turtlespeed 226 #26 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteSure the immigration laws have changed and EVERY time they have had to do with racism. Check it out. No need to - I am IN FAVOR of the laws as they are now - I odn't want them changed, i want them ENFORCED! I see. Turning a blind eye toward history is, I supposed, one strategy to attempt to keep justifying a position. So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? Nope - it should be enforced because I agree with the language in it.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #27 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSure the immigration laws have changed and EVERY time they have had to do with racism. Check it out. No need to - I am IN FAVOR of the laws as they are now - I odn't want them changed, i want them ENFORCED! I see. Turning a blind eye toward history is, I supposed, one strategy to attempt to keep justifying a position. So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? Nope - it should be enforced because I agree with the language in it. Oh! I see, just pick and choose the laws you like. So how is that any different than the people that don't want it enforced because they don't agree with the language?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #28 May 23, 2010 Quote I'm curious how far back some people in this thread can trace back their ancestry in this country. I know mine weren't required to do anything more than simply get to the US and live here for a few years. 1659 is the oldest verifyable ancestor as far as european lineage coming to this continent... there are several older ones.. but until I can verify with documentation as I have for Thomas Hagan I am being very very carefull to only put verified persons into the family tree. Thomas was 15 and was bought in Barbados by an English gentleman and brought to Port Tobacco in Maryland as an indentured servant. He as well as thousands of other young "transportees" who managed to survive Cromwells invasion( his parents did not survive) were sold into slavery in an ethnic purge by Cromwell and the English. We also have several first nations ancestors in our lineage in the Holcombe branch of the family. Those ancestors of my great grandmother who was a Floridian Seminole that was neverr removed to Oklahoma with most of our people, had to walk all the way across the continent to get to Florida thousands of years ago. Not too much paperwork to deal with in those days Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #29 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSure the immigration laws have changed and EVERY time they have had to do with racism. Check it out. No need to - I am IN FAVOR of the laws as they are now - I odn't want them changed, i want them ENFORCED! I see. Turning a blind eye toward history is, I supposed, one strategy to attempt to keep justifying a position. So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? Nope - it should be enforced because I agree with the language in it. Oh! I see, just pick and choose the laws you like. So how is that any different than the people that don't want it enforced because they don't agree with the language? Its called majority rules . . . there are more people that agree with the law than don't - so enforce it. And if it comes to pass that a majority DON'T want it that way, well then I'll be willing to bet it changes. See, the Politicians got elected that way. I don't have to like it, but the law says they were elected and they are definately enforcing that one, aren't they?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #30 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSure the immigration laws have changed and EVERY time they have had to do with racism. Check it out. No need to - I am IN FAVOR of the laws as they are now - I odn't want them changed, i want them ENFORCED! I see. Turning a blind eye toward history is, I supposed, one strategy to attempt to keep justifying a position. So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? Nope - it should be enforced because I agree with the language in it. Oh! I see, just pick and choose the laws you like. So how is that any different than the people that don't want it enforced because they don't agree with the language? Its called majority rules I see. So you believe the majority of voters in the State of Arizona voted for this law to pass? What would you say if I told you only 17 people in the state voted for it? Sylvia Allen - R David Braswell - R Chuck Grey - R Jack W. Harper - R Barbara Leff - R Al Melvin - R Russell Pearce - R Jay Tibshraeny - R Ed Bunch - R Linda Gray - R John Huppenthal - R Steve Pierce - R Thayer Verschoor - R Frank Antenori - R Ron Gould - R John Nelson - R Robert "Bob" Burns - R See any trends? Sources; http://www.arizonaboycottclearinghouse.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=11&Itemid=54 http://www.azleg.gov/MemberRoster.asp?Body=Squade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #31 May 23, 2010 Quote So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? I'll say that. it's the law. enforce it, or remove it. If citizens don't like a law, there's an established legal procedure to get a law removed.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites CanuckInUSA 0 #32 May 23, 2010 QuoteWhat gives you the 'Right' to live where you do? Absolutely no right whatsoever. I am just lucky (knock on wood) that some external force which is more powerful than myself has not come knocking on my door telling me that I no longer live here, or some external force which is more powerful than myself which destroys my home and everything in it. Look at nature people, it is survival of the fittest. Life on this planet has evolved for billions of years. The strong find a way to adapt while the weak do not. Contrary to the socialist mantra which wants to imply "We are all equal", we are not all equal (never will be) and we are no different than what occurs in nature. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andrewwhyte 1 #33 May 23, 2010 QuoteA illegal alien can't buy/own a house. Says who? I know several Canadians who own a house in the US. One of our local DZOs bought a house in Arizona City this winter. They have no right to live there so they could become illegal aliens at some time in the future. Would they then lose title to their house? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #34 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuote So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? I'll say that. it's the law. enforce it, or remove it. If citizens don't like a law, there's an established legal procedure to get a law removed. Agree, but just want to add equal enforcement for all. Part of the process of making a law should also be the intent and detemining how it will be able to be enforced.