Feds to file lawsuit over Arizona immigration law

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

With all that's been going on in Arizona it's hard to say that this law has the best of intentions in mind.

it's not about rescinding the law it's about not passing laws that are BAD laws which target a specific people i.e. HISPANICS.

again, speculation. you're assuming you know the intent of the law makers. just because it impacts one group of people disproportionately, doesn't mean that was the intent of the law.

it's arizona. a state with one of the highest hispanic populations in the country. a state that borders a hispanic country. of course, it will impact the hispanic community more. that doesn't mean it was intended to impact the hispanic community more.

that last statement was regarding changing the current immigration system.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Really, it's not completely hypocritical - immigration to fill vast expanses of unpopulated land, as was the case when most European immigrants came over, or out of force/servitude, isn't all that analogous to the current situation with immigration in the southwest. They simply bring along far different problems, of a different scope and scale, and with decades of differences in the social pressures and political problems associated with immigration. Sure, you'd expect a little more compassion, but recognizing problems that require solutions is still important.

As much as the specter of crime is a talking point for the far right that doesn't exactly hold water, the "Nation of Immigrants" point is hollow and rhetorical as a talking point for the far left.

Much more important, to me anyway, are the founding ideals of the United States, all of which would seem to indicate a course of action basically 180 degrees away from what Arizona/many bandwagon Republican leaders seem to support. It seems clear immigration was never intended solely as a "brain drain" on the Indian subcontinent for our benefit, for example - the notion of the United States as a 'safe harbor' for those under oppressive or restrictive regimes makes much more sense, even transposed a few hundred years.

For me, the "huddled masses" argument is completely different than the "Nation of Immigrants" stuff, and really gets to the ironic root: a nation of Patriotic Minutemen(c) wants to ignore what's written on the Statue of Liberty (and limit the rights of red-blooded Hispanic citizens in their own state).

I think it's just absurd when people here claim to want to keep "those foreigners" out. And that applies to whether it's legal or illegal immigration, whether it's anti-African, Arab, Persian, Hispanic, whatever sentiment, it's ridiculous and then angering at the same time.

However your last point made me think of this article Tea Party activists at colonial Williamsburg .

The executives who oversee Williamsburg said they have noticed the influx of tea partiers, and have also noted a rise in the number of guests who ply the costumed actors for advice about how to rebel against 21st-century politicians. (The actors do their best to provide 18th-century answers.)

"If people . . . can recognize that subjects such as war and taxation, religion and race, were really at the heart of the situation in the 18th century, and there is some connection between what was going on then and what's going on now, that's all to the good," said Colin Campbell, president and chairman of Colonial Williamsburg. "What happened in the 18th century here required engagement, and what's required to preserve democracy in the 21st century is engagement. That is really our message."
...
Sometimes, the activists appear surprised when the Founding Fathers don't always provide the "give 'em hell" response they seem to be looking for.

When a tourist asked George Washington a question about what should be done to those colonists who remain loyal to the tyrannical British king, Washington interjected: "I hope that we're all loyal, sir" -- a reminder that Washington, far from being an early agitator against the throne, was among those who sought to avoid revolution until the very end.
...
And when another asked whether the Boston Tea Party had helped rally the patriots, Washington disagreed with force: The tea party "should never have occurred," he said. "It's hurt our cause, sir."

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Why?

My ancestors were Dutch and Irish who settled in Indiana and Oklahoma, mainly. Family lore has my father's side homesteading in Fairview, Oklahoma as FOB Irish. My mother's side was Dutch, showed up in Cushing, Oklahoma by way of Indiana, where they built a furniture store, also had a homestead and built a church and had various real-estate holdings (not oil, unfortunately).

I don't really see how that makes my status here any less tenuous than anyone else whose ancestors came here legally.

You should have finished this post with a "run and tell THAT."

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by agzg

WITHIN Mexican territory

*lightbulb*

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

it's arizona. a state with one of the highest hispanic populations in the country. a state that borders a hispanic country.

