IMMIGRATION RED-HOT CAMPAIGN ISSUE

I don't understand why people think that Spanish is illegal.

ebrown_p wrote:

I don't understand why people think that Spanish is illegal.

In my own opinion, there are some people that would like to make English the official language of the U.S. In effect, eliminate the dual language government pamphlets, etc.

I would guess that some people that were raised only speaking English, would like to think the world they live in is dominated by English.

That is changing in many places.

Realistically speaking, since the effort to learn Spanish is beyond the comfort level of many people, there won't be a change in "Anglo" America until schools start Spanish in the second grade, I believe.

Until that happens, people will have to continue living under the delusion that the Lone Ranger, if he would have been a real person, spoke English.

Advocate wrote:

You write so well (choke).

Putting things in all caps is the equivalent to(sic) shouting, (sic) on the internet. It's rude. As I said above, you've been doing this long enough to know better. Now, go play nice with the other xenophobes.

You didn't correct any spelling; using the term (sic) when you didn't correct any spelling is generally not considered to be a sign of intelligence.

Really batting a thousand today, Adv

Cycloptichorn

Well, the whole question about illegals may be academic, since when I call an 800 telephone number, a computer voice often asks me to press #1, if I want to continue in English. This must mean something, if 800 telephone numbers already consider this a bi-lingual country.

The illegal question may be a red-herring. The country may have already changed from the old Ozzie and Harriet world of the 1950's. No one may have said it too loud, so some of us won't suffer from future shock.

I don't understand why people think that Spanish is illegal.

For the good of the country, I hope that we remain basically an English-speaking country. Should, say, South Florida and Southern California become, basically, Spanish-speaking areas, this could very well adversely affect the unity in this country.

Advocate wrote:

For the good of the country, I hope that we remain basically an English-speaking country. Should, say, South Florida and Southern California become, basically, Spanish-speaking areas, this could very well adversely affect the unity in this country.

"For the good of the country," in my opinion, people who are going to raise a child should be mandated to take a course in "child rearing of the prospective good citizen." The course can be online, in a classroom, wherever, but raising a child to be a good citizen should be taught to parents; I don't think society should assume that parents know how to raise a child to be a good citizen.

And, that course can be given in more than one language - for the good of the country.

Foofie wrote:

Advocate wrote:

For the good of the country, I hope that we remain basically an English-speaking country. Should, say, South Florida and Southern California become, basically, Spanish-speaking areas, this could very well adversely affect the unity in this country.

"For the good of the country," in my opinion, people who are going to raise a child should be mandated to take a course in "child rearing of the prospective good citizen." The course can be online, in a classroom, wherever, but raising a child to be a good citizen should be taught to parents; I don't think society should assume that parents know how to raise a child to be a good citizen.

And, that course can be given in more than one language - for the good of the country.

I guess you have no valid response.

Advocate wrote:

Foofie wrote:

Advocate wrote:

For the good of the country, I hope that we remain basically an English-speaking country. Should, say, South Florida and Southern California become, basically, Spanish-speaking areas, this could very well adversely affect the unity in this country.

"For the good of the country," in my opinion, people who are going to raise a child should be mandated to take a course in "child rearing of the prospective good citizen." The course can be online, in a classroom, wherever, but raising a child to be a good citizen should be taught to parents; I don't think society should assume that parents know how to raise a child to be a good citizen.

And, that course can be given in more than one language - for the good of the country.

I guess you have no valid response.

What "unity" of the country? The red states live in one mindset; the blue states live in another mindset; Christian Evangelicals have their own preference for where this nation goes; other Christians have their preference; secular types have their preference.

This nation is not a 1950's style Scandanavian country with a demographic homogeneity that helps everyone care for everyone else.

"Unity," in my opinion should not be the goal, since we don't have unity now. The goal should be "functioning," in spite of our lack of unity. Meaning, for this diverse country to continue to function optimally, we need a "high tolerance for ambiguity" (what the best executives tend to have). That means the Spanish speaking population in south Florida is a positive, since it allows south Florida to be another "profit center" for the nation, since south Florida is a banking center for Latin America, and an entertainment capital for Latin America.

And, if no one has noticed, Hispanics usually manage to learn two languages, but Anglos are often reticent to learn another language (and based on the street vernacular, and English S.A.T. scores, the English language is not learned well by everyone). Just listen to people talk English ("where you at?"). So, if Anglos needed to learn Spanish, starting in the second grade, it might just have a positive effect on the growing minds of this population group. Then there is no disunity, since in one generation everyone is bi-lingual; we would then all have additional tv channels to watch.

Foofie wrote:

Advocate wrote:

Foofie wrote:

Advocate wrote:

For the good of the country, I hope that we remain basically an English-speaking country. Should, say, South Florida and Southern California become, basically, Spanish-speaking areas, this could very well adversely affect the unity in this country.

"For the good of the country," in my opinion, people who are going to raise a child should be mandated to take a course in "child rearing of the prospective good citizen." The course can be online, in a classroom, wherever, but raising a child to be a good citizen should be taught to parents; I don't think society should assume that parents know how to raise a child to be a good citizen.

And, that course can be given in more than one language - for the good of the country.

I guess you have no valid response.

What "unity" of the country? The red states live in one mindset; the blue states live in another mindset; Christian Evangelicals have their own preference for where this nation goes; other Christians have their preference; secular types have their preference.

This nation is not a 1950's style Scandanavian country with a demographic homogeneity that helps everyone care for everyone else.

"Unity," in my opinion should not be the goal, since we don't have unity now. The goal should be "functioning," in spite of our lack of unity. Meaning, for this diverse country to continue to function optimally, we need a "high tolerance for ambiguity" (what the best executives tend to have). That means the Spanish speaking population in south Florida is a positive, since it allows south Florida to be another "profit center" for the nation, since south Florida is a banking center for Latin America, and an entertainment capital for Latin America.

And, if no one has noticed, Hispanics usually manage to learn two languages, but Anglos are often reticent to learn another language (and based on the street vernacular, and English S.A.T. scores, the English language is not learned well by everyone). Just listen to people talk English ("where you at?"). So, if Anglos needed to learn Spanish, starting in the second grade, it might just have a positive effect on the growing minds of this population group. Then there is no disunity, since in one generation everyone is bi-lingual; we would then all have additional tv channels to watch.

We have always had a great deal of diversity, such as regional, religious, and other differences. However, since our institutions (government, schools, English language, transportation, etc.) work well, the country thrives.

The bi-lingual situation in S. FL is good, but probably not as great as you think. For instance, many blacks are deeply resentful of being left out because of an inability to speak Spanish. What worries me is the real possibility that we could have, somewhere, a Quebec-type situation in which a region would demand many special concessions from the country. Like what almost happened in Canada, this could split the country.

F, perhaps you are unaware that Quebec came within a hair of declaring independence, and that this was virtually all due to the language difference.

We haven't seen a serious threat of this SO FAR in the USA.

Advocate wrote:

F, perhaps you are unaware that Quebec came within a hair of declaring independence, and that this was virtually all due to the language difference.

We haven't seen a serious threat of this SO FAR in the USA.

You mean, apart from the Civil War....

old europe wrote:

Advocate wrote:

F, perhaps you are unaware that Quebec came within a hair of declaring independence, and that this was virtually all due to the language difference.

We haven't seen a serious threat of this SO FAR in the USA.

You mean, apart from the Civil War....

Oh, you feel that the Civil War was over language?

F, perhaps you are unaware that Quebec came within a hair of declaring independence, and that this was virtually all due to the language difference.