I wanted to put some thoughts out there regarding immigration. First of all, there are plenty of illegal immigrants that should be sent home. But some that shouldn't be sent home. But that nasty grey zone of deciding who should stay and who should go is ripe for immoral action.
I don't think every illegal immigrant should be made to leave. Some are upstanding, tax paying citizens who are beneficial to the community and this country. Deporting them would rip their family apart. If the only reason people have for them to leave is "it's against the law", then maybe we take a critical look at the law. Isn't that exact problem at the heart of immigration reform - that the law doesn't align with moral action? How many times throughout history have people appealed to "the law" to justify immoral action? There's no need to mention Nazi Germany at the far end of the spectrum, because that's a polarizing example. Other examples are everywhere, in all parts of the world. We sit rant and rave at the stupidity of lawmakers, then hold their word to be as high as the word of god? Laws shouldn't be sanctified and used to justify any and every action. They should be critically examined.
Instead of sending home an upstanding human who contributes to his community and society, let's exile the white trash "legal citizen" drug dealer whose actions leave people dying and brain dead. Exile the people who feed off government welfare programs and contribute nothing but carbon dioxide, feces and trash to their community. Exile the murderers and rapists in our prisons rather than spend a ton of money to keep them here locked up. If we're going to send anyone out of this country, why not send away our trash? This especially includes any illegal immigrant trash. But why shouldn't it also apply to "legal" citizens? I understand we can't do it, but it makes you wonder at the stupidity of deporting good, hard working people meanwhile supporting trashy drug dealers with welfare checks.
This makes me think of a sci-fi plot. In the distant future, there are a maximum number of citizen "slots" - say 300 million. If you own a citizen ID card, you're a citizen. But if you're low on money, you can sell your card to someone else for a large sum of money. You'll be boosted out of welfare, but you have to leave the country. If you work your way up the economic ladder in your new home, you can buy your way back. Family members who are aging and near death can bequeath their cards to newborn grandkids to ensure their lineage remains citizens. If a child is born and there's no dying family member with a card to bequeath them, the family could pitch in to buy one, or as a last resort a relative could leave the country and donate his or her card. It could be some sort of immoral Capitalistic nightmare. Or maybe there are clever checks and balances that could be integrated to make it work.
-
In total there are 3 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 3 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 709 on Tue Mar 19, 2024 1:09 am
Immigration reform
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Immigration reform
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Re: Immigration reform
Create a 51st state out of the northern part of Alaska and ship them all there.
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
- LanDroid
-
- Comandante Literario Supreme
- Posts: 2800
- Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 9:51 am
- 21
- Location: Cincinnati, OH
- Has thanked: 195 times
- Been thanked: 1166 times
- Cattleman
-
Way Beyond Awesome
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:19 pm
- 11
- Location: Texas
- Has thanked: 474 times
- Been thanked: 507 times
Re: Immigration reform
With all deference to Interbane, my opinion (and it is mine) is that allowing illegal immigrants to remian is a slap in the face to all those who entered this country legally, as did my grandfaher during the 19th century, and those who are currently waiting patitntly to be allowed in, whether due to an outdated quota system or because the paperwork is being processed with the speed of a turtle swimming through cold molasses. I will make an exception for those who were brought here as small children - they had no say in the matter.
Love what you do, and do what you love. Don't listen to anyone else who tells you not to do it. -Ray Bradbury
Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, and why. Then do it. -Robert A. Heinlein
Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done, and why. Then do it. -Robert A. Heinlein
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Re: Immigration reform
I share your opinion Cattleman. It's a slap in the face to those who are doing the right thing and applying for legal citizenship. But even if we share that opinion, we might disagree about the solution. Well, perhaps not, since I don't really have a solution in mind.
It's a great big hot mess.
It's a great big hot mess.
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
- LanDroid
-
- Comandante Literario Supreme
- Posts: 2800
- Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 9:51 am
- 21
- Location: Cincinnati, OH
- Has thanked: 195 times
- Been thanked: 1166 times
Re: Immigration reform
If the US deported all 11 million illegal immigrants as Trump campaigned, sectors of our economy could collapse. Agriculture in California depends on seasonal workers at sub-minimum wages. I don't know if Americans would pick fruit for 12 hours per day at even $15/hour? So unless we're willing to pay $2.25 per orange, be careful what you rant for!
- TheWizard
-
The Great Gabsby
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 6:43 pm
- 10
- Location: Blaine, TN
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 17 times
- Contact:
Re: Immigration reform
Let's take the main point apart, topic by topic:
[I don't think every illegal immigrant should be made to leave. Some are upstanding, tax paying citizens who are beneficial to the community and this country.]
