-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
They Took Our Jobs!!
- Thread starter Jb
- Start date
Umm I never said we had a right to take their land, I how ever am saying that the argument is a failed one since Indian nations no longer exists, and thus we are talking about illegal immigrants entering this country, which has recognized borders and they are breaking the law. The Indian nations have full right to throw those immigrants out or to make war with them for settling in their land ( And many of them did ), but as we both know those nations no longer exist, and as such the right to protect their borders moves to the current nation, the United States.
Last edited:
So what is the south park line then? I don't understand mentioning a quote from a tv series when you fail to provide the quote at all
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_wrongs_make_a_right
It doesn't help anything if we let people immigrate freely and without regulation. It doesn't rectify the wrongdoing that we did to Native Americans and even does an extra wrongdoing on the people whose lives will be complicated in the process of taking in any every single person who wants to sneak over the border. It was a terrible thing to conquer Native Americans and take their land as our own, but that doesn't warrant illegal immigration. Two wrongs don't make a right. We have to keep our minds and morals in the present.
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
You said to look at it from a perspective, and I did, and I when I did, I realized that if settlers had no right to invade the Native Americas and Mexicans have no right to invade the current Americas, then neither of them is more or less justified. There's really no point in saying one has "no more a right" to do so than the other, unless you're somehow advocating that we, the decendants of conquerors (not even really able to help the situation we were born into, really) need to get what's coming to us by letting someone else invade us. Invasion, illegal immigration, whatever the heck is it, can't be justified by precedence because it's wrong in the first place. Maybe you were trying for another point though, I don't know.
I have no problem with immigration, and immigrants need jobs like any other citizens. But the message of the cartoons just didn't settle with me right.
Last edited:
Yet why should we not be outraged by illegal immigration? Land changes hands numerous times, Indian tribes took from other Indian tribes, the Europeans took from the Indians, the Americans took from the Indians, etc etc etc. You cannot go back and point to one definite owner of a area, but at each time the current owners of the land had a right to be outraged for the encroachment. And just as Indians were ****** at other Indians moving in, and those Indians were ****** at the French/Spanish moving in and then the Americans moving in after it was sold to the Americans, Americans have a right to be ****** at Mexicans moving in. Especially since the border region is filled with drug smuggling and gang violence. Difference though is that in the past, with the indians, the resulting immigration into land usually resulted in violence. So far we haven't taken up arms against those invading our country.
Immigration does annoy me. Even legal immigration.
They take up jobs
Some end up living off benefits because they can't find jobs
They take up space. A problem in the U.K. because the countryside is being built on to provide homes. When the government encourages a higher population while building on farmland. i.e. land used to produce FOOD, then there will eventually be problems with food supply.
I'm not overly keen on this EU freedom of movement thing for these reasons.
They take up jobs
Some end up living off benefits because they can't find jobs
They take up space. A problem in the U.K. because the countryside is being built on to provide homes. When the government encourages a higher population while building on farmland. i.e. land used to produce FOOD, then there will eventually be problems with food supply.
I'm not overly keen on this EU freedom of movement thing for these reasons.
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
Well I mean we all know immigrants really made the nation I live in now, especially California, and pretty much made America's "melting pot" culture. Actually the mass immigration to California and to other parts of the nation pretty much fueled the Industrial Revolution and made us who we are.
Now that we are that, is more legal immigration damaging anything? This is a legitimate question like any other. Especially if we're not talking about the United States. The United States depended upon the culture immigrants brought to it to make a culture for it, and in the world of enterprise at least, that sort of is the culture of the United States, to take in others and work miracles to make them coexist.
But other countries already have established cultures, and even to a point, the United States has a sort of English settler culture that's deeply rooted in it - this matter is touched upon in Ethan's thread about cultural assimilation. So the question takes on a different meaning when you look at it this way. Do these societies need immigrants? Do they deserve to cement their culture in law for their own comfort and draw some guidelines to make the place their own, or should everywhere be an outlet for anyone to enter and make themselves at home?
Now that we are that, is more legal immigration damaging anything? This is a legitimate question like any other. Especially if we're not talking about the United States. The United States depended upon the culture immigrants brought to it to make a culture for it, and in the world of enterprise at least, that sort of is the culture of the United States, to take in others and work miracles to make them coexist.
But other countries already have established cultures, and even to a point, the United States has a sort of English settler culture that's deeply rooted in it - this matter is touched upon in Ethan's thread about cultural assimilation. So the question takes on a different meaning when you look at it this way. Do these societies need immigrants? Do they deserve to cement their culture in law for their own comfort and draw some guidelines to make the place their own, or should everywhere be an outlet for anyone to enter and make themselves at home?
