RE: those damn illegals

RE: those damn illegals (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Maya2001 -> RE: those damn illegals (3/29/2008 6:33:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Smith117 quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 You seem to enjoy being arguementive instead of checking your own so called facts. [;)] And what so called facts do you allege that I don't check? quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 Is a goverment website sufficient proof for you that aliens is a term used? I imagine it would be, however, you can show all the documents you like, documents are not "common use." I watch the news nightly, I pay attention to political debates and prior to today, I have never heard the term "legal alien." That's because when they are legal, it's more PC to call them immigrants, or naturalized citizens. That's why on debates about illegal immigration, I frequently see either "illegal alien" or "immigrant." Like I said you love to be arguementive and simply keep changing your words to maintain the arguement and just the refresh your memory ....... your earliers word There are no "legal aliens." There are citizens, naturalized citizens, and then there are visitors. And then there are illegal aliens. and if you would like to continue the argument I am quite willing to pull up news articles and news videos that use the term legal aliens when reporting the news [;)] [:D][sm=crop.gif][sm=crop.gif][sm=crop.gif]

Smith117 -> RE: those damn illegals (3/29/2008 6:38:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Smith, you're enjoying the public spanking? "Legal alien" is a widely used expression; "alien" is an official term for foreigners in the United States; I even have a frikkin' "alien number" on my residency papers. Good enough for ya? For fucksake ROFL! quote: The green card is formally known as the Alien Registration Receipt Card, Form I-151 or I-551. The first receipt cards were Form AR-3 (printed on white paper), and were the product of the Alien Registration Act of 1940. Designed as a national defense measure, the Act required all aliens (non-U.S. citizens) within the United States to register with the U.S. Government. They registered at Post Offices, and their registration forms were forwarded to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) for processing. After processing, a receipt card (Form AR-3) was mailed to each registrant as proof of their compliance with the law. The Alien Registration Act, however, did not discriminate between legal and illegal alien residents. All were registered, and all received AR-3's in return. www.uscis.gov Edit: Sting himself sang a song about it. I'm an alien I'm a legal alien I'm a gentleman in New York Gentleman in New York If a song from popular culture that contains the term isn't good enough evidence that the term "legal alien" is used widely everyday (as well as in legal and immigration jargon), I pray that all that surround you show the infinite patience it would require to deal with your obtusiveness :-) . It's not a public spanking. It's a discussion. Do you confuse the two? As I said, throw up as many documents as you like. I live in Dallas, Texas, USA. And unless you're sitting right next to me as I watch the news and political debates, you likely don't see what I see. And what I have yet to see (prior to today) is the term "legal alien." Prove me wrong. You can't because you aren't here. You don't watch TV with me and you don't know where I go to get my news. Oh I'm sure there may be instances where the term is used. I am also sure that I have not seen those.

Smith117 -> RE: those damn illegals (3/29/2008 6:41:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Maya2001 Like I said you love to be arguementive and simply keep changing your words to maintain the arguement and just the refresh your memory ....... your earliers word There are no "legal aliens." There are citizens, naturalized citizens, and then there are visitors. And then there are illegal aliens. and if you would like to continue the argument I am quite willing to pull up news articles and news videos that use the term legal aliens when reporting the news And my "earliers" other words were that I do not SEE them use that term here. You might see it where you are, I do not. When you're searching for articles and broadcasts, make sure and check if they've aired here. Because I can say definitively that, at the age of 29, having lived here most of my life, except for the 7 years I was out "seeing the world." I have never, not once seen the term "legal alien."

domahpet -> RE: those damn illegals (3/29/2008 6:50:54 PM)
im not following here that closely, but maybe this will help- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_alien

Smith117 -> RE: those damn illegals (3/29/2008 6:55:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domahpet im not following here that closely, but maybe this will help- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_alien That's been posted already.....or it was attempted to be posted, her link didn't work. First, can we agree that "law terms" are not commonly used by society? I think we can. There's an entire lexicon of words lawyers use that many of use will never understand nor want to. So, applying the 'legal term' to a 'common term' arugment is pointless.

Lucylastic -> RE: those damn illegals (3/29/2008 7:09:57 PM)
http://usasearch.gov/search?v%3Aproject=firstgov-web&query=resident+alien Anyone who is/was or will be an alien is aware of it ....... if your link doesnt work... I could post the relevent parts here? Lucy

Smith117 -> RE: those damn illegals (3/29/2008 8:10:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic http://usasearch.gov/search?v%3Aproject=firstgov-web&query=resident+alien Anyone who is/was or will be an alien is aware of it ....... if your link doesnt work... I could post the relevent parts here? Lucy That won't be necessary, as none of those references are what you hear in common conversation.

