South Carolina House passes illegal immigration bill

[jillio]

You brought up the Federal courts, not me.

There is no justification for racism.

There was in the 1800's which is the time period you used to attempt to prove my post incorrect. However, you were unable to do so, as one cannot look at history in isolation.

BTW, in the 1800's, there was legal justification, moral justification, religious justification, and cultural justification for racism. As I said, in the last 200 years we have learned exactly how wrong all of those supposed justifications were. And since we have learned that, why is it we continue with practices that are racist?

In fact, there are those that are continuing to use the above to justify their discriminatory practices and prejudiced belief systems against certain groups. Some have learned nothing at all, except how to change the target.

 

[TXgolfer]

simple - you send that cop to jail for murder.

And you can send the "hypocomical" cops to jail too.

 

[Reba]

There was in the 1800's which is the time period you used to attempt to prove my post incorrect. However, you were unable to do so, as one cannot look at history in isolation.

No, I wanted to show that the Federal courts are not infallible. They do make mistakes. Thankfully, most of their mistakes in the past were eventually overturned.

BTW, in the 1800's, there was legal justification, moral justification, religious justification, and cultural justification for racism. As I said, in the last 200 years we have learned exactly how wrong all of those supposed justifications were. And since we have learned that, why is it we continue with practices that are racist?

Justification for racism? No. Attempts to rationalize racism? Yes.

 

[TXgolfer]

No no.. not time as in how long it takes to verify legal status (which by the way is ALREADY done in the first place, so....what is the purpose of this amendment?). I'm talking about time wasted waiting around to see the results of this "amendment" to the law. I predict the results will NOT be more illegal immigrants being caught.

So basically SC is like "Look! I created more laws to battle illegal immigration. So we don't have to worry about it for a while now." Time passes by. Several studies were done to show the effectiveness of this law (which most likely will show NO effect) and there will be numerous complaints by Americans who were given a tough time by the police. (Those people probably just happened to look Mexican)

Then SC will be back to square 1 with illegal immigration with more Americans having disdain for the police/laws. Hence, time is wasted.

It's actually quite amusing. Quite a lot of people here who are all for this law also complain about those extensive body searches at the airport. Does no one else see the similarities of those two situations?

At least I am congruent....I didn't complain about the body searches either.....in fact I think I was on my own on that.

 

[jillio]

No, I wanted to show that the Federal courts are not infallible. They do make mistakes. Thankfully, most of their mistakes in the past were eventually overturned.


Justification for racism? No. Attempts to rationalize racism? Yes.

It wasn't a mistake at the time the decisions were handed down according to the legal principles and the cultural norms of the time. Again, you cannot apply a legal decision from 200 years ago to today. You are, I repeat, attempting to use history in isolation. It does not work.

How about you come up with something a bit more recent, and then we'll discuss it.

In order to rationalize, one must justify. And it continues today. Some have only learned to change the target. Thankfully, however, our legal system has moved beyond that.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

There was in the 1800's which is the time period you used to attempt to prove my post incorrect. However, you were unable to do so, as one cannot look at history in isolation.

BTW, in the 1800's, there was legal justification, moral justification, religious justification, and cultural justification for racism. As I said, in the last 200 years we have learned exactly how wrong all of those supposed justifications were. And since we have learned that, why is it we continue with practices that are racist?

In fact, there are those that are continuing to use the above to justify their discriminatory practices and prejudiced belief systems against certain groups. Some have learned nothing at all, except how to change the target.

Drapetomania!

 

[jillio]

Light skinned people sneak over the southern border, and dark skinned people sneak over the northern border. So? I don't want any person of any color sneaking over our borders.

I welcome people of all colors who come into our country and state LEGALLY.

Yep, and there is a lot of racial profiling going on with light skinned people, isn't there? I don't see any laws of this nature that target blond haired blue eyed people.

 

[Reba]

At least I am congruent....I didn't complain about the body searches either.....in fact I think I was on my own on that.

Should we worry about you? You might be having entirely too much fun at the airport screening.

 

[TXgolfer]

Yep, and there is a lot of racial profiling going on with light skinned people, isn't there? I don't see any laws of this nature that target blond haired blue eyed people.