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
Well I mean we all know immigrants really made the nation I live in now, especially California, and pretty much made America's "melting pot" culture. Actually the mass immigration to California and to other parts of the nation pretty much fueled the Industrial Revolution and made us who we are.
Now that we are that, is more legal immigration damaging anything? This is a legitimate question like any other. Especially if we're not talking about the United States. The United States depended upon the culture immigrants brought to it to make a culture for it, and in the world of enterprise at least, that sort of is the culture of the United States, to take in others and work miracles to make them coexist.
But other countries already have established cultures, and even to a point, the United States has a sort of English settler culture that's deeply rooted in it - this matter is touched upon in Ethan's thread about cultural assimilation. So the question takes on a different meaning when you look at it this way. Do these societies need immigrants? Do they deserve to cement their culture in law for their own comfort and draw some guidelines to make the place their own, or should everywhere be an outlet for anyone to enter and make themselves at home?
Now that we are that, is more legal immigration damaging anything? This is a legitimate question like any other. Especially if we're not talking about the United States. The United States depended upon the culture immigrants brought to it to make a culture for it, and in the world of enterprise at least, that sort of is the culture of the United States, to take in others and work miracles to make them coexist.
But other countries already have established cultures, and even to a point, the United States has a sort of English settler culture that's deeply rooted in it - this matter is touched upon in Ethan's thread about cultural assimilation. So the question takes on a different meaning when you look at it this way. Do these societies need immigrants? Do they deserve to cement their culture in law for their own comfort and draw some guidelines to make the place their own, or should everywhere be an outlet for anyone to enter and make themselves at home?
Murky_Night
Jirafa
SunnyC you live in California too? i guess i should start reading locations. Suddenly SunnyC makes sense to me now.
Anyway. Living in the Central Valley of California where over half of all my friends are Mexican. I have heard how they feel about anti-immigration. They really think all the people behind the borders and everything are racist. Even though i disagree with that opinion, i have to agree when things come to far (Arizona). I just wonder what would have happened if i was raised elsewhere without my Hispanic friends, would i have become a racist right-wing republican?. Especially when my parents are so racist against Mexicans(and i mean racist, my mom cussed out Mac&Cheese box cuz it had Spanish on it).
Anyway. Living in the Central Valley of California where over half of all my friends are Mexican. I have heard how they feel about anti-immigration. They really think all the people behind the borders and everything are racist. Even though i disagree with that opinion, i have to agree when things come to far (Arizona). I just wonder what would have happened if i was raised elsewhere without my Hispanic friends, would i have become a racist right-wing republican?. Especially when my parents are so racist against Mexicans(and i mean racist, my mom cussed out Mac&Cheese box cuz it had Spanish on it).
Wow so many ignorant statements I have no idea where to begin. First being against Illegal Immigration is not being against Immigration. Second being against Illegal Immigration does not make one racist, that does not mean if they are right wing, or left wing. Nor does what Arizona rightfully did to protect itself mean anything other than it is protecting itself from a immediate problem which I might remind you as of recently includes assassins from drug gangs crossing into Arizona to kill.
Are there some racists that are also anti immigrant both legal and illegal? Yes, but then again there are some Mexicans who believe that more illegals should come over to reclaim land that they lost to the United States.
And I will remind you that being Anti Illegal Immigration is nothing more than the most Pro Immigrant stance a person can take. As Immigrants, LEGAL Immigrants, have to overcome challenges themselves including very hard and long waiting process to become a legal citizen. To support a class of people, that flaunts that process, that spits in the face of those that worked their *** off to get here legally and to proudly become a American, is a disservice to every Legal immigrant here.
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
Personally, the infamous Arizona law does not sound racist at all to me. I think it has just become a fashion to hate it. The law would simply require people are already pulled over by speeding, other laws etc, to show their ID. American adults are supposed to keep their ID in their wallet/with them at all times so what's the problem? In fact the fashion of hating the Arizona law has inspired quite a few racist sentiments against Caucasions or Republicans.
And really, some people, regardless of their race, have no understanding about illegal immigration and immigration. My friend, who's Mexican, went to a rally in my city protesting tighter immigration measures, believing that the government was going to deport his family. Even though he's third generation legal Mexican-American. He was that ignorant about it.
