Originally posted by Rete
> From End of World Poverty
>
>
> > What a big heart you have. They are welcome as long they don't
move into
> > your neighborhood.
>
> He never implied that
>
> >
> >
Are you the one standing down at the hospital shelling out $100 bills to
all
> > of the illegals who are demanding immediate healthcare yet have
absolutely
> > no intention of paying for it?
>
> Actually that is a
moot argument, these individuals do pay taxes and
> if fact they were
legalized then tax compliance would be easier for
> them, so no one but
themselves will pay through their taxes for those
> expenses.
>
>
>
>Are you the one spending your free time
> > educating every child of an
illegal alien parent who managed to escape the
> > notice of the
immigration authorities?
>
> No need to. Again, federal and state
taxes from income earned by these
> individuals would cover these costs
the same way they do for any of
> us.
>
>
> > How many are you
personally bringing
> > into your home and feeding and clothing?
>
>
I'd probably take in a family for a few days until they could begin
>
working and paying taxes like anyone else.
>
>
>
> >
> >
Your heart is so big and caring that you will jam a gun into the head of
> > every one of your neighbors so that they are forced by the police
powers of
> > the State to assuage your guilt feelings and so you can
sleep better at
> > night knowing that "You Care" yet others are
carrying the load, often
> > against their will.
>
> See the previous
point, each immigrant would finance her/his public
> cost.
>
>
> >
What a big heart you have. You hate your neighbor by
> > robbing him to
pay the person who has his own country he should be
> > reforming.
>
>
That is a bit philosphical actually, and much has been said as to the
>
direct relationship of the wellbeing of the U.S. may have to the poor
>
conditions of some of these countries. But nonetheless, reform can
>
also begin from the outside.
>
>
> > I can't vote in other countries,
but the illegal alien can.
>
> You would need to inquire about the
signficance, or lack thereof, of a
> vote in a third world country to
understand how negligible a vote can
> be in these countries some times.
>
>
>
>
> > > It's too easy to tell
> > > people to stay
put and work for change when they are struggling to feed
> > >
themselves and protect their children and old people from famine and
> >
> disease.
> >
> > What is this? Are you saying that the Ends Justify
the Means? No level of
> > criminality is unacceptable as long as the
ends of "protecting their
> > children" (at the expense of the host
country they are leeching) is met?
>
> Maybe then native americans
should deport us all, we are guilty as
> charged of such criminality
against their country and culture. Would
> you dare apply your argument
in that context? I did not think so.
>
>
> > How about just breaking
into houses and stealing everything in sight? How
> > about murder for
hire? Hey, its for the children! Apparently forging
> > documents,
stealing tax dollars, operating motorvehicles without a license
> > or
insurance and a host of other crimes are acceptable in your sight. You
> > have morally disqualified yourself from judging against any wrong
as long as
> > the ends is subjectively noble.
>
> How about telling
native americans you are friendly people and then
> stabbing them on the
back? or how about creating a slave trade. Slave
> labor upon which much
of this country's wealth was amassed?....maybe
> you should not go into
the criminality argument, lest we end up asking
> who came first? the
chicken or the egg?
>
>
> >
> > > Do you have children? How far
would you go to protect them?
> >
> > By breaking a host of laws? So
would you become a drug dealer to "protect
> > your children"?
>
> Read
the part about "an unjust law ceases to be a law". How about the
>
former "Black crow" law, by which "negroes" were legally prohibited to
>
do the same things white americans could? should such a "negro" obey
>
the "Black crow" law so that he would be deemed legally
>
correct?..Ilogical argument again
>
>
>
> I sniped the
previous for it is answered with the answer I gave about
> aliens paying
for federal, state and sales taxes.
>
> > > The U.S. government
provides nobody with a good standard of
> > > living free.
> >
> >
"good" is a subjective term. Our welfare deadbeats in this country have
> > larger living areas and more meat in their diet than your average
western
> > European. No one in need of emergency medical care is
turned away despite
> > having no intention of paying for services
rendered. The lights, water,
> > food, telephone, entertainment,
police, medical and education systems ares
> > ready 24/7/365. I would
think that would be "good".
>
> May I say? "taxes"?