MissMorrigan -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 1:45:37 AM)
The law is a tool used to ensure justice in a society. I agree with you that there is a great deal of information about this case that has been omitted and by the way, I was not 'going after' you, you mentioned speeding and I rightfully asked if you brought this fact to the authorities' attention, which was a valid comment given the comments regarding why it was this woman had not tried to rectify her status until now. The reason children are mentioned in this thread is b/c they are the crux of this story, Wolf, not a 'derailment'. My comment about branding was not one of seriousness, for goodness sake, it was in response to them being considered 'criminals' given that their mother had them in a country while there supposedly illegally. People are attempting to debate WHY it is the mother is classified as a non-national given that she has spent her entire life, bar five years of it, in the US which, I'm sure others will agree, makes absolutely no sense. quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf I was not the one that had to start talking about extremes, like branding. Those kinds of comments are made to emotionally charge a discussion, not make it a rational one. Just as your comments below are meant to go after me personally, rather than address the issues of 1) The law must me maintained in a society that lives by a rule of law 2) If the law is not just then the people need to lobby for it to be changed 3) The borders must be secured for any revisions to mean anything, otherwise amnesty just means it is okay to break our laws if you can hide out long enough 4) There is obviously information missing, as they choose to seperate her from the children, rather than allow her to take them with her 5) While we put things off, it is the detrimental consequences that teach us to not do this in the future. To not suffer those negative consequences, is to remove a lesson that life is trying to teach her. 6) Speeding is a crime, almost everyone does it, that makes us a criminal. Words do not hurt that much and people should be taught that. Maybe putting them as point will assist you in addressing them. I do not mention the children, because that is not the point of the problems with immigration, that is just fluff to get bleeding hearts to ignore the rule of law.

MissMorrigan -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 2:00:29 AM)
I have no problem with what you have said in the main, I firmly believe that people wanting to work/reside in another country must abide by the laws set out. However, as with anything in life, there are always those exceptions to the rule, and there should be regulations set out to deal with such cases justly. However many children the woman in the OP have is irrelevant, infact, it wouldn't even be a factor if she had US citizenry, so let's not focus on that, it's a little below the belt and taking a pop at cultures that differ. So the question remains. What of those who were brought to the US as young children, would you place them in the same classification as those that entered the US illegally in the first place? If so, how could you justify returning them to a foreign country? I use the term 'foreign' b/c that's exactly what it would be, a country unknown to them. quote: ORIGINAL: EPGAH If you're interested in fairness, how is it "fair" that the taxpayers get to support 8 new lives because some woman couldn't be bothered with birth-control? And if we let her get away with it just 'cause she has children, that will say, "If you have children, break our laws all you want, no consequences!" I also see little to no outcry about AMERICAN criminals who are sent away from their families...How is that "fair"? And if we give FOREIGNS a pass on certain "inconvenient" laws, then since our own citizens are more valuable, what laws can THEY ignore? Remember, one of our country's mottos was "E Pluribus Unum", roughly, "Out of many, ONE"...There's too much focus on the Pluribus, and not enough on the Unum! America DOES need to take a page from other nations, from Australia on down, namely, a stricter attitude: "If you don't like it, LEAVE!"

SeeksOnlyOne -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 4:30:24 AM)
i will echo what Miss Morrigan said and add.....and yes i said this earlier in the thread, but ill repeat it hoping it gets noticed, as someone else said no ones reading anything on here any more....anyhow i digress.... there are as many ignorant citizens with 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, kids in schools. and the ones at my school are normally knocked up again every time you see them. the child of one of the employees at my school had 4 children taken away from her, for being an unfit mother, and immediately got pregnant again. thank goodness they took that baby from her at birth, and im sure she will do it again. she had 4 different baby daddies, one of them spoke no english and she speaks no spanish. i guess wanna fuck is international. the point im trying to make is.......this woman also continues to have babies, never worked, was obviously mentally ill, got food stamps, ssi, welfare, and who knows what else. she put no effort whatsoever into doing anything for her kids, except birthing them. we also helped her when we could with hand me downs, but there was no outcry from the school when her children were taken away....it was more a sigh or relief for we knew those children were maybe going to have a chance to know love and tenderness in their lives before it was too late. now reverse those scenarios-make margarita the citizen with her history and make the custodians daughter the illegal with her history. i would be screaming to go ahead and send the custodians daughter back to mexico and allow those children half a chance at a life. and we would have all been fighting to get the citizen her children back because poor and struggling does not equal not loved and not taught right from wrong and compassion and a strong work ethic. there has to be compassion and logic in curing the illegal problem. there also needs to be compassion and logic in curing the welfare problem we have here in the states. i have my ideas on how that could be done, but im by no means in a position to make it happen other than trying to vote for someone i believe has the same beliefs and goals. but i can do what i can for this one family, logically and compassionately knowing that no good will come out of these kids being separated from their mom. and i will continue to do so. i made a $50 deposit to the defense fund that was started last week and i will pray a lot, knowing it is all i can do. how it turns out will be known in a few weeks or months, and i will let yall know. unless something really catches my eye im gonna drop out of this thread now, and i sincerely thank each of you for your comments. it just seems to have gone a bit down hill and while i dont mind debating the points, some of it is downright silly now. ie...telling someone who is a legal alien they are not-lmfao. like you would make that moniker up! anyhooo..... thanks for all the replies. each of you have given me something to think about.

