"U.S. Immigrants To Boycott on May 1st". This Really Pisses Me Off.

[Vesayen]

As a voting American citizen I have a 1 in (how many people are registered voters?) say in who gets acess to my country.

Foreigners do NOT have a right to come into this country. The only rights foreigners have are the moral and legal rights we give them. I am partial to something along the lines of "Immediatly deport any illegal aliens with whatever property they legally posses".

No jail sentences, no fines, no detentions(indefinite detentions without a trial for a real crime, is inhuman), just get them the HELL out of here.

The second time, some punitive measure, I'm not sure what would be good.

Our country is worse off for then it was in the case of most immigrants today-though not all. Skilled labor is always welcome, though it is pretty damn rare, we are getting reverse brain drained ourselves now.

Go away.

I don't want you here.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Did you and or your family become citizens?

Yes.

Assuming they did, how do they feel about illegal aliens? Mexicans or not?

Very sympathetic actually. My father actually did overstay his student visa and was technically an illegal for a few months until his green card came in the mail. He's always been sympathetic to illegals.

Hell, as am I. You don't have a right to better life simply because you were born on one side of a border rather than another! We are all humans.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Hell, as am I. You don't have a right to better life simply because you were born on one side of a border rather than another! We are all humans.

Morally? No.

Legally? You bet your ### I do.

The entire territory of the United States is owned by the federal goverment and thus, in very small part, by me. America is not some great un-owned entity where anyone who wishes, may enter. It is PRIVATE property.

*I* own it, *YOU* own it. Every American citizen owns it in a small part. One part of owning property is the right to prevent others from accesing it.

Stay the hell off my grass.








I really wrestle with this morally.... we are oblidged to give charity, but at least in my religion you are not oblidged to help every stranger to the point of putting YOURSELF in poverty-no one believes that and if anyone claims they do, they can easily be proven to be a hypocrit. That is what our current immigration policy is going to do.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What is law but written down morals?

And if you want to use the private property argument, then we've decided not to call the cops on the immigrants from Mexico... for so long that by the legal principle of adverse possession, those who have been here for a long while have taken ownership of where they live. By your private property argument, those who have acquired land by adverse possession should automatically be citizens, or it isn't owned by the United States .

[DRoseDARs]

Vesayen, if you want to play that game, do you have any idea how many times the United States VIOLATED treaties and legal agreements in order to get much of this continent from native peoples? Were you paying attention at all in your history classes? "Private property" my ass: We're a nation of squatters and you doth protest too much.

[Bill3000]

What is law but written down morals?

Taxes are moral?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Bill3000
Taxes are moral?

Of course... taxes are required to keep the country going. It has been decided that it is moral to force people to pay for governmental services (ie, taxes).

[Bill3000]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Of course... taxes are required to keep the country going. It has been decided that it is moral to force people to pay for governmental services (ie, taxes).

I wouldn't say that it's moral, just necessary.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


What is law but written down morals?

And if you want to use the private property argument, then we've decided not to call the cops on the immigrants from Mexico... for so long that by the legal principle of adverse possession, those who have been here for a long while have taken ownership of where they live. By your private property argument, those who have acquired land by adverse possession should automatically be citizens, or it isn't owned by the United States .

Law is not written down morals. Law is the rules we agree to, instead of solving disputes by violence-which we generally agree is a bad thing. Sometimes we can agree to laws which share our moral views, if we share moral views. Sometimes not.

Those who have lived here a while have *NOT* taken ownership of the land they live on. Unregistered aliens can not legally own property in the U.S. U.S. law does not recognize so called "rights" of habitation.

The land is owned by the U.S. and it is possible to become a joint member of ownership, which is done by rules set down by current owners and no one else.

If you sneak in and live someplace a while, you don't become a joint owner, sorry.

You need A and B to become a joint owner. A is the rules we set down B, is being here. You are saying that just because you fulfil one requirment(B) you are automatically qualified. You are not.

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
Vesayen, if you want to play that game, do you have any idea how many times the United States VIOLATED treaties and legal agreements in order to get much of this continent from native peoples? Were you paying attention at all in your history classes? "Private property" my ass: We're a nation of squatters and you doth protest too much.

Our treatment of the native american peoples is a horrific crime beyond all reproach. If you have a good solution for how our dead anscestors can make proper redress to their dead anscestors, I really am eager to hear it.

Then again, every country in the world has been invaded by some one else *shrug*. That includes Mexico by the way, so there goes that claim lol(and YES the mayas were invaders too-there were earlier peoples in Mexico-if you were going to say the Mayan population of Mexico has a pass).

Then again if you think its bad to invade other peoples land, as you just said, then surley we have the right to defend ourself from the mexicans, no?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Law is not written down morals.

Of course it is. Law is legislated morality.