>
> >
> > > The
wealth of the most dominant country in the world,
> > > which owns that
wealth in part through the exploitation of other
> > > countries and
their populations and resources(read countries with
> > > petroleum and
other mineral resources, plus the use of dirt cheap labour
> > > in
Mexico, Guatemala, China, Phillippines, etc. etc.) provides people
> > >
with the opportunity to work and actually get a decent wage for that
> >
> work.
> >
> > And here comes the well anticipated "I Hate America"
dreck typical of the
> > left.
>
> So you are a right-winger? The
previous poster never showed traces of
> hatred towards america. I
believe you are oversimplifying.
>
>
knowledge in the areas of history and
> economical history of the world>
>
> >
> > > I, personally, begrudge nobody that opportunity. These
people
> > > are not "criminals" in the sense that they demonstrate anti-
social
> > > behaviour.
> >
> > Well we are a nation of laws not a
nation based on mushy feelings. Illegal
> > immigrants, by definition
of being illegal are anti-social. If you can't
> > accept that, then
maybe it is their total disregard for our society's
> > culture that
would plant them firmly in the camp of "anti-social". In
> > your
perverted definitions, I guess booing the US soccer team and shouting
>
> "Osama, Osama" at Mexico vs US games here in the US isn't anti-social.
> > Maybe their demands that we cater to their language and culture,
rather than
> > the other way around isn't a sign of being "anti-
social". Maybe the fact
> > they leech off the ~social~ system (ie
education, medicine, law enforcement,
> > entitlement programs) with no
intention of compensating their hosts isn't a
> > sign of being "anti-
social". Maybe screaming for the repatriation of
> > California, New
Mexico, Arizona and Texas isn't a sign of being anti-social.
>
> LOL
that was quite immature, I mean not to realize you are judging
>
billions of people on the reactions of a few, and even if it held true
>
for the majority, it only reveals the issues in international
>
relationships, nothing to do with unjust laws.
>
>
> >
> > > They
break the law of the U.S., yes, because there is no
> > > other way for
them to get in...
> >
> > That is pure bullshit. Every country has its
own laws and its own
> > self-interest at stake in their immigration
programs. Just because we
> > aren't suicidal enough for your tastes
and let every Antonio, José and
> > Hector stream across our borders
totally unimpeded,
>
> Now that just shows your stereotypical attitude.
>
> > it takes a peculiarly
> > perverted sense of reasoning to
conclude that there is "no other way for
> > them to get in". You are
begging the question. Why should we let them in?
>
> Because this
country was stolen from its original inhabitants, and
> because as a
moral consequence it became a country of immigrants which
> have always
helped pave the greatness of this country.
>
>
> > Wasn't building the
maquiladoros good enough? Isn't exporting
> > manufacturing jobs deep
inside the country good enough? Isn't ginving them
> > favorable status
in the production of food to be imported into the US good
> > enough?
Apparently not, giving them free and unrestricted access to every
> >
institution in this country seems to be the only thing acceptable to
you.
>
> That is where your reasoning faults again, the major benefits
are for
> corporate america, not the outsourcing country
>
> >
> > So
why do you hate this country so much that you have no sense of pride or
> > responsibility in maintaining it?
>
> I think there is nothing
implicit about the sense of pride or lack
> thereof, by part of the
previous poster. You seem to be resorting to
> it for you ran out of
arguments.
>
> >
> > > but laws are made by people and are not
> > >
always right or even practical.
> >
> > Who are you to judge? Laws
are made by our elected representatives.
>
>
> Same people who
devised segreagtional laws...are those laws still
> around??
>
> >
> >
> They are certainly not politically
> > > neutral, and if the history
of Europe in the 20th century should have
> > > taught us anything, it's
that blind adherence to the law is not
> > > necessarily a good thing.
>
>
> > OK, we got your number. You are an advocate of lawlessness.
Where each
> > person does what is right in his own eyes.
>
> I doubt
the previous poster advocates lawlessness, I think he meant to
> expose
that positions such as yours are only a facade for racism and
> bigotry.
It has always existed - hopefully it will not one day.
> However, some
of us do believe you do not want to embrace immigration
> (as your
ancesters were embraced in the past) for you suffer from
> racism and
bigotry.
>
>
Then again, maybe not.
--
Lion in Winter
Posted via http://britishexpats.com |