The Long Road to Residency

Southern Man said:
Dude if you don't appreciate the USA then get the fuck out. What other country has a Constitution that states that God gave Men freedom and Men in turn give limited power to a government? Everywhere else on the planet you will be a subject of a government that decides what rights to give you and what rights not to give you.
Click to expand...

The constitution does not state that God gave men rights. That's the declaration of indepence. The constitution does not make a single mention of god, because, thank god, this is not a Christian nation.

Natural rights are nonsense on stilts. There is no supernatural entity to grant them. And it's completely and totally contradictory with Christianity as well. If God wanted natural rights you'd think he'd put something so important in the goddamn bible.

No, our rights were arrived at through logic and societal consensus around that logic. They were not given to us by the government and they were not given to us by God. They were given to us by our will to fight for them.
 
Mr. Spite said:
The constitution does not state that God gave men rights. That's the declaration of indepence. The constitution does not make a single mention of god, because, thank god, this is not a Christian nation.

Natural rights are nonsense on stilts. There is no supernatural entity to grant them. And it's completely and totally contradictory with Christianity as well. If God wanted natural rights you'd think he'd put something so important in the goddamn bible.

No, our rights were arrived at through logic and societal consensus around that logic. They were not given to us by the government and they were not given to us by God. They were given to us by our will to fight for them.
Click to expand...

then you would also state that saudi arabia is NOT a muslim nation.....right?
 
If you were to ask me about a nation like Turkey, I'd say that it isn't a Muslim nation, since the government is explicitly secular and anticlerical.
 
Southern Man said:
Dude if you don't appreciate the USA then get the fuck out. What other country has a Constitution that states that God gave Men freedom and Men in turn give limited power to a government? Everywhere else on the planet you will be a subject of a government that decides what rights to give you and what rights not to give you.
Click to expand...
Dude, what the fuck are you babling about?
 
Mr. Spite said:
The constitution does not state that God gave men rights. That's the declaration of indepence. The constitution does not make a single mention of god, because, thank god, this is not a Christian nation.

Natural rights are nonsense on stilts. There is no supernatural entity to grant them. And it's completely and totally contradictory with Christianity as well. If God wanted natural rights you'd think he'd put something so important in the goddamn bible.

No, our rights were arrived at through logic and societal consensus around that logic. They were not given to us by the government and they were not given to us by God. They were given to us by our will to fight for them.
Click to expand...

Just where the fuck do you think "the blessings of liberty" come from, you stupid child.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It's a nerve racking experience, knowing that one bad answer and that your fate is in the hand of an immigration officer. Granted if one part of the couple is a US Citizen you've got a hell of a lot going in your favor and it's not a difficult interview to pass, unless it is a sham. I can remember having a brain fart when the interviewer asked me what her brothers name was. I freaken forgot and started to freak out. She politely went on to another question and two minutes later when she was on another question I started yelling his name!
Click to expand...

LOL, sounds like a scene right out of the movie Green Card.
 
Southern Man said:
In fact it did. Savage rules.

Do you disagree with his assessment?
Click to expand...

It's nothing but a straw man. His assessment has no connection to reality. No one is arguing that we should toss out our borders, language or culture.

The only thing one gains from the comment is that Savage seems to believe language and culture should be under the control and protection of the government. That's obviously what SM wants. It's nothing more than advocacy totalitarianism where state and society/culture are one.

Our culture, the melting pot, develops freely. It is not and never should be dictated by the government.

Likewise, language is not something dictated by the government. Snoop Dog has had more influence on language and culture than probably any President ever has.

Our borders, the actual point here, obviously have to be controlled to some degree by the government. There is no danger that the government will stop doing that as borders determine whom they may tax. The issue has nothing to do with "tossing out" the border.

The issue is about denying peaceful people citizenship or entry.
 
Southern Man said:
Just where the fuck do you think "the blessings of liberty" come from, you stupid child.
Click to expand...

The blessings of liberty come from liberty. That's obvious from the phrase. If it were supposed to mean what you seem to imply it would say the "blessings of God" or something similar.
 
RStringfield said:
It's nothing but a straw man. His assessment has no connection to reality. No one is arguing that we should toss out our borders, language or culture.

The only thing one gains from the comment is that Savage seems to believe language and culture should be under the control and protection of the government. That's obviously what SM wants. It's nothing more than advocacy totalitarianism where state and society/culture are one.

Our culture, the melting pot, develops freely. It is not and never should be dictated by the government.

Likewise, language is not something dictated by the government. Snoop Dog has had more influence on language and culture than probably any President ever has.

Our borders, the actual point here, obviously have to be controlled to some degree by the government. There is no danger that the government will stop doing that as borders determine whom they may tax. The issue has nothing to do with "tossing out" the border.

