California governor signs "Dream Act"

[Tenacious D]

You do not think you have an inalieable right to wander wherever you so desire? I certainly think I do; now, just because some government does not protect nor secure such a right, does not mean it does not exist.

Property owners certainly have the right to lock up or fence in their property; however, moral law will not restrict one from wandering as long as one does no damage to another's property. Civil law, on the other hand, is highly restrictive but cannot automatically be assumed to be moral.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

These are glaring holes from someone of your intellectual ilk, UT. But I'll play along -

Doesn't the property owner have a right to hold and protect his land in completely uninhabitable fashion?

This may be a trick question.....
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[BigPapaVol]

I do see a problem with this; however, I do not see the problem of not enforcing laws as greater than the problem of having bad laws.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

What? Law enforcement selectively enforcing laws? That slope is awfully slick. Wonder if that's a third world type of slope you like?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[BigPapaVol]

If one wants to uphold the ideal of liberty, then yes. If not, then the US needs to stop referring to itself as the land of the free and some obtuse beacon of freedom for the world.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

No it doesn't. We believe in universal freedom, but our documented freedoms pertain to Americans or those abiding by our legal system. We don't need a set of rules for Mexicans.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[therealUT]

That's like saying it's immoral to be against trespassing.

It is.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[therealUT]

These are glaring holes from someone of your intellectual ilk, UT. But I'll play along -

Doesn't the property owner have a right to hold and protect his land in completely uninhabitable fashion?

This may be a trick question.....
Posted via VolNation Mobile

The property owner does have that right; the property owner is probably not considering himself as upholding the ideal of liberty in doing so, though.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

You are upset that private funds can be used however one chooses to use them?

I am not. I oppose illegal immigration but not the idea that people can do as they please with their money. Does the law say that whoever gives the scholarship must sponsor the person toward legal status? If so... I have no problem with it at all.

I would very much like to find a way to let more hispanics into the country legally. Ellis Island type operations on the border would be ideal coupled with strict enforcement of the border everywhere else to prevent drugs and crime.

 

[sjt18]

You do not think you have an inalieable right to wander wherever you so desire? I certainly think I do; now, just because some government does not protect nor secure such a right, does not mean it does not exist.

Property owners certainly have the right to lock up or fence in their property; however, moral law will not restrict one from wandering as long as one does no damage to another's property. Civil law, on the other hand, is highly restrictive but cannot automatically be assumed to be moral.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

This is only workable if the respect for our Constitutionally expressed ideal of rights and liberties is held universally.

 

[IPorange]

I would very much like to find a way to let more hispanics into the country legally. Ellis Island type operations on the border would be ideal coupled with strict enforcement of the border everywhere else to prevent drugs and crime.

I would like to see this, coupled with a mechanism to internally process illegals here already who are otherwise lawfully and peacefully residing here.

 

[therealUT]

I would like to see this, coupled with a mechanism to internally process illegals here already who are otherwise lawfully and peacefully residing here.

The Federal Dream Act, which was voted don, included such a stipulation. Again, it was voted down.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[tvolsfan]

I would like to see this, coupled with a mechanism to internally process illegals here already who are otherwise lawfully and peacefully residing here.

I could live with that if they secure the borders first. I'm not in favor of granting amnesty without actually securing the border.

 

[Tenacious D]

The property owner does have that right; the property owner is probably not considering himself as upholding the ideal of liberty in doing so, though.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

If we're going to devolve into swinging wildly with the broadest possible brush.....

Who says s/he doesn't see that they are upholding an idealistic belief in liberty - their own.

And who gives one whit why they do it or not - as the rightful owner, they can do with as they please, without need for some moralistic agreement by any number of non-owners.

Am I safe to assume that you also believe that all boundaries are to be similarly ignored / erased between states, as well? What about those between independent nations?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

I would like to see this, coupled with a mechanism to internally process illegals here already who are otherwise lawfully and peacefully residing here.

The second proposition is more dicey because if they are here illegally then by definition they are not residing lawfully.

I think you almost have to consider some type of punitive measures against them. I would suggest that either a hefty fine or being put at the bottom of the list for citizenship. I don't know. Otherwise, how could it be fair to those who come legally?

Another thing I feel pretty strongly about is that it should be criminal and enforced to provide employment or tax funded benefits to illegals. I think you have to punish those who are breaking the law by incenting people to come illegally. I hardly blame the illegals... If I saw an opportunity to better my family's situation obstructed by an invisible border... I would probably do it too.

 

[sjt18]

The Federal Dream Act, which was voted don, included such a stipulation. Again, it was voted down.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

I actually do believe that was a good idea that was voted down because the GOP feared a mass of new Dem voters.

At some point, the GOP will repackage it and the Dems will oppose.

 

[Tenacious D]

I would like to see this, coupled with a mechanism to internally process illegals here already who are otherwise lawfully and peacefully residing here.

Gravity itself has been suspended, here.

If I break into your home and stay there while you are away - say, at work or away on vacation - do I have a right to stay there, so long as I didn't trash the place or steal something? What if your house is nicer than my own? What if my kids would get a better education in your neighborhood than my own? How come you were so fortunate and I wasn't? Doesn't seem fair, IMO.

How many illegal immigrants - nay, even homeless people - have you currently invited to stay in your home? If the answer is "zero" - shouldn't you do more practicing and less preaching?

Surely, we should see how this works on a futon-scale before we go nationwide with it, no?


If so, PM me your address, roomie.

How do you "lawfully and peacably" break the law? Seems sort of mutually exclusive.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Tenacious D]

I could live with that if they secure the borders first. I'm not in favor of granting amnesty without actually securing the border.

Any plan of amnesty would present a Sumterian moment, to be sure, meaning, we would average one about every 150 years or so.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[CSVol]

Any plan of amnesty would present a Sumterian moment, to be sure, meaning, we would average one about every 150 years or so.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

So, since Reagan did it in 1986, no more until 2136?

 

[BeecherVol]

An inalienable right to wander. Missed that one, somewhere.

See many people "wandering" onto military bases of late? How about private golf courses?

Of course, I assume that people can wander into Mexico, too, right?
Posted via VolNation Mobile

2 of those you may get shot. The other may just result in being run down by a golf cart.