No, every last one of them is a law-breaker. They aren't tax-paying citizens unless they stole a social security number and are working under it, which is another crime.
[Deporting them would rip their family apart.]
If you prosecute a drunk driver, do you make the same argument? How about someone who rips off a liquor store, or a rapist, or a pedophile? Are you worried about ripping their families apart? By your argument, how can we send ANYONE to jail?
[If the only reason people have for them to leave is "it's against the law", then maybe we take a critical look at the law.]
Yes, 'against the law' is 'against the law.' If you don't enforce the laws you don't like, then stop saying you want to live in a free Republic. You want to live in a dictatorship - you just want it to be the kind of dictatorship that you like
[Isn't that exact problem at the heart of immigration reform - that the law doesn't align with moral action?]
No, the problem at the heart of immigration reform is that we have one party which is heavily dependent on their votes. You have a block of immigrants who want to bring their families and friends here and build their own, autonomous community here, rather than assimilate, and a political party who'll let them, so long as they vote Democrat.
[How many times throughout history have people appealed to "the law" to justify immoral action?]
The last time was Roe v Wade, and it introduced the whole issue of 'privacy' into the Constitution. Since then, more evidence has been thrown out of court than in the nearly 200 years before. Laws need to be based on the contents of the legal system, and enforcement of laws needs to be based on the content of those laws.
[There's no need to mention Nazi Germany at the far end of the spectrum, because that's a polarizing example.]
No one is doing that.
[Other examples are everywhere, in all parts of the world.]
Such as Japan, which doesn't allow immigration, or the European nations so overrun with immigrants that they can't maintain the safety of their native populace?
[We sit rant and rave at the stupidity of lawmakers, then hold their word to be as high as the word of god?]
Respect for Congress is at an all-time low BECAUSE of their refusal to address issues like this
[Laws shouldn't be sanctified and used to justify any and every action. They should be critically examined.]
Yes, they should. That is a legal system, where the actions of the government are restricted by laws. Otherwise, you have a government restricted only by the will of the leader. That's called fascism, and it's not a good alternative.
[Instead of sending home an upstanding human who contributes to his community and society, let's exile the white trash "legal citizen" drug dealer whose actions leave people dying and brain dead.]
And ... you're right back to fascism, because due process doesn't allow you to kick the people whom you don't like, out of the country. You know, like Castro did?
[Exile the people who feed off government welfare programs and contribute nothing but carbon dioxide, feces and trash to their community. Exile the murderers and rapists in our prisons rather than spend a ton of money to keep them here locked up. If we're going to send anyone out of this country, why not send away our trash? This especially includes any illegal immigrant trash. But why shouldn't it also apply to "legal" citizens? I understand we can't do it, but it makes you wonder at the stupidity of deporting good, hard working people meanwhile supporting trashy drug dealers with welfare checks. ]
Regarding people as 'trash' is exactly what Hitler did, only he called them 'mud-people.' And by the way, 51% of immigrants right now are on welfare according to USA Today.
[This makes me think of a sci-fi plot. In the distant future, there are a maximum number of citizen "slots" - say 300 million. If you own a citizen ID card, you're a citizen. But if you're low on money, you can sell your card to someone else for a large sum of money. You'll be boosted out of welfare, but you have to leave the country. If you work your way up the economic ladder in your new home, you can buy your way back. Family members who are aging and near death can bequeath their cards to newborn grandkids to ensure their lineage remains citizens. If a child is born and there's no dying family member with a card to bequeath them, the family could pitch in to buy one, or as a last resort a relative could leave the country and donate his or her card. It could be some sort of immoral Capitalistic nightmare. Or maybe there are clever checks and balances that could be integrated to make it work.]
If you want to live your life according to the creators of 'Starship Troopers,' you have other issues more pressing than immigration.
When you say, "I will favor the law-breakers over the law-followers," you invite anarchy, and you can see the results of that in the streets today, right now, whenever there's a Trump rally and ANTIFA shows up and starts attacking people. Groups like that ARE the result of selective law enforcement, and the people who pay the price for it are the ones who obey the law, until they give up on it and fight back in the streets. You saw examples of THAT in the fascist dictatorships in the Latin America of the 70's and early 80's. If you want to go out into a blood-bath every time you leave your home, then just keep pushing this naive bullshit as if there are no consequences to your actions
[I don't think every illegal immigrant should be made to leave. Some are upstanding, tax paying citizens who are beneficial to the community and this country.]
