Bookman
Campaign Veteran
imported post
155gr wrote:
155gr wrote:
Very well said!
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
ACLU Recuiting in Fremont
- Thread starter Z06
- Start date
155gr
Regular Member
imported post
Your right to your opinion does not include the right to have other people respect what you say. It only includes your right to be able to say it.
... and that's a helluva lot more than people in most countries have. For example, Canada and England don't even have that.
Your right to your opinion does not include the right to have other people respect what you say. It only includes your right to be able to say it.
... and that's a helluva lot more than people in most countries have. For example, Canada and England don't even have that.
Riverdog
Regular Member
imported post
155gr wrote:
155gr wrote:
That was my point.
CrossBow33
Regular Member
imported post
I just read through the entire thread. What was it about, again?
Somthin' 'bout the ACLU? Veet 'Nam?
It's enough to make one mourn for what, it appears, will never be. A truely disheartening experience!
I just read through the entire thread. What was it about, again?
Somthin' 'bout the ACLU? Veet 'Nam?
It's enough to make one mourn for what, it appears, will never be. A truely disheartening experience!
Bear 45/70
Regular Member
imported post
Bookman wrote:
Bookman wrote:
If found out while breaking the law??????? They are breaking the law by just being in this country. Send them all back where they came from if they came hereuninvited, aka illegally. Your lack of logic boggles the mind.
thewise1
Regular Member
imported post
Bear 45/70 wrote:
How do you suggest we send them all back to where they came from while simultaneously maintaining the requirement for reasonable articulable suspicion that is required to stop them and demand identification, which is the only way to prove they are here illegally?
I predict a reply that involves military service.
Bear 45/70 wrote:
Speaking of logic, let's play this through to the end.
How do you suggest we send them all back to where they came from while simultaneously maintaining the requirement for reasonable articulable suspicion that is required to stop them and demand identification, which is the only way to prove they are here illegally?
I predict a reply that involves military service.
Bookman
Campaign Veteran
imported post
I have no problem with people looking for a better life. Some of these people are doing just that and no more. MOST of them can't afford to do it legally. Because I'm so torn on this issue, I had to come to this compromise with my conscience.
So I disagree with you. So what? Bite me!:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate
I have no problem with people looking for a better life. Some of these people are doing just that and no more. MOST of them can't afford to do it legally. Because I'm so torn on this issue, I had to come to this compromise with my conscience.
So I disagree with you. So what? Bite me!:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate
thewise1
Regular Member
imported post
Bookman wrote:
If we start stopping people because they are brown or dark complected or don't speak very good English, I will have a problem with that - just like I don't want to be stopped merely because I'm carrying a gun.
Bookman wrote:
I understand where you're coming from and am not looking to argue, but I'll just say that if laws apply to us, they should apply to the illegals as well. As they are identified through other stops, deport them and I won't cry.
If we start stopping people because they are brown or dark complected or don't speak very good English, I will have a problem with that - just like I don't want to be stopped merely because I'm carrying a gun.
scarlett1125
Regular Member
imported post
DEROS72 wrote:
Being from the South, I can remember having teachers who did just that. Of course, in our small town, it almost went without saying that everyone was Christian and believed the same thing. However, that didn't make it right. That would be tantamount to making everyone move to the region of the country that has been assigned to their religion (Clarence Thomas' idea of the separation of church and state), which would only cause more intolerance.
DEROS72 wrote:
While I'm sure I'll get slammed for this by some, I believe that there is a difference between teaching children about different religions and teaching them to believe one over all the others. I would love to see true religious tolerance in all of our schools, but it seems impossible as long as there are those teachers and administrators who have no sense of tolerance and will teach children that one belief system (no matter what it is) is the right one and to believe anything else is heresy.
Being from the South, I can remember having teachers who did just that. Of course, in our small town, it almost went without saying that everyone was Christian and believed the same thing. However, that didn't make it right. That would be tantamount to making everyone move to the region of the country that has been assigned to their religion (Clarence Thomas' idea of the separation of church and state), which would only cause more intolerance.
