Friday, May 7, 2010

Hate (again)

I Strongly dislike getting political on my blog, but today I have quite a good reason, and I hope people will read.

I responded to a comment made by a friend on Facebook today asking him to clarify what he meant by "Deport them All" It was in regards to the students who were reprimanded for wearing American flag tee-shirts on Cinco De Mayo. I made it clear that I thought this situation was absolutely ridiculous, and made my position clear. At least I thought so. I was not disrespectful and nor was he. His friends however were positively salivating like mad dogs. You'll see:

L______ Absolutely..... Deport them all and let the chips fall where they may...

Marjorie Napier Deport all of who? The kids at this school are Completely misguided in wanting the other kids suspended, and it is completely unacceptable what the staff at the school did. However the article did say these kids were Mexican-American. Is anyone suggesting that any child of an illegal immigrant be deported along with their parents? I'm sure some people think so, but I do not. Though my mother is an American citizen my father was not. I object to any legislation that may call into question my status as an American. It is a slippery slope I would rather not go on if it's all the same to anyone else.

I do not take issue with this next comment. I feel it is perfectly just to feel the way he does.

R____ This is absurd. We live in America and "should have freedom" of choice. The 200 kids that walked out in protest waving the Mexican flag are not facing suspension, for using the American right of protest, so why are these 5 kids facing ridicule for publicly showing their patriotism??

This person has every right to her opinion and every right to ask me in a civil discussion to clarify my position.

L_____ Why WOULDNT children of illegal immigrants be deported with their parents? The anchor baby law needs to go- the parents are ILLEGAL!!!!! If I do something ILLEGAL- I go to jail or suffer the consequences. This consequence is being deported. Parents take care of their own children- so why wouldn't they go WITH them? Who else is going to care for ... See Morethem??? How absurd! Legal -fine, stay here. Pay taxes. Be decent. ILLEGAL? Go home and come back LEGALLY or don't come back. Plain and simple. So what's the slippery slope here?????them??? How absurd! Legal -fine, stay here. Pay taxes. Be decent. ILLEGAL? Go home and come back LEGALLY or don't come back. Plain and simple. So what's the slippery slope here?????

L_____ Oh and uh- it's NOT all the same to me. No disrespect intended!

Really? No disrespect intended? Because that particular comment tastes strongly of sarcasm and disrespect.

Was I disrespectful in my reply despite this?

Marjorie Napier I take it you don't see the problem in taking citizenship status away from people. I do see the problem there. Which is why we disagree on this point. Under current law these kids ARE Americans. More than likely not all these children are children of illegal immigrants, and yet the phrase "deport them all" seems to suggest that they are.

I AM the child of an illegal immigrant. Should I be deported? Perhaps there are some who think so despite my own mother's citizenship status. There is the slippery slope that I was talking about. I am no less the patriot because of my father's immigration status. I am no less American.

Now we can create a myriad of laws to try and round up illegal immigrants or we can start shoving people in vans and carting them across the border. Either way injustices WILL ensue. Do you think for one moment that my very brown little children could not be mistaken for illegal "anchor babies?" I assure you that by looking at them you would not be able to tell if their parents were born in Mexico or not.

I do not pretend to have the answers. I only state what I know to be the truth as I see it. This is an issue that has people very divided. It's even more true here in the border states.

I meant to make a point after this next statement,(which I disagreed with on one point at least) but my comment was lost. That's when I saw the absolute hatred spewing that ensued and decided to comment on the hatred itself here.

K_____ We need to get rid of the anchor baby loop hole. The problem we have is lack of assimilation. We can not have 2 America's which is what we have. Either you are an American citizen or you are a Mexican citizen. You can not stand in an American school in an American city paid for by my tax dollars wave a Mexican flag in my face and threaten the kids wearing American flag shirts expect everything to be okay.

Sadly 90% of Hispanics put race before they do the Nation that feeds them, clothes them , teaches their kids and gives them health care. Sadly 90% of Hispanics put race before they do the Nation that feeds them, clothes them , teaches their kids and gives them health care.

So, next what J____ would like to say is that My children and I should be harassed for papers or documentation on a whim.

