Torn on This Issue

[rlg94086]

Bye. Come back when you can formulate a decent argument to any of the points I made in my post. So far, you’ve only commented on my technique.

hahahaha and this folks is the reason people shouldn’t guess.

What happened I actually called you out and hurt your feelings, sorry bro. I look at everything, and I did take the time to read critically, you didnt because my profile clearly states about me.

It wasnt about who can win it was the snotty way in which you were replying by stating that the poster was dumb. hence the reason I stated the word BIAS in my original post to you.

I leave you to go back to thinking you know it all…bye

 

[I_question_God]

Bye. Come back when you can formulate a decent argument to any of the points I made in my post. So far, you’ve only commented on my technique.

exactly because I came here to learn. I did not come here to argue but if that is your way of teaching, I have all the time in the world

 

[Ituyu]

That was then, and this is now. Your arguments are silly. There are established borders in the world, and the governments of those lands make laws governing their people and immigration.

Well, you quote my words and then you fail to address them and go off on a different tangent. Here is something I found that may be of interest:

“As a policy, the United States has erected steel walls along traditional migration routs, forcing migrants to cross through searing deserts. …"

" "Many if not most of these migrants are Indigenous Peoples from Mexico and Latin America seeking only an economically better way of life for their families. And many have already died from exposure in these deserts. We fear, as Professor James Riding In, Pawnee and associate professor of American Indian studies at Arizona State University, that racism is a key element in the focus on the southern border. As he stated in an interview with Indian Country Today, ‘‘Racially, these people are being targeted in the name of national security… Canada is not under the same scrutiny; most people coming across the Canadian border are light-skinned people. Most of the people coming across the southern border are brown-skinned people, Mayans and others… they are Indians.’’ “

Excerpt from:

**International Indian Treaty Council Statement to the Alianza Indígena Sin Fronteras Southern Indigenous Peoples Press Conference on Border Rights, **
August 17, 2006

 

[rlg94086]

“Traditional migration routes?” You’ll need to give some back-up to that…and while you are at it, can you give a breakdown of tribes these immigrants represent? Also, other than playing the race card for effect, can you show how our policies are racist?

Anyway, it’s all irrelevant, because the conquest of these lands happened many moons ago. We live in today, where the US has legal control of its own borders.

Well, you quote my words and then you fail to address them and go off on a different tangent. Here is something I found that may be of interest:

“As a policy, the United States has erected steel walls along traditional migration routs, forcing migrants to cross through searing deserts. …"

" "Many if not most of these migrants are Indigenous Peoples from Mexico and Latin America seeking only an economically better way of life for their families. And many have already died from exposure in these deserts. We fear, as Professor James Riding In, Pawnee and associate professor of American Indian studies at Arizona State University, that racism is a key element in the focus on the southern border. As he stated in an interview with Indian Country Today, ‘‘Racially, these people are being targeted in the name of national security… Canada is not under the same scrutiny; most people coming across the Canadian border are light-skinned people. Most of the people coming across the southern border are brown-skinned people, Mayans and others… they are Indians.’’ “

Excerpt from:

**International Indian Treaty Council Statement to the Alianza Indígena Sin Fronteras Southern Indigenous Peoples Press Conference on Border Rights, **

August 17, 2006

 

[Fremont]

Fremont;1572308:

Ituyu;1572088:

Another convenient argument. Those who come “illegally” today did nothing different from those who came “legally” then. That’s another reason that our laws are arbitrary. To make them “foreigners” or “illegals” on their native land is wrong. We had essentially open borders for most of our history with Mexico and yet they didn’t all move here. They’ve always come for jobs and a better life just like their ancestors before them and our ancestors before us. It has always worked well for those on either side of the border and it is still true today.

The point is that citizenship, alien, foreigner, etc. are political concepts not biochemical principals. Neucleic acid polymers have nothing to do with such concepts.

Again, Wikipedia:

Citizenship is membership in a political community - - a person having such membership is a citizen. Citizenship derives from a legal relationship with a state.

Anyone residing in a country that is not a citizen of that country is an alien, or foreigner (if one considers those synonymous terms). Those are not necessarily derogatory terms to me. If I chose to move to some other country I would be designated as an alien, or foreigner. I would not be offended because that is an accurate designation of my political status there.

But, aliens do not have the same rights and privileges as citizens. Polymeric neucleic acid structures in no way either endow or deny any political rights or privlilages to anyone. Only the law can do that. That is fair, just and moral as far as I am concerned.

There is a huge difference between those who came, and come, here legally and those who come here illegally. That is the whole point. Those who honor, respect and obey immigration laws are not the same as those who defy and violate immigration laws.