Those who have lived here a while have *NOT* taken ownership of the land they live on.

Under the requirements set forth in adverse possession laws in every state in the country, yes, they have.

You should familiarize yourself with what the adverse possession rules in your state say. I'd hate for you to purchase some land and then have someone else live on it for, say, 15 years without your permission and then a judge say they own the title as per adverse possession.

And that is done by the RULES set down by the US, namely the states that make up the country.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Vesayen
Our treatment of the native american peoples is a horrific crime beyond all reproach. If you have a good solution for how our dead anscestors can make proper redress to their dead anscestors, I really am eager to hear it.

Then again, every country in the world has been invaded by some one else *shrug*. That includes Mexico by the way, so there goes that claim lol(and YES the mayas were invaders too-there were earlier peoples in Mexico-if you were going to say the Mayan population of Mexico has a pass).

Then again if you think its bad to invade other peoples land, as you just said, then surley we have the right to defend ourself from the mexicans, no?

Well, there is a proposal to create a landlocked country from parts of Nevada, Utah, Arizona and New Mexico (tried to find a map, couldn't) from some of the more sparsely populated areas, but that'll never happen. No, there isn't any good solution...at least not unless a massive pandemic wipes out a significant portion of the world's population allowing the surviving Amerindians to reassert themselves. But everytime I hear "America for Americans" in any of it's ugly forms I have to shoot it down. At least a significant portion of Latin Americans have some native blood flowing through their veins. For whatever reason, their ancestors were less afraid to mix with native populations, through love or through force. Whites for the most part wanted no part in that.

There was an earlier thread on this matter of illegal immigration and I already stated my thoughts there; I think it was Imran I debated a bit on it with. I'm a lot more to the right than you'd expect for a dyed-in-the-wool liberal, but my take isn't remotely heartless like something originating from any "Compassionate Conservative" harpy.

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Law is not written down morals.

Of course it is. Law is legislated morality.

Those who have lived here a while have *NOT* taken ownership of the land they live on.

Under the requirements set forth in adverse possession laws in every state in the country, yes, they have.

You should familiarize yourself with what the adverse possession rules in your state say. I'd hate for you to purchase some land and then have someone else live on it for, say, 15 years without your permission and then a judge say they own the title as per adverse possession.

No, its not. Law is me and you getting together and saying "Let's agree not to kill each other" I hate to draw philosophers into it but Locke expresses the concept pretty clearly.... law is nothing more then escaping the state of nature. The absolute violence which is how we would naturally react is so horrific, we agree to rules to avoid that. You can say it is morality if you want, but it is not.

You know what? I'd hate that to but if I somehow bought land and violated the law, I kind of have it coming. You really should research if you plan to buy property. There is also a marked difference between buying land and uknowingly doing so improperly, and knowing you are buying it illegaly.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap


The native population in Mexico was far greater and thus survived in far greater amounts. MOst Mexicans, if not "pure natives" have some degree of indegenous blood in them. MOst mexicans would consider themselves descendets of the natives. According to the CIA factbook 60% of Mexicans are mixed blood, 30% native. Only 9% white. You think 30% of the people in the US are native?

You see this everywhere in Mexico and their culture and national sysmbols. The Mexican capital was built on top of a vast native City. Can;t think of a single major US city that can trace its existance to an indian anything. The middle of the Mexican flag has the eagle on a cactus with a snake, the sign the Aztecs were looking to set up their capital. Any reminder of a native past is any US federal symbol? NO.
Look at mexican cuisine, which is a mix of Spanish, and Mesoamerican cooking. American cooking as a whole has few links to native past.
Even the very name of the country: Mexico, based on the name the aztecs called themselves, the Mexica. As opposed to America, a take off on a European's name.

IN short, indigenous heritage was almost as comprehensively wipped out in the US as in Australia. These are socities based on a European model on a blank slate.

Mexico was built by Europeans above an ancient local heritage that had reached very sophisticated levels, including thousands of years of local urbanism.

Wow! This is one of the biggest non sequitors I've seen here in a long time.

[Vesayen]

The mayans and aztecs drove out earlier peoples, so they get no special claim to the land either.

[DaShi]

It doesn't matter. Not unless you are willing to create special circumstances in which immigration is unrestricted in some places and not in others. And to do that would be completely arbitrary and at the discretion of the native people so it still doesn't matter who was mayan and who wasn't. They're gone. Get over it.

So you left with that or the option that all immigration should be unrestricted. In either, the US is not a special case. It's ludicrous and somewhat ignorant to assume so. Unfortunately, this is exactly why it is done, because the majority of people are ludicrous and ignorant. This is how concepts of entitlement are formed. This is the heart of the problem. The belief that the US solely owes something to everyone outside its borders. And the true nonsense of the reality of it is that the US doesn't even do that great of a job of taking care of its own people.