And how many Hispanics from Arizona are representing them in the Senate?

Hmmmmmmmmmm....funny, I don't hear Washington state having issues with illegal Canadians.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

And how many Hispanics from Arizona are representing them in the Senate?

Hmmmmmmmmmm....funny, I don't hear Washington state having issues with illegal Canadians.

both of those points are irrelevant. 83 percent of illegal aliens are hispanic. the hispanic population has the highest percentage of illegal aliens. most people who are suspected of being illegal will be hispanic.

duh.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

both of those points are irrelevant. 83 percent of illegal aliens are hispanic. the hispanic population has the highest percentage of illegal aliens. most people who are suspected of being illegal will be hispanic.

duh.

Cool, let's make a law targeting Hispanics!

Oh yeah..Arizona is doing that.

Don't get me wrong...I am all for legislation that would make it difficult for people that are considered illegal to be in this country, however, as it stands, Arizona's laws and everything else that has gone down there in the past year is just wrong on so many levels and I think now we are finding out exactly what kind of people we are working with that runs their government.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Cool, let's make a law targeting Hispanics!

Oh yeah..Arizona is doing that.

LOL. not necessarily.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I don't really see how that makes my status here any less tenuous than anyone else whose ancestors came here legally.

Because it doesn't matter how your ancestors got here. It matters about how you are here.

The provisions in Section 1 have been interpreted to the effect that children born on United States soil, with very few exceptions, are U.S. citizens. This type of guarantee—legally termed jus soli, or "right of the territory"— does not exist in most of Europe, Asia or the Middle East, although it is part of English common law and is common in the Americas. The phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" indicates that there are some exceptions to the universal rule that birth on U.S. soil automatically grants citizenship.

Two Supreme Court precedents were set by the cases of Elk v. Wilkins[7] and United States v. Wong Kim Ark.[8] Elk v. Wilkins established that Native American tribes represented independent political powers with no allegiance to the United States, and that their peoples were under a special jurisdiction of the United States. Children born to these Native American tribes therefore did not automatically receive citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment if they voluntarily left their tribe.[9] Indian tribes that paid taxes were exempt from this ruling; their peoples were already citizens by an earlier act of Congress, and all non-citizen Native Americans (called "Indians") were subsequently made citizens by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

In Wong Kim Ark the Supreme Court held that under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, a man born within the United States to foreigners (in that case, Chinese citizens) who have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States and are carrying on business in the United States[10] and who were not employed in a diplomatic or other official capacity by a foreign power, was a citizen of the United States.

Under these two rulings, the following persons born in the United States are not "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States, and thus do not qualify for automatic citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment:

* Children born to foreign diplomats

* Children born to enemy forces in hostile occupation of the United States

* Children born to Native Americans who are members of tribes not taxed (These were later given full citizenship by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.)

All other persons born in the United States were citizens.

You are of the exact same worth as any other citizen as far as your country is concerned.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by starang21

LOL. not necessarily.

All you're doing is saying "Nuh uh" and "Not necessarily" and "you don't know that for sure."

So what are they doing?

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

All you're doing is saying "Nuh uh" and "Not necessarily" and "you don't know that for sure."

So what are they doing?

they're writing a law targeting illegal aliens.

i figure that much is obvious.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by starang21

they're writing a law targeting illegal aliens.

i figure that much is obvious.

So you know their intent?

(Using aliens is an example of dehumanizing, since you were struggling with the concept earlier.)

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

they're writing a law targeting illegal aliens who also happen to be Hispanics who, as I just said make up a majority of the population of Arizona, a border state.

i figure that much is obvious.

There...fixed that for you.

Just an oddball question...if they are illegal and undocumented, how do we know then that they make up a high amount of the population?

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

There...fixed that for you.

Just an oddball question...if they are illegal and undocumented, how do we know then that they make up a high amount of the population?

http://pewhispanic.org/

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

http://pewhispanic.org/

Let me try this again, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, without me having to screw around with statistics and websites, can you answer the question?