J_____ So, what would you suggest we do with a minor child (because minor children of illegal immigrants is what the article was referring to) that was born here if their illegal immigrant parents are being deported? Split up families? Separate children from their parents? Who will take care of all these children? Keeping the families together is the answer, letting millions just stay is certainly not. And you're right nobody would be able to tell for sure if your children are illegal immigrants or not UNLESS they showed proof or asked their mommy for proof of citizenship. The same kind of proof that you would have to show if you were an immigrant (illegal or not) in any & every other country. I guess the entire world is racist because you might have to carry a piece of paper. I wish I could feel sorry for you but I really just don't. I have to keep my I.D. on me at all times, what's the big deal. If you're here legally there should be no problem. If it wasn't costing Americans millions every year nobody would care but illegal immigration is a huge drain on society and getting something for nothing is usually called stealing.

I don't recall saying I supported the anchor law only that the law exists and citizenship status should not be ripped away.

L______You support the anchor law and yet you support the illegals? THAT'S not a problem? It doesn't matter what u look like- can u tell if someone is Canadian? No- but if they are illegal they should be deported. If u can't prove u r a citizen, as we r o ligated to do in ANY other country, then u r deported. ILLEGAL is the important word here. And please- do you not see any injustices going on now? Hardworking, law abiding citizens supporting illegal people who are taking jobs away from friends and family and even ourselves????? That's not an injustice? And why would you be deported if your mother was legal? Doesn't make sense. If u wanted to be with your father if he were deported then u go, in which case- it's simply a choice. We are probably not going to agree since I believe in upholding the law. Plain and simple. Sorry but I'm really tired of this issue. It's clear cut... No slippery slope here. Choices. Life is about choices and consequences. I just don't think I should suffer the consequences of someone else breaking the law and then people such as yourself condoning it. That's all. But it IS America and apparently u CAN break the law----if ur illegal that is.

L______ Deport them all- referred to the illegals- no matter where they come from. If those children stay with legal family or go with their illegal parents, is up to the parents. I'm just saying if u r here illegally, u should suffer the consequences- not those who are law abiding citizens.

So now my intelligence is being insulted. How about I just have a different opinion. Plus profanities are now being spewed despite the fact that I had not insulted anyone. I certainly don't think I said anything to anyone so bad as to "make them sick."

J_____ = The slippery slope here is that she does not know any better. She does not realize the immigration laws in every other country. She thinks it's ok for one group of people to live off of another, cost the country millions each year, break the laws and be a burden on society. If these kids are American or not...if they are here they should not be getting offended over OUR FLAG! If they have a problem with it, they should go somewhere else. Why is it ok for them not to respect the American flag? I'd like to see you pull an answer out of your ass for that question. You make me sick.

The "they" being? This person really does not see how racist she is being.

L____ I totally agree J____. They feel entitled BECAUSE their skin is brown! Seriously- this isn't a problem with people from Canada or Sweden, Germany or England! Makes me really sick. And I'm tired of it!!!! HERE- they seriously feel they own everything....

K____ certainly sees the nastiness

K_____ HEY....EVERY ONE IT IS AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE, BUT LET'S NOT GET MEAN OR NASTY OVER IT. Every one just chill out because we can agree on 99% of the stuff doesn't mean we should let that 1% tear us apart.

J_____ Do you know why? because most of them are hard working, law abiding and respectful. We have enough criminals and dead beats to take care of over here. We have too many good law abiding American Citizens that need help right now and those resources should not be stretched or all spent on illegals.

Disgusting really? Okay......

J____ Ok. I agree. That 1% is so disgusting sometimes I can't look past it. But anyone who truly cannot understand why illegal immigration is an issue or has a problem with having to show I.D. either has not informed themselves entirely of the situation or has something to hide. Being P.C. and accomidating to others has gotten us nothing but disrespect and cost us millions.

Now crossing a border is justification for murder? Really? WOW just wow.

M_____ .50 cals on border walls every 20 ft.,put up signs that say"stay 100ft. away,any closer and you get free bullets"

I thought it was American to disagree. To do it peacefully is also American.

L_____ Amen Mark!!!! I agree Kyle but I do feel emotional about my country , I think we all do!


Peggy said...

Wow! Yes I can believe it, just look at all the hatred in America right now and the karma for being hateful is that we are losing our freedom.

Clarissa Draper said...

I'm living in Mexico right now and I know that many are upset about the new laws in the States.


The Alliterative Allomorph said...

I have an award for you on my blog :)

Lisa said...

I read this yesterday and tried to respond, but couldn't come up with the right words. I'm utterly appalled with the way that particular person said, "you make me sick". I just don't get that kind of mentality. You can never have a decent, mature discussion with someone like that. Their mind is set and they will justify ANYTHING they feel is right in their own mind.