Affirmative Action? Oh wait.....we finally beat that.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Yep, and there is a lot of racial profiling going on with light skinned people, isn't there? I don't see any laws of this nature that target blond haired blue eyed people.

That's because Neanderthals went extinct.

 

[TXgolfer]

Should we worry about you? You might be having entirely too much fun at the airport screening.

 

[jillio]

Affirmative Action? Oh wait.....we finally beat that.

You want to explain that/ I don't see how affirmative action applies to racial profiiling. Perhaps you can make that a bit more clear.

 

[jillio]

That's because Neanderthals went extinct.

I think we have a few hangers on that missed the extinction boat.

 

[Reba]

It wasn't a mistake at the time the decisions were handed down according to the legal principles and the cultural norms of the time. Again, you cannot apply a legal decision from 200 years ago to today. You are, I repeat, attempting to use history in isolation. It does not work.

No, I'm not wrong, no matter how many times you say it, and you know it.

How about you come up with something a bit more recent, and then we'll discuss it.

In order to rationalize, one must justify. And it continues today. Some have only learned to change the target. Thankfully, however, our legal system has moved beyond that.

Nope.

Rationalization is making excuses.

Justification is giving factual reasons.

If one is justified in an action, there's no need for rationalization of that action.

 

[jillio]

No, I'm not wrong, no matter how many times you say it, and you know it.

How about you come up with something a bit more recent, and then we'll discuss it.


Nope.

Rationalization is making excuses.

Justification is giving factual reasons.

If one is justified in an action, there's no need for rationalization of that action.

No, dear, you are quite wrong in that you are attempting to apply events of 200 years ago, in isolation, to something that is occurring today. That is very definately wrong thinking. But, if you want to believe you are right to make yourself feel better, then have at it. The holes in your reasoning speak for themselves.

Yes, one first makes excuses and then attempts to find the support necessary to make those excuses appear to be fact. Kind of like using 200 year old legal decisions to support racist laws being proposed today.

 

[TXgolfer]

You want to explain that/ I don't see how affirmative action applies to racial profiiling. Perhaps you can make that a bit more clear.

If that is not clear to you I feel sorry for you.

 

[Berry]

We have problems. We have problems with employment. We have problems with jobs. We have problems with unemployed. We have problems with people on assistance programs who do not need to be. We have problems with national debt. We have problems with how best to spend what money we have and or can borrow.

We also have a huge problem that far too many of our natural born citizens would rather try to find ways to live off the system than try to find a job. Such as those who claim "There are no jobs to be had" while doing everything they can to remain unemployable.

We have problems with people who are willing and able to work being turned down from jobs they are capable of doing because they are "deaf" or some other lame excuse

We have problems that a huge percentage of our population won't even try to compete in the mainstream because they have been convinced that because of some ethnic of physical disadvantage they "don't stand any chance of getting ahead."

It is impossible for me to conceive how spending time, money, effort, thought, into attacking the weakest, least influential part of our society is in any way going to solve any of the real problems we have.

If every alien and or immigrant were to disappear from the U. S. tomorrow we would still have these problems.

We need to deal with real problems, not fight strawmen.

 

[jillio]

If that is not clear to you I feel sorry for you.

Your intent is clear. But I see that you have a bit of difficulty in being openly honest about what you are trying to say. But that's okay. Most who hold your attitudes do have a problem with that degree of honesty. Kind of screws it up when they say, "Hey, I'm not racist. I have (insert ethnicity) friends!" Which only goes back to why I feel so sorry for you.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Rationalization is making excuses.

Justification is giving factual reasons.

If one is justified in an action, there's no need for rationalization of that action.

Hindsight is 20/20. You need to de-attach yourself from the historian's fallacy.

At the time, their reasonings were factual based on the observations people have made. They weren't excuses.

Rationalization would be more akin to today's Holocaust deniers, not with the racists of yore.

 

[Jiro]

Anyone whose appearance doesn't match the ID card picture and description bears further investigation.

and we both know what their first thought is.

that very concept is illegal.