SleepyParachute -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 5:04:54 AM)
Two Suggestions: # 1. There is no DIS-incentive for illegals. They should get more than a "free ride home" when caught. They should have to reimburse the government for the cost of catching and deporting them. (INS officials will readily tell you that at christmastime... illegals flood the centers to "turn themseves in" and get a free ride home for the holiday). # 2. Children of illegals should not get citizenship. We are pretty foolish for this policy, and many if not most other countries do not follow this policy.

kittinSol -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 6:06:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SleepyParachute # 2. Children of illegals should not get citizenship. We are pretty foolish for this policy, and many if not most other countries do not follow this policy. If one is born on United States territory his or her nationality is American by birth regardless of his or her parents' nationality. If you don't like this, you'll have to change the US Constitution. Good luck! quote: The English common law rule, under which a person's citizenship was determined by the place of his birth, was known as jus soli. The United States generally follows this rule. Authority for this rule is found in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." The Supreme Court endorsed the universality of this rule in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649, 18 S. Ct. 4561142 L. Ed. 890 (1898). http://www.americanlaw.com/citborn.html

cjan -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 6:24:25 AM)
quote: kittensol: If one is born on United States territory his or her nationality is American by birth regardless of his or her parents' nationality. If you don't like this, you'll have to change the US Constitution. Good luck! I take your point and am not arguing it at all. However, along these lines, I remember a chat I once had with my father regarding my "nationality". I was born in Germany from Lithuanian parents and came to this country at the age of 2 with my parents and sister where we all, eventually became "naturalized" U.S. citizens. So, I asked my pops, "what nationality am I? American, German or Lithuanian"? His response was to ask me "if a calf is born in a chicken coop, does that make it a chicken"?

thompsonx -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 7:06:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SleepyParachute # 2. Children of illegals should not get citizenship. We are pretty foolish for this policy, and many if not most other countries do not follow this policy. sleepyParachute: Which countries are those? thompson

EPGAH -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 7:56:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MissMorrigan However many children the woman in the OP have is irrelevant, infact, it wouldn't even be a factor if she had US citizenry, so let's not focus on that, it's a little below the belt and taking a pop at cultures that differ. MissMorrigan: How many children she had IS the point of this article, she's trying to use her children as "leverage" to pull herself back into a country she had every opportunity to leave. Hence the slang-term "anchor-baby"! As to other cultures, this is America, their "culture" is irrelevant here, if they don't like how we do things, they can return to their own country. Indeed, as SleepyParachute mentioned, all she had to do is turn herself in BEFORE she started breeding, and get a free ride home! "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." The law has been perverted from its original intent, as illegals CLEARLY believe themselves above America's jurisdiction, or at least such petty things as OBEYING our rules...Or is that the benefit of their non-citizenship? "It's time to obey American Law" "Oh, I'm Mexican "It's time to obey Mexican Law" "Oh, I'm in America" Best of both worlds; accountability to neither! Actually, that may be the reason Americans want illegals gone, namely, they refuse to pay for their burdens on OUR system! If we are to babysit for Mexico, let's send them a BIG bill!

Real_Trouble -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 8:00:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: SleepyParachute # 2. Children of illegals should not get citizenship. We are pretty foolish for this policy, and many if not most other countries do not follow this policy. If one is born on United States territory his or her nationality is American by birth regardless of his or her parents' nationality. If you don't like this, you'll have to change the US Constitution. Good luck! quote: The English common law rule, under which a person's citizenship was determined by the place of his birth, was known as jus soli. The United States generally follows this rule. Authority for this rule is found in the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states that: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." The Supreme Court endorsed the universality of this rule in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649, 18 S. Ct. 4561142 L. Ed. 890 (1898). http://www.americanlaw.com/citborn.html Two comments. First, I think that was a change that she implied she was in favor of. I suggest you not get snarky in response to what is a pretty calm and controlled statement on the surface of things. Everything she said is factually correct or clearly marked as opinion. It is a bit out of hand to be responding with law when the person who made the initial statement was, in fact, clearly totally aware of what the current law was, because they were arguing for a change! More so, we've ammended the constitution and bill of rights repeatedly already, so it's clearly not out of the question, just hard. Second, I concur with the earlier comment that nobody (to be precise, I would suggest very few people, but possibly not nobody) in this thread is listening. I've watched this degenerate over the past few pages into a tangential, non-fact based, thinly disguised shouting match based solely on opinion and agenda. I'd link you all to the study results showing that the rational thought centers of the brain shut down in partisans when they begin discussing politics and idealogoy, but I think just re-reading this thread is evidence enough of that. Ahem. I am bowing out now, take care.

