Originally posted by Rockydonovang
ad populum isn't an argument. Please explain why we should kick out people who cam to the us out of no fault of their own. Why shouldn't someone forcibly brought to america be given citizenship?
Originally posted by darthgooberImmigrants are coming here to work...
Because it encourages bad behavior. If parents sneak into Disneyland without paying and bring their whole family, the whole family should be removed if they're caught. You don't just kick the parents out and let the teenagers and children go on playing.
Originally posted by Firefly218
Immigrants are coming here to work...
Originally posted by darthgooberFor many people the legal way is practically a lottery. Years of paperwork and bureaucracy, a low acceptance rate, and for financially desperate or refugee families that’s too high a barrier of entry. Of course immigration laws are necessary, but don’t demonize and dehumanize these people. Were you in there position you might do exactly the same thing.
There are legal ways to do so. It's those who do things the "right way" who should be rewarded. If you give encouragement to those who are basically trying to cut in line then there's less incentive for anyone to go through the proper channels.
Originally posted by Firefly218
For many people the legal way is practically a lottery. Years of paperwork and bureaucracy, a low acceptance rate, and for financially desperate or refugee families that’s too high a barrier of entry. Of course immigration laws are necessary, but don’t demonize and dehumanize these people. Were you in there position you might do exactly the same thing.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes, leaving out context is very petty. so, why do you keep doing it?
I love how we're in the age where facts matter...until they don't. Trumps claims on the size of his audiences need to be immediately corrected, false claims like 18 school shootings this year? Meh.
Same here, and leftists do it all the time: confusing illegal immigrants with immigrants. They do this on purpose, because if they can say "what, you against immigrants working?" it doesn't sound as stupid as "what, you're against people coming here illegally and working?".
You heard him, it is "petty" to note the difference between someone who comes here legally and someone who doesn't. This is the same side that claims phrases like "chain migration" are ideologically charged and yet do not hesitate to use the word "dreamer" to refer to some illegals. Cuz you see being against criminals isn't so bad, but being against DREAMS makes you look like a dick.
Originally posted by darthgoober
Because it encourages bad behavior. If parents sneak into Disneyland without paying and bring their whole family, the whole family should be removed if they're caught. You don't just kick the parents out and let the teenagers and children go on playing.
Naturally, if you think a country should be run like a company, then yes, we can disregard ethics and penalize people for something they bear no responsibility for.
At the same time, if you think that's how America should be run, I hope you're consistent and willing to advocate for the end of citizenship earned rights as that isn't a concept that exists in coporations.
Originally posted by darthgoober
Your right I might do that, but I wouldn't then whine because I got caught and me and my family got deported.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Did you just equate America to a corporation?Naturally, if you think a country should be run like a company, then yes, we can disregard ethics and penalize people for something they bear no responsibility for.
At the same time, if you think that's how America should be run, I hope you're consistent and willing to advocate for the end of citizenship earned rights as that isn't a concept that exists in coporations.
I'm in no way talking about removing ethics from the equation, I simply believe that the laws and policies of the country should focus on legal ethics rather than some subjective, abstract sense of morality that the majority of the country will never agree on.
If we're using a metaphor where the country is a corporation, then yes they absolutely do have citizenship earned rights. Citizens(people who are actually part of the company) get to go to the company Christmas party, have access to the company insurance policy, can attend the company picnic, and partake of the companies coffee dispensers. People who simply sneak into the building aren't welcome to those things. And rightly so.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
I love when people act like they know how well they would live shit they don't live. But sure man, you were a edgelord in highschool. So obviously you understand the struggle of someone's whose impoverished looking to give their family a better life.
Originally posted by darthgoober
I'm in no way talking about removing ethics from the equation, I simply believe that the laws and policies of the country should focus on legal ethics
rather than some subjective, abstract sense of morality that the majority of the country will never agree on.
Not that the democrats are shining themselves in glory, 17 of them voting to deregulate the banks like they were in the buildup to the financial crisis, and now using dreamers as a political chip to make republicans more unpopular.
Money and job security are more important than the will of the people, hence the slew of legislation we've seen passed that consistently had majority opposition.
If we're using a metaphor where the country is a corporation, then yes they absolutely do have citizenship earned rights. Citizens(people who are actually part of the company) get to go to the company Christmas party, have access to the company insurance policy, can attend the company picnic, and partake of the companies coffee dispensers. People who simply sneak into the building aren't welcome to those things. And rightly so.
What the Hell makes you think I'm not impoverished? I've been poor literally my entire life.