The issue is about denying peaceful people citizenship or entry.
Click to expand...

Your very notion of statehood is warped. You believe policy should be tilted in favor of corporations who want cheap labor, to the detriment of citizen workers. The fact is that citizens deserve the labor market protections of a functioning border and enforced immigration policy.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
It's a nerve racking experience, knowing that one bad answer and that your fate is in the hand of an immigration officer. Granted if one part of the couple is a US Citizen you've got a hell of a lot going in your favor and it's not a difficult interview to pass, unless it is a sham. I can remember having a brain fart when the interviewer asked me what her brothers name was. I freaken forgot and started to freak out. She politely went on to another question and two minutes later when she was on another question I started yelling his name!
Click to expand...

And it is all so pointless. Who cares if you know her brothers name? What the hell does that have to do with anything? The relevant questions to whether she would be a good citizen are... is she a criminal or carrying a contagious disease?

The bureaucracy is self perpetuating (all of them are). We have to investigate to make sure no one is abusing our stupid rules. We are wasting resources asking questions that are not relevant to whether she would make a good citizen.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Your very notion of statehood is warped. You believe policy should be tilted in favor of corporations who want cheap labor, to the detriment of citizen workers. The fact is that citizens deserve the labor market protections of a functioning border and enforced immigration policy.
Click to expand...
I don't. I believe labor and capital should be on equal footing. Both should be free to cross borders, with minimal burdens.

Again, our nation was not founded by national socialist. It was setup based on libertarian/liberal principles, including freedom of movement. It's founding documents make clear that the protection of individual rights is the purpose of government and not to protect one group of buyers/sellers on the market at the expense of another.

Barriers to trade an immigration are the same. Both attempt to protect one specific group of domestic suppliers at the expense of all consumers of the product/service supplied. The harm to consumers is greater than the benefit of the special interest group seeking protection.
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
It's a nerve racking experience, knowing that one bad answer and that your fate is in the hand of an immigration officer. Granted if one part of the couple is a US Citizen you've got a hell of a lot going in your favor and it's not a difficult interview to pass, unless it is a sham. I can remember having a brain fart when the interviewer asked me what her brothers name was. I freaken forgot and started to freak out. She politely went on to another question and two minutes later when she was on another question I started yelling his name!
Click to expand...

LOL! Well, in our 18 years together, my American husband has never quite remembered the exact date of my birthday (he thinks it's the day after). When the officer asked him our anniversary date, I just started to laugh. He replied with the same number. I laughed again and said "quick, when's my birthday!" It was clear that we were a well established couple and the officer understood that. We passed with flying colors (being professionals didn't hurt, I'm sure).

The couple who had preceded us didn't fare so well, and judging from the woman's behavior that was probably justified. In the waiting room she all snuggled up and constantly touched his arm, his face, etc., made a big show. When they left she seemed not to know him at all. It was clear that it wasn't just a reaction to an argument.
 
nAHZi, your views on immigration/trade are the same as your view on AA. You want the system tilted in your own favor. When it is not, you whine that it is the reason for your failure. You are stuck in adolescence.

Your mommy does not owe you anything, bitch! Get up off your lazy ass and get it for yourself.
 
Southern Man said:
In fact it did. Savage rules.

Do you disagree with his assessment?
Click to expand...



Of course I do...Savage is almost as insane as you are.

He just doesn't let his homophobic tendencies out in public since he got fired for that hateful homophobic rant he spewed at a listener a few years ago.
 
RStringfield said:
And it is all so pointless. Who cares if you know her brothers name? What the hell does that have to do with anything? The relevant questions to whether she would be a good citizen are... is she a criminal or carrying a contagious disease?

The bureaucracy is self perpetuating (all of them are). We have to investigate to make sure no one is abusing our stupid rules. We are wasting resources asking questions that are not relevant to whether she would make a good citizen.
Click to expand...
I could have done with out it, that's for sure. I think all that shit could have been taken care of when we met the conditions for the K-1 Visa. I also find the current system is racist as hell. Emigrating from western Europe to the US is pretty easy. It's obvious they prefer white Europeans to come over then people of color.

My cousin brought his British fiance over on a a K-1 Visa. It took him a week to get the visa. It took me 6 months to get one for my Filipina fiance (now wife).
 
RStringfield said:
nAHZi, your views on immigration/trade are the same as your view on AA. You want the system tilted in your own favor. When it is not, you whine that it is the reason for your failure. You are stuck in adolescence.

Your mommy does not owe you anything, bitch! Get up off your lazy ass and get it for yourself.
Click to expand...

Yes. The laws of the united states should be constructed to improve the lives of citizens first. Protecting the labor market from massive glut is a long standing traditional reason for immigration quotas. And it's valid. Your conception as the state as merely a facilitator of corporate short term profit is flawed, fascist and flawed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top