US immigration laws are not arbitrary, capricious, unjust or wrong – except maybe in your mind. The Church has never stated that any US immigration laws are arbitrary or unjust. Our judicial system has not ruled our immigration laws are a violation of the Constitution or any statute. Just because you make such claims does not make your claims true. If anything your claims are arbitrary and impulsive – based solely on your personal opinion with no basis in US secular law or Church pronouncements.

 

[Fremont]

Fremont;1572214:

You’ve never once addressed “illegal” immigration from any place else but our southern border. We have a much more porous boder with Canada that is three or four times larger which is far easier to cross than our southern border.

If you don’t know that our immigration policies have always been directed at particular waves of immigrants then you simply don’t know how we’ve dealt with the issue since the beginning.

Of course, I understand that our health issues have been a policy. However, a fence does nothing to identity or protect us from the problem. A procedure that requires them to get checked before admittance does just that. A fence would leave us more vulnerable because as the experts responsible for border control have said, fencing does not work.

Here’s another tidbit from the study:

Immigrants, even those from countries that are much
poorer and have lower average life expectancies than the United
States, are healthier than U.S. natives of the same age and sex.
New immigrants have better records with respect to infant
mortality and health than do U.S. natives and immigrants who have
been in the United States longer."

Controlling diseases is a good idea for anybody on our side of the border. The fence idea does nothing about the 11 million people already here. If they’re sick, we need to know and a fence wastes monies that could help us all be safer in this respect where ever we find a problem.

You can make all the false accusations about my statements and motives you want if that is what you need to satiate your ego. “Sticks and Stones - - -.” I find it rather amusing to see your flailing around with wild claims and such weak basis for them.

Irrespective of your false accusations about me they in no way make US immigration laws arbitrary or unfairly focused on any ethnic or national groups. Your claims in this area are flawed and are not backed by the Church or any secular legal authority.

The fence will be a deterrent to illegal immigration, a good step in the right direction. I hope there will be more positive steps to discourage, hopefully eliminate, illegal immigration into the US from any and all other countries.

There are alternatives to addressing our labor demands and I am confident we can appreciate and utilize those alternatives rather than rely on unlawful behavior by illegal immigrants.

I want to see all immigration to the US legal and with better protection for the common good with health inspections of all immigrants.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Al Masetti;1571805:

Then maybe you should be consulting with Homeland Security and our Border Patrol because they don’t think so.

" T.J. Bonner, the president of the National Border Patrol Council, the main union for Border Patrol agents. “San Diego is the most heavily fortified border in the entire country and yet it’s not stopping people from coming across.”

11 million people looking at the fence from our side of the border seem to confirm Mr Bonner’s observations. All the fencing did was divert traffic from San Diego temporarily but now border crossing at San Diego is once again on the rise.

Pipelines, railroads and highways (linear construction projects) are routinely constructed very rapidly. Maybe the government is incapable of doing these projects rapidly (why does that not surprise me?), but the private sector does it routinely. And has for decades. No magic. Just skilled work.

 

[Fremont]

That was then, and this is now. Your arguments are silly. There are established borders in the world, and the governments of those lands make laws governing their people and immigration.

Everything else you have said is garbage. Mexico’s borders did change, when they were defeated by the United States. Citizens of the United States have come from all over the world. Some came when the borders were completely open, others came after immigration laws were changed. Whatever process or lack of process they had at the time determined the legality of their entry.

As someone whose ancestory includes the Europeans who settled here in the 1600s and the Native Americans who were already here, I take exception to your constant argument that anyone from Mexico who is coming here is “indigenous” to the United States. It’s ridiculous. Most are of mixed Spanish and Native American heritage, but their Native American ancestors were not on this piece of land now called the United States.

My Native American ancestors would have kicked their butts, if they tried to encroach on their land 400 years ago.

Well stated and on point.

Absurd and ridiculous claims will persuade no one and do nothing to move us forward.

The political climate of the Americas has changed over the years – as has the political climate of just about everywhere else in the world. It is up to all to face reality and work to improve the quality of life for all within those realities.

 

[Ituyu]

US immigration laws are not arbitrary, capricious, unjust or wrong – except maybe in your mind. The Church has never stated that any US immigration laws are arbitrary or unjust. Our judicial system has not ruled our immigration laws are a violation of the Constitution or any statute. Just because you make such claims does not make your claims true. If anything your claims are arbitrary and impulsive – based solely on your personal opinion with no basis in US secular law or Church pronouncements

Our country has a sad history replete with unfair and injustice actions against people due to race, ethinic origin and religion that includes our neighbors to the South.

