Eleven States Ready To Adopt Arizona Immigration Laws

[Don]

"We are not opposed to anyone coming to America for a better life, we are opposed to the way they are coming in and then thumbing their noses at the law abiding citizens. It is wrong and you just cannot get away with it any longer. If you want to be an American then you must do it the right way. Any politician, who willfully ignores our laws is not fit to govern. Those politicians must be voted out."


It's this kind of confusion that has caused the problem we face. If you are OK with anyone coming here for a better life, you have destroyed your own argument to keep them out. If they have a moral right to come here, you have no moral right to keep them out.

This is our country and they have no right to be here if we say they don't.

I have developed a way to address this kind of moral confusion. When some person, even a well meaning person, spouts this line, I ask: "Are you willing to give up your job so that someone else can have a better life?"

"Are you willing to hand over your house to illegal aliens becuase your house is built on land that was taken from Indians 300 years ago?"

You cannot defeat an enemy by accepting your enemy's moral premises. This is our country. WE have a right to exclude anyone for any reason and if they want a "better life," let them create one in their own land like we did in ours.

[PochoPatriot]

Originally Posted by Don

It's this kind of confusion that has caused the problem we face. If you are OK with anyone coming here for a better life, you have destroyed your own argument to keep them out. If they have a moral right to come here, you have no moral right to keep them out.

Two questions:
1. How does being supportive of legal immigration destroy an argument against illegal immigration?

2. Where in the quote is a "moral right" to immigration being espoused?

[Don]

Originally Posted by PochoPatriot

Two questions:
1. How does being supportive of legal immigration destroy an argument against illegal immigration?

2. Where in the quote is a "moral right" to immigration being espoused?

1. The whole distinction between "illegal" and "legal" immigration is a fig leaf behind which people hide in order to minimize their risk of being called racists. If everyone thinks "legal" immigration is ok, why don't you just support amnesty and bingo: Everyone who came here "illegally" will be "legal" and you should have no more problem with them being here.

The bogus talk about "illegal" vs. "legal" immigration is a white flag of surrender. People who hide behind their support for "legal immigration" are invariably the strongest opponents to "amnesty" that would legalize illegal aliens. And with good reason.

Most people don't object to them being here because they're "illegal". Most people object because illegal aliens are third world primitives and savages who are not compatible with advanced modern civilization. You cannot have a first world country with a third world population. Seriously. Do you think these savages would behave any differently if they were legal? I don't.

If you want confirmation of this, read the LA Times Sunday edition 5.23,10, article about the up and coming industry in Los Angeles: An "academy" for certifying "gang interventionists."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...ext-crime.html

Teachers are being laid off, but LA is increasing its budget for an "academy" to give "certification" to "gang interventionists" all of whom are former gang members(!) and whose primary job is to try to talk latino gang bangers out of killing each other. Science, math, history, etc., teachers are being laid off for budgetary reasons, but the city has money for former gang bangers who will enjoy full employment at taxpayer expense. I have never seen anything so stupid.

2. The quote does not use the word "moral right", but that is the underlying premise of people who defend immigration of any sort.

[PochoPatriot]

Originally Posted by Don

1. The whole distinction between "illegal" and "legal" immigration is a fig leaf behind which people hide in order to minimize their risk of being called racists. If everyone thinks "legal" immigration is ok, why don't you just support amnesty and bingo: Everyone who came here "illegally" will be "legal" and you should have no more problem with them being here.

No, actually this is a distinction made by the law. It has nothing to do with being called a "racist". Just because a person supports legal immigration it does not follow that they are for amnesty. Your logic is faulty.

Originally Posted by Don

The bogus talk about "illegal" vs. "legal" immigration is a white flag of surrender. People who hide behind their support for "legal immigration" are invariably the strongest opponents to "amnesty" that would legalize illegal aliens. And with good reason.

This is such a steaming pile of bovine excrement. I support legal immigration, period. I support people coming to this country who want to fully embrace everything that makes this country great, and will fully assimilate into this culture. However, it does not in any mean that I support amnesty. Once again, your logic, if it can be called that, is in gross error.

Originally Posted by Don

Most people don't object to them being here because they're "illegal". Most people object because illegal aliens are third world primitives and savages who are not compatible with advanced modern civilization. You cannot have a first world country with a third world population. Seriously. Do you think these savages would behave any differently if they were legal? I don't.

The terms "primitives" and "savages" are highly incendiary, and should not be used in this forum. I realize, however, that this is how they are referred to in your local Klan meeting, but this sort of invective should not be used here.

Second, while it is true that there are a huge percentage of immigrants that come from "third world countries" we have to ask ourselves why that is the case? By far the majority of immigrants leave their countries of origin because they want a better life. If you were on of those "primitives" and "savages" you too would want to get here, and live a life far better than the life you would live in your home country.

Originally Posted by Don

If you want confirmation of this, read the LA Times Sunday edition 5.23,10, article about the up and coming industry in Los Angeles: An "academy" for certifying "gang interventionists."

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...ext-crime.html

Teachers are being laid off, but LA is increasing its budget for an "academy" to give "certification" to "gang interventionists" all of whom are former gang members(!) and whose primary job is to try to talk latino gang bangers out of killing each other. Science, math, history, etc., teachers are being laid off for budgetary reasons, but the city has money for former gang bangers who will enjoy full employment at taxpayer expense.

I agree, however who better to talk to gangbangers than gangbangers who have seen the error of their ways, and have changed their lives? I don't think you or I would have much credibility in the lives of gangbangers. Whether or not this is a program that the city should be funding during this time is the real debate. As far as teachers go, then perhaps that should be brought up to the LAUSD school board, that has the jurisdiction of those decisions.

Originally Posted by Don

I have never seen anything so stupid.

Obviously you do not read your own posts.

Originally Posted by Don

2. The quote does not use the word "moral right", but that is the underlying premise of people who defend immigration of any sort.

So your problem is immigration, period. Why do you fear people from other countries, cultures or elasticities? Immigration has helped this country. Why do I believe that? Quite simply because America is an ideal, and not an ethnicity or race.