Of course, it didn't help that people were there throwing eggs at the protesters, saying, "Go home, wetbacks!" I'm even divided on calling them racist, even though wetback is a derogatory term. I mean, from their point of view, why would somebody come if they aren't in support of illegal immigrants? Wouldn't they then satisfy criteria to either be "wetbacks" or supporters of? Even though of course, they weren't entirely right, and many people there were probably just following the fashion, didn't know any better and refused to listen to the facts.
Even though you did not say that they are, and I believe what you say about your parents, I have to agree with BigLutz in this instance, being racist is not a "Republican thing". There are white, racist Republicans, and there are people who are racist against Mexicans, but to say the two are usually connected is a different sort of bigotry all of its own.
I just think that all types of immigration in Britain are causing too many problems. There aren't enough jobs for everyone. There aren't enough houses. The disadvantages outweigh the advantages, I think.
Murky_Night
Jirafa
first of all, when did i say i agreed that anti-illegal immigration? i said i agree with them when it comes to far, again Arizona. And yes i disagree with Arizona's law, I just think it i s racial profiling. Nothing to add, it doesn't matter if the law says its its not, do really the the cops won't treat it like racial profiling?
SunnyC and Biglutz- look at what i said
i said a racist right wing republican. If i thought all republicans were racist i would have just said "republican". though i suppose i should have put commas so you guy would understand i was describing what kind of republican i was talking about. But hey, i don't have an A plus in English and it was late.
All i was simply saying is that i understand when Hispanics get angry when people talk about immigration. I don't agree with them but i do understand how they feel when things get too far.
as for the whole racist-parent thing that was meant to be off topic and separate from the other part of my post. It was simply on my mind i wanted to express it. Plus i don't remember what time it was but it was late, and i was tired. I probably shouldn't have even been on the computer, i really about to fall asleep on the keyboard. I would try coffee next time but coffee is so gross.
Murky_Night
Jirafa
first of all, when did i say i agreed that anti-illegal immigration? i said i agree with them when it comes to far, again Arizona. And yes i disagree with Arizona's law, I just think it i s racial profiling. Nothing to add, it doesn't matter if the law says its its not, do really the the cops won't treat it like racial profiling?
SunnyC and Biglutz- look at what i said
i said a racist right wing republican. If i thought all republicans were racist i would have just said "republican". though i suppose i should have put commas so you guy would understand i was describing what kind of republican i was talking about. But hey, i don't have an A plus in English and it was late.
All i was simply saying is that i understand when Hispanics get angry when people talk about immigration. I don't agree with them but i do understand how they feel when things get too far.
as for the whole racist-parent thing that was meant to be off topic and separate from the other part of my post. It was simply on my mind i wanted to express it. Plus i don't remember what time it was but it was late, and i was tired. I probably shouldn't have even been on the computer, i really about to fall asleep on the keyboard. I would try coffee next time but coffee is so gross.
Well first you are automatically profiling in assuming the cops will do so. Second the law goes to GREAT lengths to prevent racial profiling, but lets also not forget that the VAST and I do mean VAST majority of Illegals in that state are Hispanic. Arizona does have to do something, especially with the drug lords now crossing the US border by sending "Hitmen" into Arizona. Washington is paralyzed by Latino groups who see any type of border protection as a afront to them, and or wish to see more illegals come into this country. At some point Arizona and the other border states DO have to protect themselves if the authorities wont do anything.
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
People like you and me grow up and get jobs as cops. I have one friend in the security business and looking to have another in the highway patrol. What makes you think policemen are more prone to be racial profilers than anybody else?
And, read the second paragraph.
Someone already has to commit a crime in order for a cop to ask them for their identification and then take action if they don't have it. That's what the Arizona law is. Meaning, the policeman already has to be in the process of enforcing a law, and have a legal reason to talk to someone before they check to see if they're a legal citizen. So it makes no sense to think of this as racial profiling.
It's more like legal profiling. In fact to drag the race of millions of people violating the system into this, that's racist in and of itself. They don't need the immense pity and it's not helping improve the perception that all races as equal. They should have to work equally hard to get into the US.
Commas make no difference. It's a stereotype of the Republican party to be white and racist. Just like any other stereotype you'd stand up against and correct for the purpose of being fair. Just saying it like that makes someone want to explain that not all Republicans are like that.
Try some hot black chai tea, it's got caffeine in it. It would need sugar though.
Murky_Night
Jirafa
^_^ thanks shall try it sometime
I do not think cop are more prone to be racial profilers. Everyone has judged someone because of race some time. Besides. It is not like they will be suspicious of a Scottish man, even though he has a huge van with no windows, chances are they won't think he is storing a Dominican family in the back. (PS i absolutely know what you guys will say next....and i has no defense
)