immigration from across our border is an issue?

Don't make claims to property you are unwilling to defend or incapable of defending... a more concentrated force will observe your weakness and take whatever it wants from you.

---

1)Ok no fundamental link between the patriotically colloquial phrase "Home of the free" and perceived societal freedom? I beg to disagree, freedom from opression is a common theme in the US and lends quite a lot to our patriotism. I am in no way saying people can't be free to express disagreement with govmt. , it's also a founding principle of this country. However disagreeing with policy and protesting it is fine. But is it produective to do it while refusing to even pretend to contribute to the society you're protesting and actively attack the national pride?

No sense of irony that people claim that their rights/constitution is what makes them free when what it is really accomplishing is to note what you are *allowed* to do. You've got a parent. You are as free as a kindergartner. And you are probably 'safe' because of this.

I don't disagree with your notation of "freedom!!!!!!" as a theme in the USA... rather I disagree that the populace of the USA is free It is certainly less enslaved than many countriy's peoples... but it is a far cry from free.

1a)Is the purpose of moving to a favored society to productively integrate? I'm not nearly as bigotted as most people I know. I'm for people celebrating African heritage month, etc. It's not celebrating the culture of america though, so 'm just confused why the joining of the words?

I believe celebrations are a waste of time without due cause. You just won a war? FUCKING CELEBRATE. There's a special day over here in which you accomplished nothing? Why the fuck are you celebrating? GET BACK TO WORK.

And yes tacky, you are not a bigot. Maybe your strength of character and your understanding of what is and is not moral is putting people off though

1b) I see xxxxxxx-american as a needless segregation of society. Why not just celebrate and enjoy your culture wherever you are. If you're from Africa; be African, you can do that living in America. If you want to live in America and want to retain your African nationality, be an African in America or even an American from Africa, not an African-american. It may seem like a tautology, but I really see no purpose in dual nationality or somehow equating 2 nationalities.

Agree. I think it a major hassle to not lop all Americans into one big I-don't-give-a-damn-where-the-hell-you're-from group: you're here now! It seems rather egotistical to brag "my ancestors accomplished all of this!" when you have accomplished nothing. It's hard to respect someone with zero self-respect, all the harder when they brag about how little they've done.

For example I know plenty of "african-americans" who haven't been in Africa for at least 5 generations. I have no probelms with any of them celebrating their heiritage or culture, what I have a problem with is them claiming a nationality based off lineage rather than their nation of residence. Why aren't they just Americans? Not to mention it has nothing to do with culture or heritage or nationality anymore it's only about color. Perhaps I could convey this if I stop using other people and use myself. I have Scotch, German, Dutch, American Indian geneology in me. I don't claim to be scottish-american, native-american,or dutch-american. I consider myself American. I enjoy the cultures I have in my geneology and other I don't. I find slightly more significance in the one's I have a family histroy in.

Good question. I hear it has something to do with Kenyan's being tall and muscular (minus AIDS). Where would basketball be without great big black bucks?

But seriously... why would we even care from a legal standpoint where someone is from? Does knowing what color of skin a human has help us collect taxes from them? Lol ^_^

1c)Whatever my biases are I think it's fundamentally wrong to try and integrate into a society with which you show willfull disobedience to statutes and freedoms and a general contempt for.

Do you see me in a rush to integrate into america? I'll use it so long as it lets me use it, but one day it will likely outlive its use. That isn't to say I don't hope it turns into the most awesome place to live ever for the next eighty years starting now.

2) Perhaps you don't have a "family to protect" instinct. If someone came into my 40 room mansion and wanted to live, sure I'd welcome that. If they didn't want to pay I might have a litle gripe about that but I wouldn't have a problem with that for short term. However, there is an expectation (in society) that contribution by all is standard. If they not only emphatically refused to contribute, and willfully started rearranging areas to the way their home looked I would talk with them, but not necessarily be against it. If they maliciously defied all previous communications and obstinantly refused to contribute attacked the foundational structure of their room and decided to start burning my drapes.... then I'd have to kick them out. If they wouldn't leave I'd have them escorted. If they broke in I would defend my family and property. I'm not advocating senseless killing. I am advocating protecting our country from radicals that refuse to conform to entry procedures (no matter how broke the process is) by an escalating scale.

You'd let someone into your house without without even having the courtesy to ask? That is an utter disrespect of your boundaries... you are fully entitled to reintroduce their respect for your boundaries by force in my all so very humble opinion.

Killing something because it will not respect you is not senseless... it is cautious. If it doesn't respect your boundaries: it does not respect you. If it does not respect you and has the capacity to cause you immediate harm: it is an immediate danger to you for you to deal with immediately. Slaying such a being neutralizes the threat with finality, and there is absolutely nothing senseless about being as safe as possible when the rewards are not worth the risk.

---

If someone breaks into your house with the intent to make it their own, and you had a gun, wouldn't you shoot them?

Except they are crossing the border to trim my shrubs and Americans won't do that kind of work. I'm in Arizona which is ground zero for nut bag republican assholes who love guns and hate Mexicans. This whole "immigration" debate is nothing more than racism and, if you doubt that, ask why white Canadians are never part of the equation.

And here i thought that was because the canadians protect their borders and nobody in their right mind wants to move from canada to the USA

Plenty of slaves in the sea to trim your shrubs... you hardly need any more than you've already got (assuming the people making a stink about it are correct with their numbers).

---

---

---

Just people people move to the US and want to become a US citizen, doesn't mean they want to spurn their heritage. Many immigrants like having their cake and eating it too - and they can. Being called an islamo-american or african american or japanese-american is saying is simultaneously respecting where they're from and who they are. There's no shame in that.

