We, the sensible people of the United States,...

[ajbera]

As a capitalist/entrepeneur, it would behoove me to learn the language of any people in whom I saw a viable market. It doesn't matter if they were immigrants in my country or the natives of a faraway land. But it's beside the point.

People, native residents, immigrants, everyone, should continue to learn and improve themselves, including learning additional languages. It's always positive to expand abilities and horizons.

However, there needs to be a default, standard language by which the peoples of a particular place are able to communicate without hindrance. One language that everyone is taught so they can fully communicate their thoughts, wants, and needs without the need for interpretation, translation, and risk of miscommunication. The dominant and most common language in the United States for the longest period of time is English; hence it's what the default language should be.

Furthermore, even with English as the primary language, there's plenty of miscommunication, frequently through sloppy usage and plain ignorance. Allowing a second (or more) language into the mix could bring about greater miscommunication.

[Mr. President]

What was the point of this thread? Trying to start a Leftist Dance of Death?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I don't want to be obligated to work. That means I'm not going to do it.

Hey, that's ok, if you're a hot looking young stud, you can find a sugar momma, or if you swing that way, you can be a rent boy.

Other than that, you can enjoy all the results and fruits of not working all you want.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Mr. President
What was the point of this thread? Trying to start a Leftist Dance of Death?

It's just a whiny Rush Limbaugh crowd troll that's been going around email for months. Instead of sharing the "wisdom" by email, it got shared by thread.

[Urban Ranger]

Wow, it's from Rush Limbaugh? I don't know, it's hard to imagine Slowwhand stooping that low. Sad.

[Berzerker]

Nah, someone else wrote it, Limbaugh just read it on the air.

[mrmitchell]

It's too late. It's been tainted.

Ming, please close this thread immediately before it's too late.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Oerdin
You find the idea of a national language to be disturbing? So 90% of the world disturbs you?

The learn it or leave distrubs me.

[SlowwHand]

Tingkai, you're the biggest dreamer I've ever seen.
Completely oblivious to life in the real-world.

Good luck, buddy.
God knows you'll need it.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Tingkai, you're the biggest dreamer I've ever seen.
Completely oblivious to life in the real-world.

Good luck, buddy.
God knows you'll need it.

Isn't it politically incorrect to assume that he believes in God?

[Dinner]

Re: Re: We, the sensible people of the United States,...

Originally posted by Tingkai
Yup, so just because you can afford a gas-guzzling, pollution spewing car doesn't mean you have the right to own one.

Want to bet?

And just because you want to own a 50-cal machine gun and 200 assault rifles doesn't mean you get to own them.

Please note that is a very clear cut case of public safety over riding individual rights. You might not like SUVs but they just aren't a public safety issue no matter how much you wish they were.

Yup, so just because you don't like people who speak a language other than English doesn't mean you get to deport them.

Nice red herring. We are talking about which sort of standards and requirements we, as a nation or group of nations, should place up peaople who wish to immigrate. Should they know about the history and culture of the nation they wish to live in? Should they be able to function and be employable (I.E. speak the national language)? Should they be free of communicable diseases? All of these are valid points which are legitament things immigration and naturalization can look at in order to determine an individual's suitability for naturalization.

And yes, people have the right to sue others, even if we think the lawsuit is completely stupid. If the courts side with stupidity, then we have a problem.

I agree but we should have a loser pays system like the British have so people who file groundless law suites can be punished instead of the victim of groundless law suites.

Why not? Why should health care be only for those who can afford it. We provide a high-standard of universal healthcare in Canada, as do many other countries. There is no reason not to do it.

How about the reason that it costs to much and I don't want to pay for you? You are making a value judgement based upon desires and not natural or legal rights. You may think something is a good idea but that doesn't mean you have a right to it.

If you do not have the right to kill others than the government cannot allow capital punishment.

Want to bet? Ever heard of war? Most research has concluded that capital punishmentis an effective deternent to violent crime so in order to save innocent lives you use the most effective deterent to puinish the criminals. The punishment fits the crime and is just.

And do we really want to give back the land that was stolen or coerced from the First Nations?

Who themselves stole it from other native groups, who stole it from other native groups, who...

[MrFun]

So if you do not have the right to happiness, why does the government still carry out corporate welfare for the wealthy?

[mindseye]

This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are
from. We welcome you here. English is our language and like the one
you left behind, we also have a culture. Learn it or go back to the
country and the living conditions you were fleeing."

Could we apply this domestically?

Hey, you folks with the Big Hair, the ten-gallon hats, talking like you got marbles in your mouth ... either get with it, or get back to Texas where you fled from.

[mindseye]

Afterthought ...

English is our language and like the one you left behind, we also have a culture.

Whoever wrote this doesn't speak English very well ...

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MrFun
So if you do not have the right to happiness, why does the government still carry out corporate welfare for the wealthy?

It's a form of protectionism which governments use as a way to boost employment and support local industries. In the long run it harms the competetiveness of the very industries they're trying to support.