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

I may not be entirely clear on what transpired above because I found the way it was presented a tad confusing, but if I'm following it correctly, then I believe there are a couple of misunderstandings here:

--> Though my mother is an American citizen my father was not. I object to any legislation that may call into question my status as an American.

The way I understand it, if your Mother was a legal American citizen when she married your Dad, then via the marriage, he automatically became a legal American citizen.

My understanding may or may not be correct, but I believe it is, and this is one reason many women in places such as China, Korea, Russia, etc., seek to meet and marry American men. Some (not all, of course) desire the legal American citizen status that would automatically be conferred upon them via that marriage. This is why we sometimes hear of stories in which an American man marries a foreign woman in a kind of sham wedding of temporary convenience in order for her to acquire legal status while bypassing much of the red tape and paper work.

--> So, next what J____ would like to say is that My children and I should be harassed for papers or documentation on a whim.

No, this could not be done "on a whim". As SB 1070 is written, a police officer would be allowed to request a document indicating legal status (i.e., an Arizona Driver's License, et al.) only in the course of a legally recognized stop. That is to say, if you were detained for reasonable cause in the course of a legal infraction. The officer could not indiscriminately stop you on the street and demand to "see your papers". To do so would be making himself and the police department vulnerable to a violation of civil rights lawsuit on your behalf.

However, if, for example, he pulled you over for running a red light or speeding and had cause to believe you might be in the state illegally, then he could demand to see some form of proof of legal status. Of course, we both know that in the above scenario, he's going to ask every single driver (regardless of race) for a driver's license, and you producing that for him would alone satisfy the new SB 1070 Arizona immigration law.

In truth, this new law is not nearly the huge departure from the status quo that many people in the media are making it out to be.

Yak Later...
~ "Lonesome Dogg" Stephen

Marjorie said...

@ Mom- It's terrible isn't it? I just can't stand not being able to politely disagree with a friend without their more rabid friends coming out of the woodwork to salivate and spew hatred. I am almost never disrespectful in a debate. I expect people to be the same with me. Maybe I am expecting too much.

@ Clarissa- The Mexican government is as much to blame for this entire scenario as the American government is. It's very bad all around.

@ Lisa- These people were just plain mean. I don't think I deserved that at all.

@ Stephen- I know it was a bit confusing because I was really just addressing the hatred that was directed toward me. Honestly the real problem I have with this law is that there will be abuses of it. I have family that HAVE been racialy profiled and harassed not once but many times. Cops can make up excuses to pull someone over. Tucson cops do it all the time.

Actually my mom was not married to my father ever.

But the debate wasn't really about the law SB 1070, Which I do dislike despite being VERY conservative on many issues. It was really about the fact that it was assumed that I want some sort of open borders policy because I object to deporting every single illegal immigrant due to the fact that some of their children are citizens.

Stephen, I know that you may not agree there but I know that you can debate in a reasonable fashion without resorting to staments like some used above, and that was really the point of the blog post. If we can't civilized in a debate how on earth do we expect our candidtes to have any sort of integrity?

Marjorie said...

@ Jessica- YAY! Thank you for the award! I will try and post tomorrow.

StacyAnn said...

Like Lisa I read this yesterday and needed a little time to collect my thoughts so as not to respond reactively.

Deep breathe...

Ok, first off- Marjorie I am so sorry that you were spoken to this way. The fervor with which people defend this type of 'deport them all' thinking is nothing short of racism. Plain and simple. And there is no excuse for it.

I have encountered this type of hate and anger myself from conservatives on the right and I think it is disturbing. Now, I know that not all conservatives are racist but I assure you that most racists are conservative. It’s a shame because I do not think that conservative political philosophy is inherently racist. But the reality is that there is a strong underlying current of hate running through the Tea Party, anti-immigration, pro-life and other groups on the right and it is something that more enlightened libertarians, republicans and conservatives should address and not ignore, minimize or excuse.

I don’t want to start an immigration fight on your blog but for the record I am very troubled by the implications of this law on all Americans. I am also concerned for the police that are being asked to enforce this law. There is a provision within the law that allows for a citizen to sue the police if they fail to enforce the law. This could very quickly become neighbors turning in neighbors, harassment of anyone with brown skin or an accent, American children being forced to carry government issued ID to school or to the playground and on and on. That is not freedom.

Nf1andprek-whisper said...

