User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 40

  1. #21
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haight View Post
    Here's my two cents:

    The US Government, under the leadership of James Polk and John Tyler, was immoral and unethical . . . and here's why:

    1. They willfully and with malice of forethought disobeyed the immigration laws of Mexico.
    2. They willfully and with malice of forethought evaded the police enforcing the laws of Mexico.
    3. They entered the territories of Mexico with a sense of entitlement.
    4. Their selfish behavior attacked the infrastructure of Mexico and jeopardized the rights, health, and safety of legal residents of Mexico.
    5. They attacked the sovereignty of Mexico for their own selfish interests.


    If you want to split hairs about it, Mexicans have more native blood in them and have 'more right' to the land.

    The influx of Mexicans across the borders is much like a tide coming in. It takes time, energy, and financial resources to keep them out. Is it worth that cost? What can Mexico offer the U.S.? (oil perhaps? If the geology is anything like Texas?) The first, most efficient approach is to not fight what is naturally occurring, but find ways to achieve mutual benefits. I was encouraged at the suggestion of an independent Western Hemisphere in political talks a few years back. Whatever happened to that? If the U.S. can find ways to collaborate and integrate resources with Mexico, perhaps we can both become stronger for it? The U.S. could use strong allies in this Hemisphere. There is wisdom in having strong bonds with one's neighbors. If you make an enemy of your neighbor, what happens when foreign enemies become a threat?
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  2. #22
    Senior Member sdalek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post


    If you want to split hairs about it, Mexicans have more native blood in them and have 'more right' to the land.
    Then we should say that the American Indians have full claim to both the US and Mexico. Both countries are equally guilty of attempted mass genocide: Aztec, Hopi, etc, and by today's standards Spain, Portugal, England, and all other colonialist countries that had interests in the Americas have committed unethical acts.

    The crux of the matter is, though, that today it is the US government that is the sovereign state being wronged and the illegal immigrants who are acting unethically. Were we invading Mexico or Bolivia or Guatemala the same way, we ourselves would be illegal immigrants would be accused of acting unethically.

    Quote Originally Posted by toonia View Post
    The influx of Mexicans across the borders is much like a tide coming in. It takes time, energy, and financial resources to keep them out. Is it worth that cost? What can Mexico offer the U.S.? (oil perhaps? If the geology is anything like Texas?) The first, most efficient approach is to not fight what is naturally occurring, but find ways to achieve mutual benefits. I was encouraged at the suggestion of an independent Western Hemisphere in political talks a few years back. Whatever happened to that? If the U.S. can find ways to collaborate and integrate resources with Mexico, perhaps we can both become stronger for it? The U.S. could use strong allies in this Hemisphere. There is wisdom in having strong bonds with one's neighbors. If you make an enemy of your neighbor, what happens when foreign enemies become a threat?
    What is the cost of unsecured public health because illegals can't be monitored or treated? What is the cost of the drain on the public coffers offering services to illegals while citizens have to be turned down because there is no money? What is the cost of political divisiveness in trying to address the issue? What is the cost of physical access to illegals which can be exploited by terrorists? What is the cost to me personally because I get call after call by social services thinking that I am someone else and wanting me to appear in court to address assault charges, divorce proceedings, or child-support simply because my name matches the name of the person they are seeking and no further background checks can be done to validate that I am not the person they are seeking?

    Integration of the western hemisphere would eliminate the problem however, consider this. Read about the in depth issues that are being encountered by the EU before wishing this to proceed. The open integration would resolve the immigration issue however it would also provide free access into the US and free outflow of all monies out of the US without an balanced return. East and West Germany, for example, are still going through this political and economic problem. All easterners that could, fled to former West Germany, throwing the German economy into mass confusion with the influx of cheap labor. The set the German economy back almost 10 years and while it outwardly looks to have recovered is still dealing with repercussions. Also, with few attempts to invest in the former East Germany, there is an economic vacuum that has been left there. How does this benefit those who could not flee? Nobody wants to go there because of the poor infrastructure and pollution, legacies of the communist government days.

  3. #23
    Member FranG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haight View Post
    I have a better question. If someone takes your house without your consent, and through your desperation, you decide to break in and take a donut off the counter because your choices and resources have been severely limited . . . would you consider that an unethical act?

    Well, I don't know what atrocities your father has committed, but you could be a beneficiary of those atrocities and see it within yourself to right what he has wronged - so to speak. But, I guess, that all depends on the circumstances.
    Well I'm African American so I should be entitled to a few dozen donuts right? Krispy Kreme beware cause I'm on the prowl.
    I live the life daily; I die the death nightly

  4. #24
    Senior Member sdalek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISFJ
    Posts
    298

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FranG View Post
    Well I'm African American so I should be entitled to a few dozen donuts right? Krispy Kreme beware cause I'm on the prowl.
    Not Dunkin' Donuts?

  5. #25
    Senior Member Dark Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    271

    Default

    I am always wondering why people who demand free flow of capital across national borders get upset if people follow to where the capital goes. If the money flows from Mexico to the US, then it is only natural that the people move there as well, so if you want a free market, abolish your national borders, otherwise you just steal the other nation's money while theri people are forced to stay there and live from the crumbs you throw to them.
    If you dont want to abolish your borders, then establish fair trading that respects national boundaries and allows people to make the amount of money they deserve.