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #35 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSure the immigration laws have changed and EVERY time they have had to do with racism. Check it out. No need to - I am IN FAVOR of the laws as they are now - I odn't want them changed, i want them ENFORCED! I see. Turning a blind eye toward history is, I supposed, one strategy to attempt to keep justifying a position. So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? Nope - it should be enforced because I agree with the language in it. Oh! I see, just pick and choose the laws you like. So how is that any different than the people that don't want it enforced because they don't agree with the language? Its called majority rules I see. So you believe the majority of voters in the State of Arizona voted for this law to pass? What would you say if I told you only 17 people in the state voted for it? Sylvia Allen - R David Braswell - R Chuck Grey - R Jack W. Harper - R Barbara Leff - R Al Melvin - R Russell Pearce - R Jay Tibshraeny - R Ed Bunch - R Linda Gray - R John Huppenthal - R Steve Pierce - R Thayer Verschoor - R Frank Antenori - R Ron Gould - R John Nelson - R Robert "Bob" Burns - R See any trends? Sources; http://www.arizonaboycottclearinghouse.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=11&Itemid=54 http://www.azleg.gov/MemberRoster.asp?Body=S I didn't see you all upset because a majority in House and Senate voted for the healthcare bill while the mojority of the populace did not agree. Hence the "shove it down their throats " comment. Only problem here is . . . The Grove Insight poll of Arizona base voters shows similar frustration over congressional inaction. While 60% of Arizona voters express support for SB 1070, a whopping 73% also support federal reform that includes both enforcement and a path to citizenship. So what I can discern from your comments is that it is OK for a bill to be passed against majority, but only one that you think is good.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pirana 0 #36 May 23, 2010 A vague, and potentially loaded question. But worded as it is (use of the word "right"), requires knowing if you mean rights conferred by the ruling body of the place where the person lives, or some other local cultural norm (religious, social contract, ?). In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #37 May 23, 2010 Quote A vague, and potentially loaded question. Gasp Quote But worded as it is (use of the word "right"),... The word "Right" was placed in apostrophes to imply a double meaning Quote In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live. For me, that's a given. We all have a right to life (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #38 May 23, 2010 Quote Quote A vague, and potentially loaded question. Gasp Quote But worded as it is (use of the word "right"),... The word "Right" was placed in apostrophes to imply a double meaning Quote In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live. For me, that's a given. We all have a right to life Even ones that are only a few weeks old?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #39 May 23, 2010 Yeap (I've an idea where this is going) (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #40 May 23, 2010 Quote Yeap (I've an idea where this is going) Good - I agree - Nuff said.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pirana 0 #41 May 24, 2010 I'll admit to playing devil's advocate here; but I think it is very telling to identify where people think these rights come from. So from where does the right to live emanate? Does it apply to all life, or just humans, or just certain humans? Is it the same in all places? At all times?" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #42 May 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #43 May 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples. For that matter - somewhere along your line, your family somewhere used to have colonies. Wait - you mean that it was actually YOUR fault because it is the English that started all this, wasn't it?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #44 May 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples. For that matter - somewhere along your line, your family somewhere used to have colonies. Wait - you mean that it was actually YOUR fault because it is the English that started all this, wasn't it? Wrong. My ancestors stayed home.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
rhaig 0 #31 May 23, 2010 Quote So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? I'll say that. it's the law. enforce it, or remove it. If citizens don't like a law, there's an established legal procedure to get a law removed.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #32 May 23, 2010 QuoteWhat gives you the 'Right' to live where you do? Absolutely no right whatsoever. I am just lucky (knock on wood) that some external force which is more powerful than myself has not come knocking on my door telling me that I no longer live here, or some external force which is more powerful than myself which destroys my home and everything in it. Look at nature people, it is survival of the fittest. Life on this planet has evolved for billions of years. The strong find a way to adapt while the weak do not. Contrary to the socialist mantra which wants to imply "We are all equal", we are not all equal (never will be) and we are no different than what occurs in nature. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #33 May 23, 2010 QuoteA illegal alien can't buy/own a house. Says who? I know several Canadians who own a house in the US. One of our local DZOs bought a house in Arizona City this winter. They have no right to live there so they could become illegal aliens at some time in the future. Would they then lose title to their house? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #34 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuote So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? I'll say that. it's the law. enforce it, or remove it. If citizens don't like a law, there's an established legal procedure to get a law removed. Agree, but just want to add equal enforcement for all. Part of the process of making a law should also be the intent and detemining how it will be able to be enforced.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #35 May 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSure the immigration laws have changed and EVERY time they have had to do with racism. Check it out. No need to - I am IN FAVOR of the laws as they are now - I odn't want them changed, i want them ENFORCED! I see. Turning a blind eye toward history is, I supposed, one strategy to attempt to keep justifying a position. So, you're saying that any law on the books should be enforced simply because it's the law? Nope - it should be enforced because I agree with the language in it. Oh! I see, just pick and choose the laws you like. So how is that any different than the people that don't want it enforced because they don't agree with the language? Its called majority rules I see. So you believe the majority of voters in the State of Arizona voted for this law to pass? What would you say if I told you only 17 people in the state voted for it? Sylvia Allen - R David Braswell - R Chuck Grey - R Jack W. Harper - R Barbara Leff - R Al Melvin - R Russell Pearce - R Jay Tibshraeny - R Ed Bunch - R Linda Gray - R John Huppenthal - R Steve Pierce - R Thayer Verschoor - R Frank Antenori - R Ron Gould - R John Nelson - R Robert "Bob" Burns - R See any trends? Sources; http://www.arizonaboycottclearinghouse.