I was sad to read this on mothers day of all days I thought most of these thoughts were disapating but I guess I am wrong. I am so sorry that someone you considered a possible friend on facebook could be of that thinking, defriend them and you won't ever be able to change His mind. TOO bad, it's how they are raised I guess- Glad you posted it even if it was hard to read.

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

Part 1 Of 2:

--> the real problem I have with this law is that there will be abuses of it.

Well, that is undoutedly true, however, because the city and police department will be liable to civil rights lawsuits, the abuses will be far fewer than the anti-immigration law folks want us to believe.

Furthermore, there is not one single government program or system that does not occasionally suffer abuses. We do not live in anything even remotely resembling a “Utopia” and we never will until we die or Christ returns. But to do NOTHING when we have a massive illegal immigration problem in this country would be a grievous mistake. Just because it is impossible to create a “perfect, flawless” resolution is no reason to ignore the issue.

I don’t want to see abuses occur any more than you do, but I think the potential for them is being vastly overstated by those who wish to kill the law at any cost.

--> Cops can make up excuses to pull someone over. Tucson cops do it all the time.

Marjorie, I’ll bet there is no one in this country who dislikes police departments more than I do, and I am a law-abiding citizen! My personal background has made me more aware of the common “police officer mind-set” than most other citizens possess, so believe me, I know that they can and do find flimsy excuses to harass innocent folks. I’m a White male and I have been on the receiving end of their crap on more than one occasion. And if you think the cops are jerks here, try living in Los Angeles where I think there must be a class in “Jackassness” taught at the police and sheriff academies!

But to avoid addressing this problem right now would be not only a colossal mistake but a slap in the face to every single person who immigrated here lawfully by following the legal protocols. If I endured the red tape and jumped through all the hoops in order to become a legal American citizen, I would be angry in the extreme if the U.S. Government later “legalized” everyone who had sneaked into this country and managed to avoid detection. Talk about being UNFAIR to those who played by the rules!

[Continued below...]

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

Part 2 Of 2:

--> Actually my mom was not married to my father ever.

Well, that really doesn’t make any difference because you were born to a legally recognized American citizen, therefore you were automatically a legal citizen and so are your own children. You really have nothing to fear from this law.

Let the police departments abuse the law a few times and the lawsuits they lose will straighten them out in pretty short order.

--> I object to deporting every single illegal immigrant due to the fact that some of their children are citizens.

Well, this gets into the ridiculous so-called “anchor baby” law, which is too complex to delve into in a comment. But in short, it was deliberately conceived in order to entice Mexican women to sneak into the U.S. and give birth to children here. They were being used in order to provide ultra-cheap labor to employers, but there is an even more insidious motive behind it which has to do with dismantling U.S. sovereignty and establishing a single global government essentially based on Keynesian socialism. But it’s too complicated to address here.

--> Stephen, I know that you may not agree there but I know that you can debate in a reasonable fashion without resorting to staments like some used above.

You are correct on both counts. All debates should remain civil and let the truth win out. Unfortunately, however, the weakest debater will usually resort to ad hominem attacks and ill-tempered epithets in desperation. I’ve had more debates with Liberals than you probably could even imagine, and most have eventually sunk to that level. And although I’d rather it was kept at the intellectual level, when they’ve chosen dirty tactics, I’ve been willing to fight fire with fire. I can and will roll around in the mud when called to do so, and I am more than capable of holding my own at that level, too.

Marjorie, given that there is no absolutely perfect solution to this major problem, and that the Federal Government (for reasons it won’t publicly admit but which I’m aware of) refuses to do its Constitutionally-mandated job, I’m wondering how you would resolve this problem if you were the governor of Arizona?

~ “Lonesome Dogg” Stephen

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

Part 1 Of 2:

LITTLE RED PRO-LIFE HOOD: “My, what a broad brush you paint with, Grandma!”

STACYANN [disguised as Grandma]: “The better to slander you with, my dear.”

StacyAnn, I myself make assessments about people on a one-on-one basis; I do not lump people into racial groups (i.e., I am NOT a “racist”). However, it is estimated that 96% of Blacks voted for Barack Obama. Far more Blacks are liberal Democrats than they are conservative Republicans, and most of them voted for Obama because he too is a liberal. (Unless, of course, YOU, StacyAnn, want to argue that they voted for him primarily because he’s Black, in which case you will be arguing that most Blacks think first and foremost “racially”, meaning that most Blacks are racists. Which way do you choose to view it, StacyAnn?)