Racism against Native Americans

Main article: Native Americans in the United States
edit]

Colonization, dispossession

Hundreds of native peoples comprising millions of individuals lived in the territories that would become the United States. During the colonial and independent periods, a long series of Indian Wars were fought with the primary objective of obtaining much of North America as territory of the U.S. Through wars, massacre, the intentional and unintentional spread of disease, forced displacement (such as in the Trail of Tears), restriction of food rights, and the imposition of treaties, land was taken and numerous hardships imposed. Ideologies justifying the context included stereotypes of Native Americans as “merciless Indian savages” (as described in the United States Declaration of Independence) and the quasi-religious doctrine of Manifest Destiny which asserted divine blessing for United States conquest. Once their territories were incorporated into the United States, surviving Native Americans were denied equality before the law and often treated as wards of the state. Further dispossession continued through concession for industries such as oil, mining and timber and through division of land through legislation such as the allotment act. Thousands of American Indians and Alaska Natives were forced to attend a residential school system which sought to reeducate them in white settler American values, culture and economy–to “kill the Indian, [while] sav[ing] the man.”
.

 

[rlg94086]

Yes. We also had a legalized system of slavery, but things changed.

What do some of our sadder points of history have to do with our current immigration laws? Do our faults of the past make our current laws null and void?

Our country has a sad history replete with unfair and injustice actions against people due to race, ethinic origin and religion that includes our neighbors to the South.

Racism against Native Americans

Main article: Native Americans in the United States
edit]

Colonization, dispossession

Hundreds of native peoples comprising millions of individuals lived in the territories that would become the United States. During the colonial and independent periods, a long series of Indian Wars were fought with the primary objective of obtaining much of North America as territory of the U.S. Through wars, massacre, the intentional and unintentional spread of disease, forced displacement (such as in the Trail of Tears), restriction of food rights, and the imposition of treaties, land was taken and numerous hardships imposed. Ideologies justifying the context included stereotypes of Native Americans as “merciless Indian savages” (as described in the United States Declaration of Independence) and the quasi-religious doctrine of Manifest Destiny which asserted divine blessing for United States conquest. Once their territories were incorporated into the United States, surviving Native Americans were denied equality before the law and often treated as wards of the state. Further dispossession continued through concession for industries such as oil, mining and timber and through division of land through legislation such as the allotment act. Thousands of American Indians and Alaska Natives were forced to attend a residential school system which sought to reeducate them in white settler American values, culture and economy–to “kill the Indian, [while] sav[ing] the man.”
.

 

[Ituyu]

“Traditional migration routes?” You’ll need to give some back-up to that

Tohono O’dham Nation

…and while you are at it, can you give a breakdown of tribes these immigrants represent

Though we can’t change the past, denying it doesn’t erase it either.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_United_States

 

[rlg94086]

Maybe you should focus your efforts on some other “racists”:
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2005/08/03/cstillwell.DTL

It turns out that racism in Mexico, both against blacks and dark-skinned indigenous Indians, has a long history. Mexico’s colonial past has left its mark on modern-day society. Prejudice toward “pureblood” Indians from those who are “mixed-blood” (Spanish and Indian) is rife. Almost uniformly, people who are darker-skinned and of Indian descent make up the peasantry and working classes, while lighter-skinned, Spanish-descent Mexicans are in the ruling elite. Fox himself comes from that background, as his appearance makes evident.
This inequality may explain in part why the majority of immigrants coming into the United States fall into the darker-skinned category. Beyond the failure of the Mexican government to sustain a decent economy, darker-skinned Mexicans have a difficult time getting work because of job discrimination.

According to the Web site IndigenousPeople.net, “sixty percent of Indians over 12 years of age are already unemployed, and of those who work, most earn less than the minimum wage of about $2.50 a day.” The same story notes that Mexico City’s top restaurants don’t allow patrons to bring along Indian domestic workers for fear of tarnishing their business image.

We don’t treat people like that in the US, but we do protect our borders. Is that a sin? I would recommend you rally the Mexican government to fix its economy and end its racist policies in their own country.

Our country has a sad history replete with unfair and injustice actions against people due to race, ethinic origin and religion that includes our neighbors to the South.

Racism against Native Americans

Main article: Native Americans in the United States
edit]

 

[Ituyu]

Well stated and on point.

Absurd and ridiculous claims will persuade no one and do nothing to move us forward.

The political climate of the Americas has changed over the years – as has the political climate of just about everywhere else in the world. It is up to all to face reality and work to improve the quality of life for all within those realities.

Well it appears that the past has not changed much. At least in the opinion of Indigenous leadership groups that was referenced earlier.

The International Indian Treaty Council has Consultative Status to the United Nations Economic Council since 1977, and was the first Indigenous organization to be so recognized. IITC has been working to uphold the sovereignty, self- determination and human rights of Indigenous Peoples in the international arena for over thirty years. Since 1974, the IITC has been attending and participating in session of various United Nations fora. In the initial years we began by attended the meetings of the Commission on Human Rights, that this year was replaced by the United Nations Human Rights Council. Throughout the years, the IITC has been joined by thousands of representatives of Indigenous Nations and organizations in insisting that our human rights be observed and respected by the members of the United Nations, the countries of the world.

 

[Ituyu]

Yes. We also had a legalized system of slavery, but things changed.

What do some of our sadder points of history have to do with our current immigration laws? Do our faults of the past make our current laws null and void?

From the arguments of the Enforcement Only camp, they seem to follow along the historic lines of reasoning. You have not offered one single reason the holds up to scrutiny for a wasteful fence.

 

[rlg94086]

Absolutely! But first it is you and others who have directed all the attention to the Indigenous peoples on our southern border. It is you that has promoted a policy that would mean a higher death rate on these people and it is you that has ignored our northern border. So to be accurate, it is YOU has played the race card not me.

You are joking aren’t you? My only posts regarding indigenous people have been in response to you. You have created more than one thread claiming that indigenous peoples are some monolithic group that has land and migration rights to all of the Americas. It’s historically inaccurate and irrelevant to the reality of todays borders.

Regarding the Tohono O’odham Nation…I first brought the few tribes whose borders straddle our borders in another response to you a long time ago, where I said that I would have no problem giving migration rights to people of that tribe. However, it is a small group, and they don’t represent the majority of the immigrants who are illegally crossing our borders.

 

[Ituyu]

Maybe you should focus your efforts on some other “racists”:

We don’t treat people like that in the US, but we do protect our borders. Is that a sin?

 

[Ituyu]

You are joking aren’t you? My only posts regarding indigenous people have been in response to you. You have created more than one thread claiming that indigenous peoples are some monolithic group that has land and migration rights to all of the Americas. It’s historically inaccurate and irrelevant to the reality of todays borders.

Well I’m glad you can laugh about it. But, I guess it’s just “coincidence” that you policies only target a group of non-Whites. You simply avoid the issue of our northern border. But, I don’t think a fence is called for on our northern border either. It’s a false sense of security. I think we have more to worry about from our own “home grown” terrorists.

Regarding the Tohono O’odham Nation…I first brought the few tribes whose borders straddle our borders in another response to you a long time ago, where I said that I would have no problem giving migration rights to people of that tribe. However, it is a small group, and they don’t represent the majority of the immigrants who are illegally crossing our borders.

That would be very generous of you, but in order for the fence to be anywhere near solid we would have to place an environmentally unsafe fence across their Nation. That alone would be 10% of the fence. And, even then I found no supportive documents suggesting that a fence would work. It’s a waste of taxpayer dollars, a danger to the environment, means hardships on Indigenous Nations, more people wlll die and in the end it won’t solve the problem because this influx is not the problem it’s only a symptom.

 

[rlg94086]

Why do you keep asking me about the fence? It isn’t the original focus of the thread, and I don’t think I’ve made any strong comments either for or against the fence.

I do believe we need to enforce our borders and change our immigration policy, but I’m on the fence regarding the fence. It doesn’t bother me if we do it, but it is not a complete solution by any stretch of the imagination.

If you want discuss the fence with people who care, maybe you should start a thread about it…

That would be very generous of you, but in order for the fence to be anywhere near solid we would have to place an environmentally unsafe fence across their Nation. That alone would be 10% of the fence. And, even then I found no supportive documents suggesting that a fence would work. It’s a waste of taxpayer dollars, a danger to the environment, means hardships on Indigenous Nations, more people wlll die and in the end it won’t solve the problem because this influx is not the problem it’s only a symptom.

 

[rlg94086]

This just more of the usual deflection. What do internal Mexican policies have to do with our internal policies?

As much as the historical points you keep bringing up have to do with our current immigration policies.

My point is that the real outrage is South of our border, but you prefer to focus on claiming that those who want to protect our own border are racists. If you really are concerned with the plight of the people of Mexico, move on down there and work for their civil rights. That’s where the problem is…

 

[Ituyu]

Why do you keep asking me about the fence? It isn’t the original focus of the thread, and I don’t think I’ve made any strong comments either for or against the fence.

I do believe we need to enforce our borders and change our immigration policy, but I’m on the fence regarding the fence. It doesn’t bother me if we do it, but it is not a complete solution by any stretch of the imagination.

If you want discuss the fence with people who care, maybe you should start a thread about it…

Maybe I should say Enforcement Only proposals and it’s the most common theme offered as some kind of security measure or cure. Immigration, legal or otherwise in not even a problem, it’s a solution to our need for labor and to provide us with the population growth needed for our infrastructure. None of the anti-immigrant arguments here have made legitimate attempts at addressing the issue.