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=11&Itemid=54 http://www.azleg.gov/MemberRoster.asp?Body=S I didn't see you all upset because a majority in House and Senate voted for the healthcare bill while the mojority of the populace did not agree. Hence the "shove it down their throats " comment. Only problem here is . . . The Grove Insight poll of Arizona base voters shows similar frustration over congressional inaction. While 60% of Arizona voters express support for SB 1070, a whopping 73% also support federal reform that includes both enforcement and a path to citizenship. So what I can discern from your comments is that it is OK for a bill to be passed against majority, but only one that you think is good.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pirana 0 #36 May 23, 2010 A vague, and potentially loaded question. But worded as it is (use of the word "right"), requires knowing if you mean rights conferred by the ruling body of the place where the person lives, or some other local cultural norm (religious, social contract, ?). In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #37 May 23, 2010 Quote A vague, and potentially loaded question. Gasp Quote But worded as it is (use of the word "right"),... The word "Right" was placed in apostrophes to imply a double meaning Quote In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live. For me, that's a given. We all have a right to life (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #38 May 23, 2010 Quote Quote A vague, and potentially loaded question. Gasp Quote But worded as it is (use of the word "right"),... The word "Right" was placed in apostrophes to imply a double meaning Quote In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live. For me, that's a given. We all have a right to life Even ones that are only a few weeks old?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites shropshire 0 #39 May 23, 2010 Yeap (I've an idea where this is going) (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #40 May 23, 2010 Quote Yeap (I've an idea where this is going) Good - I agree - Nuff said.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites pirana 0 #41 May 24, 2010 I'll admit to playing devil's advocate here; but I think it is very telling to identify where people think these rights come from. So from where does the right to live emanate? Does it apply to all life, or just humans, or just certain humans? Is it the same in all places? At all times?" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #42 May 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 226 #43 May 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples. For that matter - somewhere along your line, your family somewhere used to have colonies. Wait - you mean that it was actually YOUR fault because it is the English that started all this, wasn't it?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,151 #44 May 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples. For that matter - somewhere along your line, your family somewhere used to have colonies. Wait - you mean that it was actually YOUR fault because it is the English that started all this, wasn't it? Wrong. My ancestors stayed home.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
pirana 0 #36 May 23, 2010 A vague, and potentially loaded question. But worded as it is (use of the word "right"), requires knowing if you mean rights conferred by the ruling body of the place where the person lives, or some other local cultural norm (religious, social contract, ?). In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #37 May 23, 2010 Quote A vague, and potentially loaded question. Gasp Quote But worded as it is (use of the word "right"),... The word "Right" was placed in apostrophes to imply a double meaning Quote In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live. For me, that's a given. We all have a right to life (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #38 May 23, 2010 Quote Quote A vague, and potentially loaded question. Gasp Quote But worded as it is (use of the word "right"),... The word "Right" was placed in apostrophes to imply a double meaning Quote In some places you might have a debate first on whether or not a person has a right to live at all before you debate about where they live. For me, that's a given. We all have a right to life Even ones that are only a few weeks old?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #39 May 23, 2010 Yeap (I've an idea where this is going) (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #40 May 23, 2010 Quote Yeap (I've an idea where this is going) Good - I agree - Nuff said.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #41 May 24, 2010 I'll admit to playing devil's advocate here; but I think it is very telling to identify where people think these rights come from. So from where does the right to live emanate? Does it apply to all life, or just humans, or just certain humans? Is it the same in all places? At all times?" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #42 May 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #43 May 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples. For that matter - somewhere along your line, your family somewhere used to have colonies. Wait - you mean that it was actually YOUR fault because it is the English that started all this, wasn't it?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #44 May 25, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFurthest back I can find was one of my ancestors that helped map the Canadian-US border (1844). We have family documents describing some of it. They were interesting to read. Okies, so he never had to do anything special, fill out any forms or anything to become a citizen. He simply got here and lived for a bit then called himself a citizen. I have a hard time denying that to a lot of people just trying to do the same thing. Do I think the borders ought to be more secure? Sure. Do I think employers out to be punished for hiring undocumented workers? Absolutely? Do I think I need to go out of my way to hassle people just trying to make a better life for themselves the exact same way my ancestors did? I have an issue there because if I say I do, I'm a pretty big hypocrite. What were the immigration laws at that time? You DO realize that they have changed and that this is a different century we are living in? Things change - you don't usually get to pick and choose the changes. They are done by mob rule. Laws don't change themselves. In the final analysis, unless you are an indigenous American your "right" can be traced back to theft of land by force or fraud from indigenous peoples. For that matter - somewhere along your line, your family somewhere used to have colonies. Wait - you mean that it was actually YOUR fault because it is the English that started all this, wasn't it? Wrong. My ancestors stayed home.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