No, every last one of them is a law-breaker. They aren't tax-paying citizens unless they stole a social security number and are working under it, which is another crime.
[Deporting them would rip their family apart.]
If you prosecute a drunk driver, do you make the same argument? How about someone who rips off a liquor store, or a rapist, or a pedophile? Are you worried about ripping their families apart? By your argument, how can we send ANYONE to jail?
[If the only reason people have for them to leave is "it's against the law", then maybe we take a critical look at the law.]
Yes, 'against the law' is 'against the law.' If you don't enforce the laws you don't like, then stop saying you want to live in a free Republic. You want to live in a dictatorship - you just want it to be the kind of dictatorship that you like
[Isn't that exact problem at the heart of immigration reform - that the law doesn't align with moral action?]
No, the problem at the heart of immigration reform is that we have one party which is heavily dependent on their votes. You have a block of immigrants who want to bring their families and friends here and build their own, autonomous community here, rather than assimilate, and a political party who'll let them, so long as they vote Democrat.
[How many times throughout history have people appealed to "the law" to justify immoral action?]
The last time was Roe v Wade, and it introduced the whole issue of 'privacy' into the Constitution. Since then, more evidence has been thrown out of court than in the nearly 200 years before. Laws need to be based on the contents of the legal system, and enforcement of laws needs to be based on the content of those laws.
[There's no need to mention Nazi Germany at the far end of the spectrum, because that's a polarizing example.]
No one is doing that.
[Other examples are everywhere, in all parts of the world.]
Such as Japan, which doesn't allow immigration, or the European nations so overrun with immigrants that they can't maintain the safety of their native populace?
[We sit rant and rave at the stupidity of lawmakers, then hold their word to be as high as the word of god?]
Respect for Congress is at an all-time low BECAUSE of their refusal to address issues like this
[Laws shouldn't be sanctified and used to justify any and every action. They should be critically examined.]
Yes, they should. That is a legal system, where the actions of the government are restricted by laws. Otherwise, you have a government restricted only by the will of the leader. That's called fascism, and it's not a good alternative.
[Instead of sending home an upstanding human who contributes to his community and society, let's exile the white trash "legal citizen" drug dealer whose actions leave people dying and brain dead.]
And ... you're right back to fascism, because due process doesn't allow you to kick the people whom you don't like, out of the country. You know, like Castro did?
[Exile the people who feed off government welfare programs and contribute nothing but carbon dioxide, feces and trash to their community. Exile the murderers and rapists in our prisons rather than spend a ton of money to keep them here locked up. If we're going to send anyone out of this country, why not send away our trash? This especially includes any illegal immigrant trash. But why shouldn't it also apply to "legal" citizens? I understand we can't do it, but it makes you wonder at the stupidity of deporting good, hard working people meanwhile supporting trashy drug dealers with welfare checks. ]
Regarding people as 'trash' is exactly what Hitler did, only he called them 'mud-people.' And by the way, 51% of immigrants right now are on welfare according to USA Today.
[This makes me think of a sci-fi plot. In the distant future, there are a maximum number of citizen "slots" - say 300 million. If you own a citizen ID card, you're a citizen. But if you're low on money, you can sell your card to someone else for a large sum of money. You'll be boosted out of welfare, but you have to leave the country. If you work your way up the economic ladder in your new home, you can buy your way back. Family members who are aging and near death can bequeath their cards to newborn grandkids to ensure their lineage remains citizens. If a child is born and there's no dying family member with a card to bequeath them, the family could pitch in to buy one, or as a last resort a relative could leave the country and donate his or her card. It could be some sort of immoral Capitalistic nightmare. Or maybe there are clever checks and balances that could be integrated to make it work.]
If you want to live your life according to the creators of 'Starship Troopers,' you have other issues more pressing than immigration.
When you say, "I will favor the law-breakers over the law-followers," you invite anarchy, and you can see the results of that in the streets today, right now, whenever there's a Trump rally and ANTIFA shows up and starts attacking people. Groups like that ARE the result of selective law enforcement, and the people who pay the price for it are the ones who obey the law, until they give up on it and fight back in the streets. You saw examples of THAT in the fascist dictatorships in the Latin America of the 70's and early 80's. If you want to go out into a blood-bath every time you leave your home, then just keep pushing this naive bullshit as if there are no consequences to your actions
- Interbane
-
- BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
- Posts: 7203
- Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 12:59 am
- 19
- Location: Da U.P.
- Has thanked: 1105 times
- Been thanked: 2166 times
Re: Immigration reform
They pay billions in taxes. In some cases, yes, they are breaking the law to pay taxes. What a terrible crime. Also, local taxes are paid in a variety of ways by illegals.TheWizard wrote:No, every last one of them is a law-breaker. They aren't tax-paying citizens unless they stole a social security number and are working under it, which is another crime.
I never said I wanted to live in a free republic. And I'm not the one who enforces laws. These emotional points you're making don't address my argument, even if one of them is true. They're emotional filler, non-sequitur.Yes, 'against the law' is 'against the law.' If you don't enforce the laws you don't like, then stop saying you want to live in a free Republic. You want to live in a dictatorship - you just want it to be the kind of dictatorship that you like
But back to the point, there are laws that I don't think should be enforced. That doesn't mean they won't get enforced. If someone tries to wrestling a greased pig in Minnesota, by all means enforce that and arrest the criminal. If someone in Nebraska who has an STD gets married, then by all means, throw them in jail. If illegal immigrants are being deported, I'm not getting in the way.
But if the law behind deportation has gaps that allow for immoral action, I'm going to voice my concerns. Calling me a fascist or claiming I want to live in a dictatorship won't stop me.
Illegal immigrants aren't allowed to vote. If some do vote illegally, it's a vanishingly small number. Are you getting your news from Twitter?No, the problem at the heart of immigration reform is that we have one party which is heavily dependent on their votes. You have a block of immigrants who want to bring their families and friends here and build their own, autonomous community here, rather than assimilate, and a political party who'll let them, so long as they vote Democrat.
Laws need to based on other laws which are based on other laws? That's circular garbage. The beating heart of a legal system is popular moral sentiment. Beyond that, there are legal intricacies that build upward like scaffolding, resting on underlying legal elements. But it most certainly isn't a circular system as you're suggesting.Laws need to be based on the contents of the legal system, and enforcement of laws needs to be based on the content of those laws.
Some people are trash. Comparing me to Hitler won't scare me away from saying it. It's true. There are trashy people on this planet. And how many of the 51% are illegal? Illegal immigrants aren't eligible for welfare. It's true that their kids are, but that's not the statistic you're quoting.Regarding people as 'trash' is exactly what Hitler did, only he called them 'mud-people.' And by the way, 51% of immigrants right now are on welfare according to USA Today.
Throwing out a sci-fi plot idea is not "how I live my life". It's not an argument either. It's just... idle pondering. I'll continue that habit, thank you very much. You're welcome to criticize me for it.If you want to live your life according to the creators of 'Starship Troopers,' you have other issues more pressing than immigration.
“In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams
- TheWizard
-
The Great Gabsby
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 6:43 pm
- 10
- Location: Blaine, TN
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 17 times
- Contact:
Re: Immigration reform
For your edification, wanting to obey the law as written is not making an emotional point.
Wanting to selectively enforce the laws based on whether you 'like' them, is making an emotional point, by definition.
Illegals immigrants vote in droves - why do you think the Democrats are so hot to maintain 'sanctuary cities'? In a sanctuary city, you can't ask "Are you here illegally." They get drivers' licenses, and they use them to vote. This is pretty well documented.
And saying that "some people are trash" is the root of fascism. You start your fascist support by saying, "We are better than they are, and we know how to lead." Historically speaking, that is precisely how to start a fascist regime. Again, this is not an emotional statement, it is a fact grounded in history. Franco, Mussolini, Perone, Hitler, Stalin - they all said the same thing to ground their support.
Finally, laws being based on other laws is not circular logic, it is also history. If you want a law based strictly on ideals, you actually have to go back thousands of years and study Hammurabi. The 'beating heart of a legal system' has nothing to do with popular moral sentiment, it has to do with precedent.
Wanting to selectively enforce the laws based on whether you 'like' them, is making an emotional point, by definition.
Illegals immigrants vote in droves - why do you think the Democrats are so hot to maintain 'sanctuary cities'? In a sanctuary city, you can't ask "Are you here illegally." They get drivers' licenses, and they use them to vote. This is pretty well documented.
And saying that "some people are trash" is the root of fascism. You start your fascist support by saying, "We are better than they are, and we know how to lead." Historically speaking, that is precisely how to start a fascist regime. Again, this is not an emotional statement, it is a fact grounded in history. Franco, Mussolini, Perone, Hitler, Stalin - they all said the same thing to ground their support.
Finally, laws being based on other laws is not circular logic, it is also history. If you want a law based strictly on ideals, you actually have to go back thousands of years and study Hammurabi. The 'beating heart of a legal system' has nothing to do with popular moral sentiment, it has to do with precedent.