  6. #26
    Member FranG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Razor View Post
    I am always wondering why people who demand free flow of capital across national borders get upset if people follow to where the capital goes. If the money flows from Mexico to the US, then it is only natural that the people move there as well, so if you want a free market, abolish your national borders, otherwise you just steal the other nation's money while theri people are forced to stay there and live from the crumbs you throw to them.
    If you dont want to abolish your borders, then establish fair trading that respects national boundaries and allows people to make the amount of money they deserve.
    No country can sustain an endless influx of immigrants overnight. You get hyperinflation and everybody loses. As far as your extinguishing national borders argument, that's a whole different can of worms. For the record I'm anti-government so I would only be in favor eliminating borders if we had no governments.
    I live the life daily; I die the death nightly

  7. #27
    / booyalab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,511

    Default

    I don't wanna!

  8. #28
    Senior Member Dark Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FranG View Post
    No country can sustain an endless influx of immigrants overnight. You get hyperinflation and everybody loses. As far as your extinguishing national borders argument, that's a whole different can of worms. For the record I'm anti-government so I would only be in favor eliminating borders if we had no governments.
    Of course you cant have a constant flow of immigrants into any country, what I was hinting at was that our current economic policies strongly encourage illegal immigration from poorer regions. And that to overcome the problem of that immigration it would be usefull to develop the third world coutries to some degree and cooperate with them, instead of ,you know .. exploiting them and taking away from them the basic means of survival which encourages them to go where all their money is going too.

    Of course we could also just build a really high wall and shoot everyone who tries to cross it, but that's probably not going to work forever (I say we because in the EU we essentially have the same problem, with immigrants from North Africa) .

  9. #29
    Member FranG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Razor View Post
    Of course you cant have a constant flow of immigrants into any country, what I was hinting at was that our current economic policies strongly encourage illegal immigration from poorer regions. And that to overcome the problem of that immigration it would be usefull to develop the third world coutries to some degree and cooperate with them, instead of ,you know .. exploiting them and taking away from them the basic means of survival which encourages them to go where all their money is going too.
    But by accepting them illegally or by accepting a quantity larger than economically feasible exploits us. American citizens lose at their gain, but the "super" capitalists (not the small business owner) wins. One can argue that maybe that's morally acceptable but I'm silent on that point.

    Of course we could also just build a really high wall and shoot everyone who tries to cross it, but that's probably not going to work forever (I say we because in the EU we essentially have the same problem, with immigrants from North Africa) .
    I bet ya'll's problem isn't as bad as ours. Illegal immigration skyrocketed in the last 20 years but especially in the last 6 under Bush. The policies are a factor yes, the biggest culprit being a no enforcement of immigration law policy. I mean come on; how can you have a rally where a bunch of illegals tell you where they will be and you don't do shit?
    I live the life daily; I die the death nightly

  10. #30
    Doesn't Read Your Posts Haight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    6,243

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sdalek View Post
    If you referring in a roundabout fashion to American Imperialism or Colonialism, the problem then is that at that time it may have been an accepted principle and therefore not unethical.
    I'm referring to the same line of reasoning that I began with; which means the year 1850 (or somewhere around there). And I'm pretty sure that taking property has never been an "accepted principle." Regardless, I expected the ethics that you began with to be universal and constant.

    Quote Originally Posted by sdalek View Post
    In the case of personal property, I would be compelled to fight back to regain my property by 1) using the force of law to recognize that a wrong had been committed against me and the law needs to redress the wrong and punish those responsible, 2) provided that I can effectively use force to regain what is rightfully mine without endangering others not immediately involved in this problem, fight to take it back AND elicit popular opinion to support me, which immigrants may be doing via their protests today.
    Good strategy. But it's an impossible challenge when the house that was once yours is now under the protection and laws of a Nation that is not your own, but rather, it is that of the Nation that displaced you and annexed your property. Therefore, you would now be "illegal" in your own country.

    Quote Originally Posted by sdalek View Post
    National policy set today requires that immigrants come through an approval process to be granted the right to enter US borders, thus they become legal, or to be accepted as refugees, thus also becoming legal, based on today's standards. By not doing this it becomes immoral and unethical.
    Precisely. Likewise, Mexico had immigration policies in the 1840's that were circumvented by US residents that decided to move into Texas, which was then the sovereign Nation of Mexico. Hence, again, the situations seem quite similar to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by sdalek View Post
    Then again, how do we know that there isn't a foreign policy towards the US which encourages illegal immigration to the US as a method of subversive war in order to reciprocate for wrongs done in the past?
    I'd rather not speculate on what may or may not be policy. Because when it comes to undisclosed policies, the US government will certainly have several such policies to counter whatever the Mexican government may or may not be devising.

    Quote Originally Posted by sdalek View Post
    Then it becomes a case where actions are unethical from my definition but ethical from theirs.
    Now you're smelling what I'm cooking.



    Quote Originally Posted by sdalek View Post
    In this case it was the mere case of being a German still having to live with post-WWII American attitudes towards ALL Germans and their descendants. I was never permitted to live that down by my classmates in elementary school and well on into Jr High. In the eyes of my peers at the time, just being part German was atrocity enough, I was by relationship still assumed to be harboring Nazi ideals - see the US attitudes towards Japanese descendant Americans during and after WWII.
    Well I'm Jewish, so you're not going to get any sympathy from me.

Similar Threads

  1. Angry tax-payers 'blow-up' and give an illegal immigrant a 'hard time'.
    By Arthur Schopenhauer in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-05-2010, 03:57 PM
  2. March Madness!
    By Giggly in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 97
    Last Post: 04-06-2009, 09:59 PM
  3. March Madness...
    By Mondo in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-01-2008, 10:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO