We should give the American homeless the same legal status as we do illegal aliens

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

As the mediating power in the United States, the ruling people need to empower its slave class by encouraging the Supreme Court to overturn "vagrancy" as a legal term applied towards American citizens. As it stands now, homeless illegal aliens are given greater legal status by governments in the U.S. than are homeless American citizens. Yet, in the purist sense, American citizenship should mean "a citizen who is legally homeful in America."

The Civil Purpose in the Declaration of Independence and in the U.S. Constitution ideally attempts to sit the master class in the United States with the slave class. This empowers the people to regulate liberty not as tyrants but as mediators. In other words, we never make the King at the table do anything other than bind him or her to remain at the same table as we grant freedom to the slaves to come. The King still rules the table while we own the table.

By granting the same kind of legitimate status to homeless American citizens as we do illegal aliens, we would raise the legitimacy of the whole slave class sitting at the national dinner table. This action will certainly anger the American master class but that is the American Way. So, cheers!

We don't have to give them healthcare. We don't have to give them retirement or a home. Happiness is supposed to be the American dream after all, not the secondary responsibilities of healthcare, retirement or home ownership. We simply need to leave American citizens alone by not penalizing them for being human beings.

[Truth Warrior]

Edited out, per request.

[WRellim]

By "homeless" do you mean...

All those who do not own their home with 100% equity (i.e. clear of all debts/mortgages/liens)?

Or...

All those who do not have their name on the title to a residential home? (Regardless of their equity % or even negative equity in same.)

Or...

Those who do not have an established "place of residence" to receive U.S. Mail at? (Some form of "rental" contract situation? And would a Post Office Box count?)

Also, would you make exceptions for those who are say under age 18? Age 21?

How about those who are still in school, say attending a university or community college? Does their government-subsidized "dorm room" constitute a "home"? (And how is this really any different from say people who bed-down for a night in say some charity "shelter"? Neither of these include private toilet facilities, indeed many times dorm rooms contain multiple beds just as a shelter does... so what would the cutoff for number of beds in a room be?)

And how long would a person be able to be "between homes" -- say if they sell their current residence, would they lose their citizenship status immediately? Or would they be given a grace period of say... 24 hours or maybe even (!) 72 hours with which to purchase some new residence?

Finally, who exactly would be the arbiter of this "status change" and the "loss of citizenship" privileges? The USCIS (aka formerly the INS)?

Would these former citizens be subject to deportation? And if so to where exactly? Should we just dump them in one of the oceans? (And what about those found in say... Oklahoma or Minnesota... would they be transported to the Altantic? The Pacific? The Gulf of Mexico? Or can we dump them into one of the Great Lakes?)

Or were you advocating the OPPOSITE... that you think somehow "Illegal Aliens" have some "special status"?

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

< Psychosis 101 >

Could someone please edit out the thoughtless response given above?

[Truth Warrior]

Could someone please edit out the thoughtless response given above?

Sure, I'd be more than happy to.

Is thought about vomit, OK? You're welcome!

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

By "homeless" do you mean...

All those who do not own their home with 100% equity (i.e. clear of all debts/mortgages/liens)?

Or...

All those who do not have their name on the title to a residential home? (Regardless of their equity % or even negative equity in same.)

Or...

Those who do not have an established "place of residence" to receive U.S. Mail at? (Some form of "rental" contract situation? And would a Post Office Box count?)

Also, would you make exceptions for those who are say under age 18? Age 21?

How about those who are still in school, say attending a university or community college? Does their government-subsidized "dorm room" constitute a "home"? (And how is this really any different from say people who bed-down for a night in say some charity "shelter"? Neither of these include private toilet facilities, indeed many times dorm rooms contain multiple beds just as a shelter does... so what would the cutoff for number of beds in a room be?)

And how long would a person be able to be "between homes" -- say if they sell their current residence, would they lose their citizenship status immediately? Or would they be given a grace period of say... 24 hours or maybe even (!) 72 hours with which to purchase some new residence?

Finally, who exactly would be the arbiter of this "status change" and the "loss of citizenship" privileges? The USCIS (aka formerly the INS)?

Would these former citizens be subject to deportation? And if so to where exactly? Should we just dump them in one of the oceans? (And what about those found in say... Oklahoma or Minnesota... would they be transported to the Altantic? The Pacific? The Gulf of Mexico? Or can we dump them into one of the Great Lakes?)
Or were you advocating the OPPOSITE... that you think somehow "Illegal Aliens" have some "special status"?

Well, with the viewpoint that the people are the mediating power seated between the combating master and slave class, we can't even have the lessors than slaves banned from the national dinner table. Even prisoners are brought to the table by getting a place to sleep, something to eat and quality healthcare. Yet, we aren't talking about eating, sleeping and quality healthcare here but about being granted a status greater than the designation of outcaste or untouchable.

In the primitive caste sytems of Africa before the advent of modern slavery, the outcastes or untouchables, members deemed with a status less than a slave, were rejected just as much by the subjected slave class as they were done so by the ruling master class. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_Africa

As President Bush is guaranteed the right to sit at the national dinner table, all Americans should be guaranteed that same right.

[Truth Warrior]

There's viewpoints and then on the other hand there is REALITY.

[WRellim]

Could someone please edit out the thoughtless response given above?

It most certainly was NOT "thoughtless" and I am most insulted that you would imply it to be so. (Along with the mistaken assumption you seem to be under that the contents of posts on this forum are subject to some type of "editing" or censorship to suit your personal tastes.)


You used several "emotionally loaded" words... I was merely illustrating the difficulty in ascertaining the reality of the definition of the LEAST of your words: "homeless"



We could go on to analyze the host of other "bromide" fallacies contained in your mis-understanding and mis-characterization of the "illegal immigrant" issue ...but only if you feel you are truly up to it (and I would venture that you might have MORE success with defining "homeless" first).

[OptionsTrader]

Cook the homeless and the illegals into biofuel feedstock. The Eco-friendly fiscally conservative solution coming to a fascist state near you.

[amy31416]

I just need to have the national dinner table defined first.

What is the national dinner table and who is sitting at it? Who should be sitting at it and what condiments should be set out? Should the fine china be used or should it be casual? And what's on the menu?

[Truth Warrior]

It most certainly was NOT "thoughtless" and I am most insulted that you would imply it to be so. (Along with the mistaken assumption you seem to be under that the contents of posts on this forum are subject to some type of "editing" or censorship to suit your personal tastes.)


You used several "emotionally loaded" words... I was merely illustrating the difficulty in ascertaining the reality of the definition of the LEAST of your words: "homeless"



We could go on to analyze the host of other "bromide" fallacies contained in your mis-understanding and mis-characterization of the "illegal immigrant" issue ...but only if you feel you are truly up to it (and I would venture that you might have MORE success with defining "homeless" first).

I was the target, I think, not you.

[WRellim]

Well, with the viewpoint that the people are the mediating power seated between the combating master and slave class, we can't even have the lessors than slaves banned from the national dinner table. Even prisoners are brought to the table by getting a place to sleep, something to eat and quality healthcare. Yet, we aren't talking about eating, sleeping and quality healthcare here but about being granted a status greater than the designation of outcaste or untouchable.

In the primitive caste sytems of Africa before the advent of modern slavery, the outcastes or untouchables, members deemed with a status less than a slave, were rejected just as much by the subjected slave class as they were done so by the ruling master class. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_in_Africa

As President Bush is guaranteed the right to sit at the national dinner table, all Americans should be guaranteed that same right.

Vraiment?




This imaginary "national dinner table" you speak of...




It is to be provided by WHOM exactly?

Whose grain will you confiscate to make the bread?

Which bakers do you propose should be enslaved to turn it into loaves?

Whose fowl or bovines will you confiscate and slaughter for roasting?

Whose potatoes shall be stolen, hashed and fried?

Whose table, utensils and plates will be "borrowed" for everyone to eat with?

Who will be designated as the "Pharaoh" with the power to choose?



And exactly how long do you think ANYONE will continue to work to provide those things if they are to be provided FREELY to all of those who do not labor at all?

You are in the WRONG country... and the wrong forums.

You want the "African Caste System" I would suggest you emigrate there, as I doubt any her would stop you.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

It most certainly was NOT "thoughtless" and I am most insulted that you would imply it to be so.

You used several "emotionally loaded" words... I was merely illustrating the difficulty in ascertianing the reality of the definition of the LEAST of your words: "homeless"



We could go on to analyze the host of other "bromide" fallacies contained in your mis-understanding and mis-characterization of the "illegal immigrant" issue ...but only if you feel you are truly up to it (and I would venture that you might have MORE success with defining "homeless" first).

I wasn't responding to you. Your post was incredibly thoughtful considering the time you took to respond.
"Emotional words"?
I am not a lawyer nor a law maker. I am an American citizen granted a Civil Purpose in the U.S. Constitution. This Civil Purpose supercedes legal precedence. In don't need a lawyer explaining the Declaration of Independence or the U.S. Constitution to me because it was created not by lawmakers but citizens like myself.

[Truth Warrior]

Are we all having any FUN here yet?

Stay tuned for the next exciting episodes, boys and girls!

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Vraiment?




This imaginary "national dinner table" you speak of...




It is to be provided by WHOM exactly?

Whose grain will you confiscate to make the bread?

Which bakers do you propose should be enslaved to turn it into loaves?

Whose fowl or bovines will you confiscate and slaughter for roasting?

Whose potatoes shall be stolen, hashed and fried?

Whose table, utensils and plates will be "borrowed" for everyone to eat with?

Who will be designated as the "Pharaoh" with the power to choose?



And exactly how long do you think ANYONE will continue to work to provide those things if they are to be provided FREELY to all of those who do not labor at all?

You are in the WRONG country... and the wrong forums.

You want the "African Caste System" I would suggest you emigrate there, as I doubt any her would stop you.

The national dinner table is a metaphor. The metaphor is given to distinguish the mediating power of the people from the corrupt power of tyranny. The people do not tell the King what to do but they tell him or her to either sit with the untouchables or he or she is going to be divorced as a tyrant (sound familar?).
So, the people bind the master to remain at as much as they liberate the slave to come to the national dinner table.

I used the prior examples of the illegal aliens and the prisoners to show that they are granted a greater legal status while sitting at the national dinner table than do untouchable, outcaste homeless American citizens.

[Truth Warrior]

Is there a UEW glossary available, at a reasonable price?

[amy31416]

As far as the homeless go, I don't think that giving federal handouts, the way we do with illegal immigrants is the way to go, obviously.

Should we be compassionate on a local level and take care of our own--absolutely. But that dinner table and the food on it should be provided by voluntary charity, not through the federal government. If the fed provides to illegal immigrants by taking our money, does that make it okay to take even more money to provide for another group of people that may be more deserving? No. The right thing to do is to stop the forced charity for illegal aliens and have local options for the homeless. Even homeless people are unique and one government program will not alleviate the problem. Some want to be homeless, some are mentally ill, some fell on hard times--this will vary a lot by location. Their need will also vary by location.

What is the way to enlightenment about those less fortunate? Through force and theft?

I think not.

[WRellim]

I wasn't responding to you. Your post was incredibly thoughtful considering the time you took to respond.
"Emotional words"?
I am not a lawyer nor a law maker. I am an American citizen granted a Civil Purpose in the U.S. Constitution. This Civil Purpose supercedes legal precedence. In don't need a lawyer explaining the Declaration of Independence or the U.S. Constitution to me because it was created not by lawmakers but citizens like myself.

The U.S. Constitution did not "grant" a single thing to citizens; rather it purportedly "guarantees" that the government will be limited to certain specific tasks, and will not impinge on the inherent, inalienable rights which its citizens already have by virtue of their innate being (but sadly said limits have virtually all been broken on a repeated basis, and the guarantees thus are nothing of the kind, placing all of those rights in grevious danger of irreparable loss.)

But this misunderstanding you seem to have over the government "granting" certain things -- as if "the government" (whether in the form of the constitution, or the long dead individuals who wrote and voted on it) ever had the power to grant any such thing, unless it were via some form of seizure of that power from others whom it had no right to acquire it from in the first place.



No document can "supercede" the common law understanding.

And while YOU may believe that you have some innate "right" thereby to eat the bread that is grown, harvested, winnowed, milled and baked by another man -- that man certainly has the right to prevent you from doing anything of the kind, and indeed should you attempt to either use force (either by yourself, which would be courageous albeit foolhardy -- or via some proxy in the form of "government" which is cowardly and ultimately self-enslaving) then that man will certainly have the right to stop you by equal means of force.


