What if Papa Bush, or Uncle Gonzales break a law?
Quote:
- When prohibition made it against the law to enjoy alcohol, Americans defied the law to the point that it had to be repealed.
- When interracial relationships were against the law, Americans used their right to privacy to follow their hearts. Some defied the law until it was changed.
- Homosexuality was against the law in large parts of the country. However people still loved and lived and contributed to the culture at large.
- When abortion was against the law. Americans sought abortion, and brave caring Americans illegally helped girls get safe treatment which saved lives.
- Drug use is against the law, millions of Americans still use. Progressive Americans are trying to point out that treatment and support is more effective than law-enforcement to treat human problems.
All things designed to limits' ones rights in one way or another based upon antique moral codes, I notice
Cycloptichorn
e.b., you know i usually share the same opinions as you, but on this one, well, you aren't convincing me. really, it's more in the other direction.
when all of this brouha started up again, i was much more sympathetic to the illegal's plight. i really wasn't aware just how many people had snuck in or overstayed visas. but still, i was trying to be understanding.
to be honest, it's the "skirting the issue" bullet points, buzz phrases and increasingly petulant delivery of them by illegal immigrant leaders that has done the most to turn me off.
i hang with a very liberal group (hey, it's l.a. . that's how we roll..), but i can only really think of one of them who is in sync with you. but she also calls meat eaters "murderers".
being pragmatic, the one thing that i do feel pretty sure about is that whatever "comprehensive immigration reform" winds up being, neither side will be happy with it.
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
e.b., you know i usually share the same opinions as you, but on this one, well, you aren't convincing me. really, it's more in the other direction.
when all of this brouha started up again, i was much more sympathetic to the illegal's plight. i really wasn't aware just how many people had snuck in or overstayed visas. but still, i was trying to be understanding.
to be honest, it's the "skirting the issue" bullet points, buzz phrases and increasingly petulant delivery of them by illegal immigrant leaders that has done the most to turn me off.
You are being awfully disingenuous. You and I both know that I never had a chance of convincing you. I don't think you are part of my target audience (although of course I wouldn't mind).
did you even read what i said; and try to understand it? good grief.. it's not the attitude of most illegals that is undermining their cause, it is PEOPLE LIKE YOU...
your response to virtually anyone who doesn't fervently nod their head to every thing you say comes across as something like (to paraphrase) "i can tell from my morally superior heights that you are a heartless, discompassionate, racist bigot."
yeah.. there's a an attiude sure to warm the cockles...
Your latest tack is laughable**. You say "America is a nation of laws" and then complain about my side's use of "buzz phrases". You say a "petulant delivery" turns you off, so you decide to side with Tancredo.
** like i said.. how's the view from up there?
"comprehensive immigration reform"
"we didn't cross the border, the border crossed us."
"path to citizenship"
"you'll break up families"
"the real issue is compassion"
"etc."
Quote:
i hang with a very liberal group (hey, it's l.a. . that's how we roll..), but i can only really think of one of them who is in sync with you. but she also calls meat eaters "murderers".
being pragmatic, the one thing that i do feel pretty sure about is that whatever "comprehensive immigration reform" winds up being, neither side will be happy with it.
You claim to "hang with liberals", but of course the definition of "liberal" is subjective in these cases. If you are "liberal" then I am not liberal. I think there are many things that you and I would disagree about.
too funny! this is the first time that an east coaster has told me that i and my fellow "california liberals" aren't liberal enough! wow!
and btw, your remark that i "claim to hang with liberals" is the kind of thing i was pointing out to you earlier as personal snarking. that statement brought not one thing of substance to the discussion.
The "liberal" dogma I strongly disagree with is anti-globalism-- and I suspect that you buy into this doctrine, and that this is the true motive for your opposition to "illegal" immigration.
i've given my reasons for being against illegal immigration repeatedly over several threads; thou doth suspect too much..
I find that anti-globalism is not only illogical. From the idea that some people should be born priveleged and then have the right to keep others out, to the strange economic ideas that by eliminating workers you can strengthen an economy.
WTF are you talking about ??
Anti-globalism also to goes directly against the traditional "progressive" values of diversity, respect for humanity and basic decency.
my gawdddd... the air must really be rarefied up there..
now you claim that anyone who disagrees with you is devoid of values of diversity, respect for humanity and basic decency ? is that what you are showing when you call americans "nativists" and "european immigrants"? please... i saw "gangs of new york" too...
What you are objecting to in my arugment is that I am pointing out that "progressives" have often been on the illegal side of "law and order" arguments. (I use the term "progressive" to differentiate myself from your use of the term "liberal".)
For someone who claims to hail from a "liberal" progressive tradition to use a "law and order" argument is least ironic.
what's ironic is that you seem to measure a liberal progressive's bonifides by their readiness to embrace anarchy.
you say law and order like there should be none. i'd be willing to bet that if you came home and found someone in your home without permission you'd be on the phone to the cops, not roger mahoney.
your response to virtually anyone who doesn't fervently nod their head to every thing you say comes across as something like (to paraphrase) "i can tell from my morally superior heights that you are a heartless, discompassionate, racist bigot."
Quote:
your response to virtually anyone who doesn't fervently nod their head to every thing you say comes across as something like (to paraphrase) "i can tell from my morally superior heights that you are a heartless, discompassionate, racist bigot."
I don't agree with everything Ebrown says, in fact I'm for ending illegal immigration, but he doesn't refer to me as a 'racist bigot' and never has.
Heartless, maybe, but in an equal-opportunity fashion
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:Quote:
your response to virtually anyone who doesn't fervently nod their head to every thing you say comes across as something like (to paraphrase) "i can tell from my morally superior heights that you are a heartless, discompassionate, racist bigot."
I don't agree with everything Ebrown says, in fact I'm for ending illegal immigration, but he doesn't refer to me as a 'racist bigot' and never has.
Heartless, maybe, but in an equal-opportunity fashion
Cycloptichorn
and ruthless... i wonder where ruth is ??
it's been put out there by the illegal's rights leaders and has come up here on a2k. sometimes in subtle ways as well; nativist has an inherent conotation of one being a racist and/or bigot, doesn't it ?