What little shame in that there is: what use is there in it for the governing body? Zero. It really doesn't matter. You are (hopefully) a revenue generating bag of flesh. Do you really need to feel like a special snowflake because you came from someplace that someone else didn't? Maybe I should be called an Alaskan-American. How fucking brilliant. And then let's not forget the Tezas-Americans. And the New York-Americans. And the godamn british, who rebelled against our president to found a monarchy that fell apart in short order.

All of them are equally bags of flesh... honestly: What are you trying to gain from this nonsense? We can't even exploit foreigners properly... so it's not as if any bag of flesh needs some important maker for the economy.

2) What's the big deal about border enforcement? If someone breaks into your house with the intent to make it their own, and you had a gun, wouldn't you shoot them? In my opinion do it all the way or not at all, stop half assing everything. Opinions?

Shooting people for trying to find a better life for themselves is immoral, but better border security means better internal security for the US as well in terms of law enforcement. More protections against illegal contraband coming into the US illegally is always welcome.

I don't care what you're looking for in my house (love, life, liberty, your lost left ankle): if you enter it without my *explicit* permission: i am likely to shoot/stab you. That is not immoral in my understanding (it being a matter of your lack of respect for me that you entered my house of your own regard as if I was not there, or worse to possibly harm me). And you can't exactly pick the lock on my door accidentally (or cross from Mexico into USA accidentally).

---

[tackattack]

My overall point (other than to start up a general conversation in which I really have no drive to discuss because I said I would) was that it's counter-productive for Mexicans (illegal and legal citizens) to protest entry to and equal rights in good standing with the US while demonstrating their lack of concern for America (ie. burning an American flag, attacking peaceful protesters, etc.). If they want asylum from persecution/life because you're born someplace you prefer not to be, or you just seek better opportunities, wouldn't disrespecting it's inhabitants warrent a deportation? Should there be a difference between citizens that are , naturalized, native or have 2 citizenships?

[Anomalocaris]

You sound like a total bigot.

That's my opinion.

...... In our case I'm only for letting people in when there is a genuine shortage in skilled labor in the specific area, they can bring their culture with them all they like, in fact I welcome it.

ditto

[Shell B]

I think we should just blare Lady Gaga at the Mexican border. Whoever can make it through without their brain bleeding is strong enough to be an American. Alternatively, we could just make a really complicated maze there. That way, we only get the smartest Mexicans. As for the Canadians, they need to stay on their side.

[tackattack]

I just used Mexicans as an example because when Sae asked me to post something serious the news channel had a story about mexicans protesting by burning a huge American flag, spitting on it and stomping it. I could really give a rats ass if anyone here things I'm a bigot. I'm not without some degree of prejudices (because I think they're impossible to escape) but I'm far from the bigoted asshole people would like to make me out to be, take it or leave it. I started up a serious conversation and I'm willing to rationally discuss it when baseless assertions aren't being thrown at me. If I'd have said Chinese imports or Islamic terrorists you'd probably have the same opinion so wtf ever.

[Shell B]

I just used Mexicans as an example because when Sae asked me to post something serious the news channel had a story about mexicans protesting by burning a huge American flag, spitting on it and stomping it. I could really give a rats ass if anyone here things I'm a bigot. I'm not without some degree of prejudices (because I think they're impossible to escape) but I'm far from the bigoted asshole people would like to make me out to be, take it or leave it. I started up a serious conversation and I'm willing to rationally discuss it when baseless assertions aren't being thrown at me. If I'd have said Chinese imports or Islamic terrorists you'd probably have the same opinion so wtf ever.

Tack, I didn't use the Mexican example because you did. I used it of my own accord, not as a judgment against your assertions.

Personally, I think we all have our own prejudices. I try to avoid them like the plague and rethink my stance whenever I find myself basing an opinion on a prejudice (even when it comes to Christians ).

I think immigration needs to be controlled and it is. Illegal immigration is really the issue here, I think and that needs to be controlled as well. That being said, I am not entirely sure that every cook I worked with during my ten years in a kitchen was legal and I liked nearly all of them (except the bitch that could never stop talking and caused me to take a fucking chunk out of my thumb with a chef knife).

Do I think we should shoot people when they cross the border? No, I do not think that is necessary, unless they start shooting at border patrol agents.

[tackattack]

I know shell, but Chuck was probably using it to support his view of me being a bigot, when it was merely happenstance. Immigrations is controlled, poorly. Illegal immigration isn't and you're right that is part of the issue here. I like lots of different people who are here on a green card or not legally at all. All of them though are just as appalled at those (some illegal and some legal, simply extremist) who would disrespect the country they're either hiding out in or looking to get into. Do I think we should start shooting illegal immigrants? not as a first (or even second or third in my example) resort but a line's already been drawn and we're just not enforcing it.

[Shell B]

Here's the thing, illegal immigrants aren't the only people "disrespecting" the country. However, it is the right of any person to disrespect whatever they want. I don't think that a few represent the masses. Nor do I think that disrespect is justification of deadly force.

[tackattack]

I agree ignorance is everywhere. Rednecks piss on the flag because it's the "North's " flag, and get very offended when you see the confederate flag and ask "didn't the south lose that war?" But to get the unalienable rights you should at the very least be a citizen, which makes the disrespect easier to swallow rather than it coming from a foreigner, whatever the nationality.

It may seem like I'm using one as ammo for the other, but Border enforcement is really a separate topic for me than national civil rights. I'm probably just not conveying it well because I'm tired and irked (not about anything here). I agree disrespect is not just cause to shoot someone.

[Shell B]

I don't consider the rights I have national. I consider them the rights of every human being. Just because their government may not give it to them doesn't mean that I will not, to the best of my ability.