Otto, what’s got you so riled up, anyway? In five years, I have never seen an OP basically state “If you don’t agree with me, don’t post in this thread”. Who died and made you king?
On preview, what Miller said. Will wonders never cease?
To clarify, my point wasn’t “who died and made you king?” it was “You really expected to be able to post a rant in the Pit tangenitally related to immigration and not have it over-run with assholes?” I’m not defending the behavior, merely highlighting its inevitablility.
So anyone who disagrees with you, or Otto, on immigration is an asshole? :rolleyes:
Nope. Not even remotely what I said. I’d try and clarify what I meant to you, but past experience teaches me the futility of even trying.
millroyj, I’ve explained three times already why you’re a jerk. I’m tired of trying to teach this particular pig to sing. You have this bizarre notion in your pointy head that a request not to hijack a thread is somehow an impingement on your rights, and I’m sure there’s nothing I can say that will dislodge that notion, so have fun wallowing in your own shit.
I’ve asked the Mods in the thread and in email to close the thread. Whether they do or not, I won’t open it again.
Nope, not an impingement (sic) on my rights, but a rather silly request on a public messageboard.
Problem is when you talk about something people feel strongly about, folks tend to start arguing. Even if it is only tangentially related to the OP. (I thought this was unwritten rule #27…) Some of the best arguments here on the Dope have been borne that way, IMHO.
And it seemed the discussion turned not to “illegals stealing jobs”, but to the question of illegals’ workers rights vis-a-vis illegal immigration. Which, it seems, has a whole lot to do with the OP.
Except that it started out as a rant and turned into a mini-debate. Again, I refer you to unwritten rule #27 (or is it #28…) 
Quite simply on this board the sum of A.) Gay and B.) Illegal immigrant is much greater than its parts. The consequence is a devolution into pitdom. Therefore the OP should not be suprised or enraged when the usual suspects disagree with his one-trick posts, when it was he who posted here in the first instance.
Here’s a suggestion for the OP: If you love him, find a way to make it work instead of posting here. Call your congressman/woman/mayor/local sheriff/alderman/sympathetic reporter. If after you’ve exhausted these avenues a perfectly composed flame will garner sympathy/advice, and possibly the dreaded ((hug)). Otherwise this whole situation, while very important and dear to the OP, is on the same par as the customer service rants as far as I’m concerned.
Yes. Have you noticed that a lot of the people who are in favour of breaking down the borders as far as possible when it comes to capital, investment, laws, deregulation, social services…, are often the same ones who want to put up the Berlin Wall when it comes to actual people?
I think you give milroyj too much credit. I think his point is that illegal immigrants should have no rights at all.
Yet when I suggest that we should, perhaps, be allowed to rob illegal immigrants at gunpoint, this is the response:
Seems to me that he’s talking precisely about robbery. Just not with a gun. By milroyj’s twisted logic, it’s OK to allow employers to flaunt the labor laws by underpaying illegal immigrants, because illegal immigrants don’t deserve the protection of the law. How that’s different from robbery, I don’t know.
Your argument, Shodan, is another matter entirely - more nuanced, more thoughtful, and actually worthy of discussion. You should be careful about throwing your lot in with the likes of milroyj. Hitch your wagon to a steaming pile of shit…
Considering laws which deny a human being certain rights based on where he was born and/or who his parents were are, IMHO, indefensibly immoral just like segregation laws are indefensibly immoral. Now, I realize the world cannot end all barriers to free movement of people overnight without huge problems but the only moral thing to do is to work towards gradually abolishing the laws which prevent the free movement of people and to work towards ending the economic disparity which causes illegal immigration in the first place. Laws and actions which tend to perpetuate the economic differences and the restrictions are IMHO immoral.
Also considering the fact is that the law establishes certain general principles which, although may produce unfair results in particular cases, give it consistency which is deemed more important in the overall working of justice and produces better results overall. It is more important that laws be consistent and known beforehand than that they may be “fair” because “fair” is a relative concept and leads to confusion.
Further considering thatone of the principles of the law is that the State shall not enforce illegal contracts or those contrary to public policy and I think this is a desirable principle on the whole even if it produces unfair results in specific cases.
I hereby rule that it is my opinion that:
a) I sympathise with the victims of such exploitation and I would not cooperate with the authorities who want to enforce laws against them.
b) I realise changing the law to give them certain rights may not be as simple or problem-free as it may first appear and may open a whole can of worms in the form of unintended consequences.
c) this creates an ugly dilemma for which I have no eay solution except to repeat that we should be working on removing the root causes of the problem and we are not doing it so, in that sense, we are all collectively guilty.
d) this is the easiest call to make: milroyj is a tactless jerk and an asshole. He was a tactless jerk and an asshole two years ago. He was a tactless jerk and an asshole a year ago. He is a tactless jerk and an asshole today. And my guess is he will be a tactless jerk and an asshole a year from now.
I would hope it is illegal to hire illegal immigrants, but correct me if I’m wrong.
Let’s see, he has to go where the work is, he has to work till the job is done, he’s salaried not hourly, and he’s tired. However, you seem to think this constitutes exploitation. Hell, ever talk to someone that works in an IT department or maybe even a college student that has to pay their own tuition?
What a whiner.
Actually, you are. The fact that the guy is an illegal is dismissed out of hand. It is the evil employer that is to be held accountable. After all, the poor illegal is tired and …“That’s the injustice”.
Are you saying that the employer’s behaviour towards the employee is just?