No, presuming all illegal immigrants to be something doesn’t mean you’re to presume that all immigrants are illegal immigrants.
That he may not be wrong on that assestment does not mean that you can conveniently ignore that he was pointing at your most prominent quality.
Nobody gave them permission to show up, correct?
Someone upthread noted that: “In 1907, no passports or visas were needed to enter the United States through Ellis Island. In fact, no papers were required at all.” To the best of my knowledge, my ancestors showed up the same way they entered: at the designated processing location, as permitted, and while breaking no laws, in the presence of authorities who (a) turned away some, but (b) didn’t turn them away.
It’s possible I have that wrong. But, as far as I know, I have every word of that right.
So you and yours got in and fuck those other foreigners, right? By the way, what should the punishment be for a family fleeing for their lives crossing the border?
So we’re in agreement that there should be a designated place where people can immigrate to the US without permission or papers, then.
I believe that plenty of would-be immigrants should be allowed in even today. I just also believe that plenty of would-be immigrants shouldn’t be.
I’m open to suggestions; make one and I’ll let you know what I think of it.
No, being in agreement that there was a place where one could do something without papers doesn’t mean being in agreement that there should be such a place. It amazes me that you’d try to so derive one from the other.
Why not?
Be advised that if you mutter anything about “not assimilating” I will insist on seeing proof that your ancestors spoke fluent English when they arrived.
So your ancestors shouldn’t have been allowed in, then.
Except that you have already told us what you think they deserve, you sadistic little shit.
I don’t think we need to say anything about “assimilating” in particular to say something about “being in the best interests of our country” in general. If this or that would-be immigrant wants to make the case that it would be in the best interests of our country to allow it, well, then, let’s hear them out as we go case-by-case: maybe one will get permission and the other won’t, or maybe neither will get permission, or maybe both will.
That’s because you’re a fucking idiot.
No, that doesn’t follow either. I’m only saying that they were allowed to legally immigrate, which (a) means it’s incorrect for you to say the opposite, and which (b) doesn’t mean they should have been allowed in, or that they shouldn’t have been allowed in, or that anyone else should or shouldn’t have been allowed in; it’s a mere statement of fact that, again, they, y’know, were, is all.
Should your ancestors have been allowed in?
I believe so, yes.
And what makes your ancestors more deserving than people who’d like to be let in today?
Possibly nothing! As I just said — in reply to you, upon copy-and-pasting something you wrote — “If this or that would-be immigrant wants to make the case that it would be in the best interests of our country to allow it, well, then, let’s hear them out as we go case-by-case: maybe one will get permission and the other won’t, or maybe neither will get permission, or maybe both will.”
I believe that some people “who’d like to be let in today” could make that case and get that permission, and that they’d be just as deserving as my ancestors were. And I believe that some people “who’d like to be let in today” would fail to make that case, and fail to get that permission.
And yet the system that allowed your ancestors to do just that no longer exists, and you seem to be just fine with that.
I believe that, at the time, the government was operating under the assumption that such a process would lead to pretty good results for the country. And I believe that, at present, the government has concluded that the current process will lead to even better results than using the old system would.
That’s, well, what we do: we run things one way for a while — and then, if we have good reason to believe that we’ll get better results going another way, we vote accordingly to change things up. Seems pretty unremarkable, when you get right down to it.