Bookman
Campaign Veteran
imported post
thewise1 wrote:
thewise1 wrote:
That was exactly my point, so there's no room for argument between the two of us. My last reply was directed at Bear, not you.
thewise1
Regular Member
imported post
Bookman wrote:
Bookman wrote:
Completely understand :celebrate
scarlett1125
Regular Member
imported post
So how do feel about the stops that are being conducted close to the borders asking people to declare their citizenship? Many are declaring those illegal because the police have no right to stop people if they have no evidence that a crime has been committed.
So how do feel about the stops that are being conducted close to the borders asking people to declare their citizenship? Many are declaring those illegal because the police have no right to stop people if they have no evidence that a crime has been committed.
Bear 45/70
Regular Member
imported post
Bookman wrote:
Bookman wrote:
When you look for a better life, it is OK to violate the law under your thinking. OK, fine I'll be over to your house and move in and mooch off you for food and steal money out of your wallet and steal and sell your property so I can have pocket money. It's Ok, by your reasoning as all I'm doing is looking for a better life. Your really are an idiot.
Bookman
Campaign Veteran
imported post
thewise1 wrote:
(A Chorus Line)
thewise1 wrote:
Kyewl!:monkey:monkey:monkey:monkey:monkey:monkey:monkey:monkey:monkey
(A Chorus Line)
thewise1
Regular Member
imported post
scarlett1125 wrote:
scarlett1125 wrote:
Not sure who you're asking but absent RAS that a crime is being committed, demanding that citizens declare citizenship is wrong IMO. Except at a border checkpoint or something not related to your scenario.
Riverdog
Regular Member
imported post
Bear 45/70 wrote:
I commented earlier on how our immigration policies are beyond broken. This has application toward how I personally approach the illegal immigration situation. Unfortunately, especially since 9/11, we have restricted the borders to stem the flow of legal visas to those petitioning. From work visas to educational visas, they are quite difficult to get and it has affected several folks I know personally.
The US is still one of the chief locations on the planet for higher education and skilled employment opportunities. For folks to have to 'sneak in' and pursue opportunities, pay taxes, contribute to the GNP and build a life is a sad testament to how bad the system is currently. I know companies who can't get qualified PhDs from England, for example, to get H-1B visas. They might be breaking the law, but sometimes it takes that to demonstrate the inadequacy of the law. Fix our immigration laws and we'll be somewhere.
Bear 45/70 wrote:
I know it wasn't directed at me but I feel compelled to respond.
I commented earlier on how our immigration policies are beyond broken. This has application toward how I personally approach the illegal immigration situation. Unfortunately, especially since 9/11, we have restricted the borders to stem the flow of legal visas to those petitioning. From work visas to educational visas, they are quite difficult to get and it has affected several folks I know personally.
The US is still one of the chief locations on the planet for higher education and skilled employment opportunities. For folks to have to 'sneak in' and pursue opportunities, pay taxes, contribute to the GNP and build a life is a sad testament to how bad the system is currently. I know companies who can't get qualified PhDs from England, for example, to get H-1B visas. They might be breaking the law, but sometimes it takes that to demonstrate the inadequacy of the law. Fix our immigration laws and we'll be somewhere.
Riverdog
Regular Member
imported post
scarlett1125 wrote:
scarlett1125 wrote:
An example of the erosion of our due process rights in the name of security.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
scarlett1125 wrote:
Unconstitutional.
scarlett1125 wrote:
Unconstitutional.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Bear 45/70 wrote:
There's a huge difference.
When an alien comes to America he doesn't infringe upon your rights. If anything, when we declare him illegal, we are committing the first "act of aggression" (infringement of someone's God-given right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness to the extent that that someone doesn't infringe upon anybody else's right to the same).
When I move into your house and start stealing your food and cash, I am violating your rights (taking your property).
I could call you an "idiot" at this point, but I won't do that.
Bear 45/70 wrote:
There's a huge difference.
When an alien comes to America he doesn't infringe upon your rights. If anything, when we declare him illegal, we are committing the first "act of aggression" (infringement of someone's God-given right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness to the extent that that someone doesn't infringe upon anybody else's right to the same).
When I move into your house and start stealing your food and cash, I am violating your rights (taking your property).
I could call you an "idiot" at this point, but I won't do that.
Bookman
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Bear 45/70 wrote:
Bear 45/70 wrote:
Name calling really highlights your intellectual superiority and goes to prove your point in a fashion we've come to expect from you. :lol: