I was spending time in google reader recently and came across the review of a British book, "The Progressive Patriot: a search for belonging" by Billy Bragg. Below is the quote that grabbed my attention:
Now, more than ever, "we need to challenge the Right's monopoly on patriotism - not by proclaiming our blind loyalty to our country, right or wrong, but by developing a narrative which explains how we all came to be here together in this place".
I too have wondered why it is that it seems like only one side of the immigration argument seems to have taken a near monopoly of the definition of a Patriot. (capitalized intentionally) We've all heard things like, "the real Americans" and other catch phrases that do nothing but create discord and a very small, homogeneous definition of American and especially a "patriotic American". To be in favor of a just, comprehensive immigration legislation is, absolutely, not evidence or proof of one's hate for our country. The vicious attacks from these so called patriots need to to have a reasonable, respectful and loving answer. We must not engage in the same type of vitriolic attacks that are hateful and violent. The cycle of accusations hurled at people who's only wrong doing has been to have an opinion different than yours is counter productive in this conversation. Violence will only create more violence.
So why don't we try conversing with each other? Heated, sure! As long as you are willing to listen, respectfully, to someone state their opposing case as passionately as you have done yourself! Even further than that, perhaps be willing to concede that your interlocutor may be making a reasonable argument that can contribute to the discourse and maybe even the answer to the problem!
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
response to a question
Anonymous said...
Wouldn't they use the same criteria that the Federal government uses since this just adds more people to enforce the existing law?
Interesting question though It does not acknowledge the "federal/State" jurisdiction question. Some anti-immigration groups try to get around this and the Constitutionality question by claiming the current situation to be an invasion. Someone like Alan Keyes (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=147457) needs to call our current situation an actual invasion as he is citing article I Section 10 of the constitution to defend his position. The problem is that we are not being invaded. There is no intentionally belligerent action against Americans by an invading army. No soldiers have crossed our borders with intent to capture territory and/or overthrow a rightful American government. So, in the absence of Constitutional support for this position it becomes necessary to call what is happening an invasion. Enough of that red herring...
The problem I see as an American Citizen is that this law endangers the basic freedoms of some Americans, which as the Constitution clearly states it is some too many. Article 1 of the 14th amendment states those basic freedoms. So the question revolves around the issue of local enforcement officials being able to tell who is and who is not an illegal immigrant. Even more concerning is the issue of being guilty until proven innocent. Someone who looks like I do in our current society would begin with being guilty! I do not want to live in a country where I could go to jail for forgetting my wallet at home. I've gone out and left my wallet at restaurants, then the next day I have driven back to get it. If I were to be pulled over during my ride back I would be detained, and have my car impounded. Would the town in which this happens be responsible for refunding to me the money I would have to pay the towing company to get my car back? How about the time lost for me and someone I know to come to what ever detention center I am held at with my ID?
Wouldn't they use the same criteria that the Federal government uses since this just adds more people to enforce the existing law?
Interesting question though It does not acknowledge the "federal/State" jurisdiction question. Some anti-immigration groups try to get around this and the Constitutionality question by claiming the current situation to be an invasion. Someone like Alan Keyes (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=147457) needs to call our current situation an actual invasion as he is citing article I Section 10 of the constitution to defend his position. The problem is that we are not being invaded. There is no intentionally belligerent action against Americans by an invading army. No soldiers have crossed our borders with intent to capture territory and/or overthrow a rightful American government. So, in the absence of Constitutional support for this position it becomes necessary to call what is happening an invasion. Enough of that red herring...
The problem I see as an American Citizen is that this law endangers the basic freedoms of some Americans, which as the Constitution clearly states it is some too many. Article 1 of the 14th amendment states those basic freedoms. So the question revolves around the issue of local enforcement officials being able to tell who is and who is not an illegal immigrant. Even more concerning is the issue of being guilty until proven innocent. Someone who looks like I do in our current society would begin with being guilty! I do not want to live in a country where I could go to jail for forgetting my wallet at home. I've gone out and left my wallet at restaurants, then the next day I have driven back to get it. If I were to be pulled over during my ride back I would be detained, and have my car impounded. Would the town in which this happens be responsible for refunding to me the money I would have to pay the towing company to get my car back? How about the time lost for me and someone I know to come to what ever detention center I am held at with my ID?
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
First they came for the Jews...
The following is a first draft reaction to news I read about today....
Pastor Martin Niemoller said the following,
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
I am not comparing the current attempts at dealing with our immigration issue in places like Arizona with Nazism. However, I do want to stress the importance of speaking out at the beginning of what can be the initial step of rampant profiling that can and will legitimize abuse. How does one identify an "illegal" person? Can a human being be illegal? What makes a person suspect of being in this country illegally?
I am very curious to see what Arizona develops as their criteria for identifying these people. I for one know that I will not be travelling to Arizona if this law takes effect. Would being lost and trying to find your way around in a strange place be considered suspicious? I would def. not go hiking anywhere in that state! unless a "hispanic" looking guy with water and a backpack is not suspicious enough for authorities to approach and detain.
Of course people may say that I will be fine as long as I have my documentation with me, and they will be correct. Then again, am I free if I have to make sure I have my "papers" with me on pain of detention and Jail! who brings a wallet when running? I love mountain biking, usually I leave my wallet in my car, etc. I cringe at the thought of driving through several different towns and counties in a state with such draconian laws! How long would my journey be if every time I get to a new area there will be a police officer, under pain of a suit if he does not, who could easily find a reason to pull me over (26 on a 25 anyone?)? I will then have to sit there, wait for the second patrol car to get there, hand my license over, have it checked, returned. Never mind if there are other people in my car with me!
friend: hey! haven't seen you in a while. You should come visit, oh! Bring Jose he lives by you, I want to her about your trip to Europe, I wish I'd gone with you guys.
ME: No I can't bring Jose with me and be back the same day! you live 5 towns and two counties away! One of us may get through some of those towns w/out being pulled over, two of us, never!
the previous imaginary situation may seem ridiculous to you but think of it this way; Anyone who looks like me (hispanic/latino) would have to avoid anything that would give any officer a reason to pull one over if one wants to get anywhere within a reasonable amount of time. That means obeying all laws, yeah 25 on a 25, can you remember the last time you did the speed limit for an entire drive anywhere?
I cannot stay silent about this especially since a representative from my state (PA) just introduced legislation like the Arizona one.
Single sided opinions are more often than not disingenuous and deceiving. Rep. Metcalfe rattles off a series of numbers about how much "they" cost our wonderfully free state. However, he does not cite anything about how much they contribute to our economy, where's the balance? by only speaking of the expenses this person places the blame on our immigrant population for the state deficit! As if these people just come here and sit around, taking "OUR" hard earned money! They work, buy stuff (sales taxes) pay for a place to live (property taxes), have payment plans at the hospital paying premium prices for the antibiotics they had to get from the ER because they can't have health insurance, etc.
these totalitarian measures are nothing short of racial profiling and unconstitutional. What is reasonable suspicion of being in this country illegally? Speaking another language? wearing flip flops? looking foreign? looking lost? We have a problem in this country with immigration, totalitarianism is not the answer!
I had a conversation recently,
Me: hey, haven't seen you in a while
friend: I was on vacation. Arizona, it's beautiful there, you should go there!
m: eh, not sure I want to
F: oh right! But wait, you're legal right? so it's cool...
NO WAY IT IS NOT COOL!
It was then than Pastor Martin Niemoller's quote, with which I started this post, came to mind. Freedom is a gift for which we have paid dearly. That freedom has always been for everyone and these laws do not affect just the undocumented, we will all see our freedoms limited by an over reaching state. Interesting how the people proposing these laws are the same ones crying out against an over-reaching state! I guess over-reaching is good as long as it goes along with their opinion. so no I CANNOT STAY SILENT!
One last thing, a while back I was in South Africa. one day I was chatting with one of our hosts who is Indian. He told me a story about his life prior to the end of apartheid. he says that one day he finished work late so he left in a hurry as he couldn't be in town after sundown. In that hurry he left his id card in his jacket in the office. As he was rushing to the bus he was stopped by the police, they had reasonable suspicion since he was in a hurry to get somewhere and not white. as he reached for his papers he realized he had left them in the office. SO, they detained him and he had to spend the night in jail. His family couldn't come get him as it was in town and after dark. He couldn't leave there until his wife could go to his office, retrieve the documents and go to the police station to get him.
I remember thinking how CRAZY that sounded to me and how glad I was to be a US citizen. If this law passes in PA I may find myself with a similar story in 20FREAKIN10, in the land of the free!
Pastor Martin Niemoller said the following,
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
I am not comparing the current attempts at dealing with our immigration issue in places like Arizona with Nazism. However, I do want to stress the importance of speaking out at the beginning of what can be the initial step of rampant profiling that can and will legitimize abuse. How does one identify an "illegal" person? Can a human being be illegal? What makes a person suspect of being in this country illegally?
I am very curious to see what Arizona develops as their criteria for identifying these people. I for one know that I will not be travelling to Arizona if this law takes effect. Would being lost and trying to find your way around in a strange place be considered suspicious? I would def. not go hiking anywhere in that state! unless a "hispanic" looking guy with water and a backpack is not suspicious enough for authorities to approach and detain.
Of course people may say that I will be fine as long as I have my documentation with me, and they will be correct. Then again, am I free if I have to make sure I have my "papers" with me on pain of detention and Jail! who brings a wallet when running? I love mountain biking, usually I leave my wallet in my car, etc. I cringe at the thought of driving through several different towns and counties in a state with such draconian laws! How long would my journey be if every time I get to a new area there will be a police officer, under pain of a suit if he does not, who could easily find a reason to pull me over (26 on a 25 anyone?)? I will then have to sit there, wait for the second patrol car to get there, hand my license over, have it checked, returned. Never mind if there are other people in my car with me!
friend: hey! haven't seen you in a while. You should come visit, oh! Bring Jose he lives by you, I want to her about your trip to Europe, I wish I'd gone with you guys.
ME: No I can't bring Jose with me and be back the same day! you live 5 towns and two counties away! One of us may get through some of those towns w/out being pulled over, two of us, never!
the previous imaginary situation may seem ridiculous to you but think of it this way; Anyone who looks like me (hispanic/latino) would have to avoid anything that would give any officer a reason to pull one over if one wants to get anywhere within a reasonable amount of time. That means obeying all laws, yeah 25 on a 25, can you remember the last time you did the speed limit for an entire drive anywhere?
I cannot stay silent about this especially since a representative from my state (PA) just introduced legislation like the Arizona one.
Single sided opinions are more often than not disingenuous and deceiving. Rep. Metcalfe rattles off a series of numbers about how much "they" cost our wonderfully free state. However, he does not cite anything about how much they contribute to our economy, where's the balance? by only speaking of the expenses this person places the blame on our immigrant population for the state deficit! As if these people just come here and sit around, taking "OUR" hard earned money! They work, buy stuff (sales taxes) pay for a place to live (property taxes), have payment plans at the hospital paying premium prices for the antibiotics they had to get from the ER because they can't have health insurance, etc.
these totalitarian measures are nothing short of racial profiling and unconstitutional. What is reasonable suspicion of being in this country illegally? Speaking another language? wearing flip flops? looking foreign? looking lost? We have a problem in this country with immigration, totalitarianism is not the answer!
I had a conversation recently,
Me: hey, haven't seen you in a while
friend: I was on vacation. Arizona, it's beautiful there, you should go there!
m: eh, not sure I want to
F: oh right! But wait, you're legal right? so it's cool...
NO WAY IT IS NOT COOL!
It was then than Pastor Martin Niemoller's quote, with which I started this post, came to mind. Freedom is a gift for which we have paid dearly. That freedom has always been for everyone and these laws do not affect just the undocumented, we will all see our freedoms limited by an over reaching state. Interesting how the people proposing these laws are the same ones crying out against an over-reaching state! I guess over-reaching is good as long as it goes along with their opinion. so no I CANNOT STAY SILENT!
One last thing, a while back I was in South Africa. one day I was chatting with one of our hosts who is Indian. He told me a story about his life prior to the end of apartheid. he says that one day he finished work late so he left in a hurry as he couldn't be in town after sundown. In that hurry he left his id card in his jacket in the office. As he was rushing to the bus he was stopped by the police, they had reasonable suspicion since he was in a hurry to get somewhere and not white. as he reached for his papers he realized he had left them in the office. SO, they detained him and he had to spend the night in jail. His family couldn't come get him as it was in town and after dark. He couldn't leave there until his wife could go to his office, retrieve the documents and go to the police station to get him.
I remember thinking how CRAZY that sounded to me and how glad I was to be a US citizen. If this law passes in PA I may find myself with a similar story in 20FREAKIN10, in the land of the free!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)