The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: Eupher on April 17, 2013, 07:19:40 AM
-
Thomas Lowell nails it, as usual:
Most laws are meant to stop people from doing something, and to penalize those who disregard those laws. More generally, laws are meant to protect the society from the law breakers.
But our immigration laws are different. Here the whole focus is on the "plight" of those who have broken the laws, and on what can be done to lift the stigma and ease the pressures they feel, so that they can "come out of the shadows" and "normalize" their lives.
Merely using the word "illegal" to describe their breaking the law is considered to be a sign of mean-spiritedness, if not racism. The Associated Press refuses to let their reporters refer to people who sneaked across the border into this country, in violation of American immigration laws, as "illegal immigrants."
On the other hand, if an ordinary American citizen breaks a law, no one cares if he has to live in fear for years -- "in the shadows," as it were -- worrying that his illegal act will be discovered and punished. No one bothers to come up with euphemisms to keep from calling what he did illegal.
No cities announce that they will provide "sanctuary," so that American shoplifters, or even jay-walkers, will be protected from the law. But, in some places, illegal immigrants are treated almost as if they were in a witness protection program.
What is even more remarkable about this special treatment is that you are not supposed to think about it as special treatment. When a new immigration law is proposed that simply overlooks violations of the old law, that is not supposed to be called "amnesty" -- even though the word "amnesty" has the same root as "amnesia." It is all about forgetting.
The rest is at the Link. (http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2013/04/17/immigration-sophistry-n1568320)
-
I agree; we should stop calling them "illegal immigrants".
They are, in fact "criminal aliens".
I almost said "enemy aliens"-- but that term is reserved for the citizens of nations with which we are at war.
-
I agree; we should stop calling them "illegal immigrants".
They are, in fact "criminal aliens".
I almost said "enemy aliens"-- but that term is reserved for the citizens of nations with which we are at war.
With the mixture of people illegally coming into this country, we ARE at war with some of them.
-
I agree; we should stop calling them "illegal immigrants".
They are, in fact "criminal aliens".
I almost said "enemy aliens"-- but that term is reserved for the citizens of nations with which we are at war.
"Criminal aliens". I'm using it.
I may also use "criminal immigrants".
-
"Criminal aliens". I'm using it.
I may also use "criminal immigrants".
I would reserve the word "immigrants" for those who have observed some form of application and approval for entry, such as coming through a border checkpoint ID in hand and leaving when whatever visa they have expires.
But that's just me, and who am I.
-
I think our immigration policies should be reciprocal. We treat nationals from any country the same way they treat immigrants.
-
I think our immigration policies should be reciprocal. We treat nationals from any country the same way they treat immigrants.
I like that. :cheersmate:
-
I would reserve the word "immigrants" for those who have observed some form of application and approval for entry, such as coming through a border checkpoint ID in hand and leaving when whatever visa they have expires.
But that's just me, and who am I.
That makes sense.