According to one source said to be based upon the FBI’s National Crime Victimization Survey and The Department of Justice’s Uniform Crime Reports, of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving Blacks and Whites, Blacks commit 85 percent and Whites commit 15 percent.

How accurate the statistics are I can’t state with certainty, but I can tell you that growing up in the Los Angeles area, I would have been far more likely to have been assaulted walking through South Central or any other predominately Black section of the city than a Black man would have been likely to be assaulted while walking through, say, Malibu or Brentwood, or many other “White areas” I could name.

True, the Black man might well be stopped and questioned by a cop, particularly if walking at night in one of these White suburbs, but that’s a far cry from being assaulted by a citizen of another race solely due to racial differences.

So, it would seem, according to these numbers anyway, that liberal Blacks are more likely to be race-motivated than are conservative Whites, doesn’t it?

However you falsely say:
--> “Now, I know that not all conservatives are racist but I assure you that most racists are conservative.”

[Continued Below...]

Stephen T. McCarthy said...

Part 2 Of 2:

StacyAnn, you also say:
--> “the reality is that there is a strong underlying current of hate running through the Tea Party, anti-immigration, pro-life and other groups on the right”

Really? And Pro-Lifers, too? Let’s look at some facts:

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood (the largest, most effective promoter of abortion in the U.S. today), was a Socialist (read: Liberal). She was also a racist and a hater.

The Birth Control Review, founded by Sanger in 1917, was totally committed to the eugenics philosophy. The official editorial policy of The Review endorsed I.Q. testing, which classified Blacks, southern Europeans, and other immigrants as mentally inferior to native-born White Americans and called them a nuisance and a menace to society.
. . .
On October 19, 1939, Sanger outlined a plan for stopping the growth of the Black community. She predicted that "the most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their rebellious members." Her planning…included being careful to make it appear that hand-picked Blacks are in control

But whereas Planned Parenthood stridently promotes the practice of abortions, nearly all Pro-Lifers oppose the abortions of not just some races but of ALL races.

In America, White would-be mothers represent approximately 58% of abortions performed, whereas Black would-be mothers represent about 33% of abortions committed, despite the fact that Blacks represent only 12.8% of the population. These numbers indicate that the Pro-Lifers follow a belief system that would save more Black lives, while those who promote abortion (and who are far more likely to align themselves with Liberal beliefs in general than Conservative beliefs) would continue to see Black lives snuffed out well beyond their population numbers. Where is the majority of that “strong underlying current of hate” REALLY originating from, StacyAnn?

- American children being forced to carry government issued ID to school or to the playground and on and on.

This is utter nonsense! And I and most Constitutionalists (i.e., Conservatives) I know would forcefully protest an idea like that.

StacyAnn, I’m sure the last thing Marjorie wants to see is her Blog Bit here turned into a verbal battlefield. However, I haven’t had a debate with a Liberal in a long while and I’m almost itching for one right now. And you will do. So, I will not reply to you again HERE on Marjorie’s Blog, but I am personally extending to you an invitation to meet me on My Political Blog and we can mix it up there. I’ll be more than happy to go 12 rounds with you and see how it turns out.

StacyAnn, do you know what the principal problem is with Liberal arguments? The facts rarely support them. I hope to see you on my Blog…

~ “Lonesome Dogg” McD-Fens

Dinah said...

Nice site, very informative. I like to read this.,it is very helpful in my part for my criminal law studies.

Patricia Stoltey said...

Marjorie, I think you were brave to enter into a discussion on this issue on Facebook. I've responded to a couple of friends on different topics and been viciously attacked by my friends' friends. When you can almost sense a person frothing at the mouth, you might as well say "bye" and move on. It's too bad, because the sane folks on both sides of an issue who might carry on a constructive conversation and work toward solutions are inevitably shouted down by those wearing blinders.

DiscConnected said...

Without starting a huge debate, I wanted to point out two things about the Arizona law.

(1) It is adopting a Federal law that's already on the books. So when the Federal officials like President Obama and the US Attorney General attack this law on the basis of constitutionality, they are showing their ignorance.

(2) Under the Arizona Motor Vehicle Code, a police officer already had the right to ask a passenger (you read that right) for identification.

The Constitution charges the Federal government with the responsibility of securing the borders. I suspect that the governor got exactly what she was after with this law-national attention called to the fact that the Federal government is not doing their job.