EPGAH -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 8:05:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjan Illegal this, illegal that, and all the outrage about it. Kinda funny, don'tcha think, when most of the folks on these bords, and off ( like your neighbors and mom and pop) routinely engage in sexual practices that are illegal in many if not most states. And I'm referring here to so called "vanilla" sex practices. For example, many states have laws against sodomy which they define not only as anal sex but also any kind of oral sex, etc.. As far as popeye being honest and consistent ( and I don't mean to single him out or bash him in ay way) honesty and consistency, while often admirable, are not always neccesarily so. For example, does any one doubt that George W. Bush has been honest and consistent his whole time in office ? I have no doubt, that boy Gearge is sincere in his views and beliefs, but honest doesn't make you right, do it ? And we all know the sonofabitch has been consistent as hell in his policies in Iraq and where has that gotten us and the rest of the world ? Just sayin' cjan, there's a BIG difference between illegal aliens and illegal sex...Namely, that illegal sex is not USUALLY charged to the taxpayers at large! Illegal aliens are a BRILLIANT way for corporations to avoid responsibility, or at least financial responsibility...WE, the taxpayers at large, pay for their health, their clogging of ERS, their breeding, from cradle to grave. Incubation, education, medication, and ultimately, incarceration! Therefore, that "cheap" food that pro-illegal demonstrators LOVE to bring up, isn't cheap at all, just that the price is moved from front-loaded (i.e., the price-tag), to our taxes, and lower quality of housing, overstrained hospitals/schools/prisons, and people who can't learn English after 160 years, but believe that calling them stupid for it is "racist"...Please note: They don't have to learn English, BUT if they don't, they should realize, they don't HAVE to stay in our country, either! Mexican is a loyalty to an enemy COUNTRY, BTW, not a race...Just sayin' ;) As to Bush, his "consistency" is stupid...If we wanted, we have the technology-level to follow Sun Tzu's 3000+ year-old advice, "Seek Instant Victory, not Endless Battle"...We could send 100 planes loaded with bombs and just turn the place into a new parking-lot for my alma-mater, in their never-ending quest to force students to pay for the "privilege" of parking further and further from classes...OR we could use the new empty land as our new penal colony, a way to outsource PRISON costs, the way we have with all other "industries"! But we will never do that, because that would kill too many "civilians"...But that's a topic for another thread... Indeed, I believe 10 or so other threads are about that?

popeye1250 -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 9:30:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SleepyParachute Two Suggestions: # 1. There is no DIS-incentive for illegals. They should get more than a "free ride home" when caught. They should have to reimburse the government for the cost of catching and deporting them. (INS officials will readily tell you that at christmastime... illegals flood the centers to "turn themseves in" and get a free ride home for the holiday). # 2. Children of illegals should not get citizenship. We are pretty foolish for this policy, and many if not most other countries do not follow this policy. Yes, that is nothing but an enourmous loophole that needs to be closed. You know, it's funny, if an American parent is convicted of a crime you never hear people protestring for (them) to be let go so that they won't be "seperated from their children." I wonder why that is? Enforcing our laws is not "optional".

cjan -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 9:43:26 AM)
popeye, you live in New Hampshire so your laws may be different up there. But, as I said in an earlier post, "sodomy" which is defined as either anal or oral sex is still illegal in many, if not most states, but neverthe less, practiced by many people quote: popeye: Enforcing our laws is not "optional". By your standard, without cherry picking, should those folks be prosecuted and face the resultant penalties ?

popeye1250 -> RE: those damn illegals (3/30/2008 9:48:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjan popeye, you live in New Hampshire so your laws may be different up there. But, as I said in an earlier post, "sodomy" which is defined as either anal or oral sex is still illegal in many, if not most states, but neverthe less, practiced by many people quote: popeye: Enforcing our laws is not "optional". By your standard, without cherry picking, should those folks be prosecuted and face the resultant penalties ? Cjan, I think you're missing the point, it's our party and they're not invited.

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875