In short if you want to resort to the base law of the animal kingdom and pursue predatory thievery, the man you attempt to steal from has the same right of the common law of the animal kingdom to kill or injure you to prevent it, and suffer no more remorse than if he were to kill a rat attempting the same.

[OptionsTrader]

Ramen Amypie.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Is there a UEW glossary available, at a reasonable price?

I use the same metaphor over and over and over. Besides, I use the same metaphor over and over and over.

[Truth Warrior]

I use the same metaphor over and over and over. Besides, I use the same metaphor over and over and over.

Hence the glaring NEED for a glossary!!!

"Conservatively" speaking, of course.

[amy31416]

Ramen Amypie.

Hey, it's a cheap way to put food on the table.

Only $3.14/carton of noodles. Beggars can't be choosers.

[Truth Warrior]

I like Ramen. Quick, easy and cheap! An epitome of the "American Way".

[WRellim]

The national dinner table is a metaphor. The metaphor is given to distinguish the mediating power of the people from the corrupt power of tyranny. The people do not tell the King what to do but they tell him or her to either sit with the untouchables or he or she is going to be divorced as a tyrant (sound familar?).
So, the people bind the master to remain at as much as they liberate the slave to come to the national dinner table.

I used the prior examples of the illegal aliens and the prisoners to show that they are granted a greater legal status while sitting at the national dinner table than do untouchable, outcaste homeless American citizens.

And in doing so, I believe you suffer from the influence of the propaganda of the establishment.


I have known many of the "illegal aliens" you so deride, as well as several of the "homeless" you seem to want to champion.

The illegal aliens have all been extremely hard working, suffer and endure a life as second class [non] citizens, being regularly defrauded by those whom they work diligently for, and live in constant fear of being caught by (or handed over to) the establishment thuggery. But you seem to be under the mistaken impression that they are somehow living the "Life of Riley."

Conversely the vast majority of the "homeless" that I have known have in fact been made so by their own choices in life -- given over to the pursuit of alcohol, drugs and inactivity -- constantly expecting others to provide them with the basic necessities of life (food, shelter and clothing) and offering NOTHING in return for the same. That they make such demands as due them somehow by the fact of the geographic location of their birthplace does NOT persuade me in the least. {Even a feral cat offers the services of catching and killing mice and other vermin in exchange for the occasional bowl of milk}.

[amy31416]

I like Ramen. Quick, easy and cheap! An epitome of the "American Way".

I think you like your women like you like your ramen noodles.

[Truth Warrior]

That's good, WRellim!

[Truth Warrior]

I think you like your women like you like your ramen noodles.

Nope, think again.

[WRellim]

That's good, WRellim!

Which part?

[Truth Warrior]

Which part?

The post # 24 part!

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

As far as the homeless go, I don't think that giving federal handouts, the way we do with illegal immigrants is the way to go, obviously.

Should we be compassionate on a local level and take care of our own--absolutely. But that dinner table and the food on it should be provided by voluntary charity, not through the federal government. If the fed provides to illegal immigrants by taking our money, does that make it okay to take even more money to provide for another group of people that may be more deserving? No. The right thing to do is to stop the forced charity for illegal aliens and have local options for the homeless. Even homeless people are unique and one government program will not alleviate the problem. Some want to be homeless, some are mentally ill, some fell on hard times--this will vary a lot by location. Their need will also vary by location.

What is the way to enlightenment about those less fortunate? Through force and theft?

I think not.

I wasn't saying pity them or give them handouts. We need to have the court system legitimize these broken human beings by leaving them alone. They need to realize that they have dug up an age old argument that goes all the way to the same old Machiavellean philosophy that the peasants live as they do because it is their lot in life to do so.
So, let's just leave them alone. Better yet, let's treat them like real American citizens. Ask about their happiness for a change. Forget about abstract things like food, water, healthcare and socalled legal residences. Don't let it bother your Puritan culture when a homeless man or woman drinks a beer in public instead of a coke. Or, what do they plan on doing when they straighten their lives out? How or where do they use the bathroom? Tell them jokes. They will laugh at anything.
Or try being a fireman. While a police officer might kill a homeless person if they are deemed a threat to the state, a fireman will give his or her life trying to save the very same human being because it is his or her job. My argument is that the state should be like the fireman. While all Americans should be brought to sit at the national dinner table, an American is an American homeless or not.