Immigration To The United States Is A "Human Right"

[Pauls' Revere]

In a world without GOD and morality that would be the case.

It is the case, they are privileges. I'm becoming more aware of that each day.

[Swordsmyth]

It is the case, they are privileges. I'm becoming more aware of that each day.

In a certain practical sense when dealing with immoral GODless governments, but we fight for a reason and that reason is that we are right, GOD and morality do exist and we have GOD given rights.

[Pauls' Revere]

In a certain practical sense when dealing with immoral GODless governments, but we fight for a reason and that reason is that we are right, GOD and morality do exist and we have GOD given rights.

Which God? or God(s)? The Bible only list 10 rules, why only 10?

[Swordsmyth]

Which God? or God(s)? The Bible only list 10 rules, why only 10?

Those are the most basic and many others are the logical results of them.

[fisharmor]

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.


Is it a Human Right to be provided an attorney to advise you in a court of law instead of having to either represent yourself or go into debt if necessary to get legal help? Will we complain and say the poor attorney is being Conscripted or some attorney's freedom is infringed upon to provide this service?

Some Rights from our Humanity are recognized, but I there some made up Rights exist.

If some group claiming a monopoly on law is going to attempt to lock someone up in a rape cage, or potentially execute him, then yeah, it's kind of on them to make sure that person needs to be raped/executed.

The founders weren't stupid. This was written in there because they knew the whole point of having a monopoly legal system is to rape/execute people, plus a bunch of things we today would consider bona fide torture. I think they were generally more morally centered than people today and wrote that in there for no other reason than as a hindrance to torturing/executing people on a whim.

And let's stay on target here with rights: It is a human right to serve as an attorney without eight years of education and passing a bar exam.
If law as a profession was free, and if people who wanted to be lawyers had rights, then legal fees would be dictated by markets and therefore a fraction of their current cost... which would invalidate much of your concern.

[fisharmor]

People can babble on all they like about unrestricted movement and it means nothing . Sounds good , right . Means nothing . In a place that is desired to be there will be no unclaimed land most likely . You would be an unwanted trespasser who is violating the property of others. There is no unclaimed land here at my place, I own it . I have nothing against immigrants but there we be none taken in here nor will I ever be supporting any or any others .

So what you're saying is, you support border checks 100 miles away from a border.
That's the example I gave when I said unrestricted movement is a human right.
You took exception to that, even calling it "babble", and in the process, you came out 100% in favor of these border checks.

[fisharmor]

In a certain practical sense when dealing with immoral GODless governments, but we fight for a reason and that reason is that we are right, GOD and morality do exist and we have GOD given rights.

The God of the Bible specifically told people on several occasions to leave their country and go to another one where they were outsiders.

You do know that none of the stuff you support existed before 1875, right?

[oyarde]

So what you're saying is, you support border checks 100 miles away from a border.
That's the example I gave when I said unrestricted movement is a human right.
You took exception to that, even calling it "babble", and in the process, you came out 100% in favor of these border checks.

No I do not support that , but I also would not live within 100 miles of the border . I have no real interest in immigration at all.

[Swordsmyth]

The God of the Bible specifically told people on several occasions to leave their country and go to another one where they were outsiders.

GOD owns divine title to every inch of the world and he can grant or remove custody of any part of it he wants to.

You do know that none of the stuff you support existed before 1875, right?

Times change, back then there was less economic and philosophical difference between the US and the rest of the world and travel was more expensive, slower and more dangerous, also if there was a problem back then the people or the government of a country would just round up all foreigners on a racial and/or cultural basis and expel them.

[Swordsmyth]

So what you're saying is, you support border checks 100 miles away from a border.
That's the example I gave when I said unrestricted movement is a human right.
You took exception to that, even calling it "babble", and in the process, you came out 100% in favor of these border checks.

You don't get to say "unrestricted" and then claim you are only talking about checks 100 miles from the border, "unrestricted" means wide open borders and that is what you meant and what you argue for in many other posts.

[fisharmor]

GOD owns divine title to every inch of the world and he can grant or remove custody of any part of it he wants to.

Ok, I just want you to be consistent here. You seem to be saying God grants us rights, but those rights don't include free movement, and we are not free to move across an invisible line unless either God tells us to, or the state says it's ok.

Times change, back then there was less economic and philosophical difference between the US and the rest of the world and travel was more expensive, slower and more dangerous, also if there was a problem back then the people or the government of a country would just round up all foreigners on a racial and/or cultural basis and expel them.

First of all, no, absolutely and demonstrably incorrect. The Chinese that were specifically legislated against in 1875 were practically from another planet. They would have had zero interaction with Western culture.
Today, there is no "illegal" immigrant today who hasn't seen American TV and probably grew up watching the exact same cartoons you did. The best case you can make is that they have a false impression where everyone here is blond and beautiful and rich.

Second, are you waxing nostalgic about the time when you could round up ethnicities and kick them out? The legal approach to immigration is identical to the legal approach to gun control: both were instituted for racist reasons. The first laws in each category were specifically targeting minorities.
Times do change, but the fundamental reasons for immigration and gun controls do not.

You don't get to say "unrestricted" and then claim you are only talking about checks 100 miles from the border, "unrestricted" means wide open borders and that is what you meant and what you argue for in many other posts.

The point was directed to Oyarde who called my points "babble", and I was pointing out that logicially, if he was dismissing everything I said as no better than toddler talk, he was therefore supporting these border checks.
You don't get to say "I think everything you say is nonsense" and then claim that individual points made are not.

[pcosmar]

GOD owns divine title to every inch of the world and he can grant or remove custody of any part of it he wants to.

, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

Luke 4
Full context

The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

I question your authority.

[TheCount]

Will we complain and say the poor attorney is being Conscripted or some attorney's freedom is infringed upon to provide this service?

Yeah, that's not how public defenders work. The government doesn't abduct a lawyer off of the street and assign them to a defendant.

[TheCount]

Question: If we got rid of birthright citizenship what would we put in place to determine citizenship?

Blood test to determine if they have American culture.

[TheCount]

So, end birthright citizenship (per Dr. Paul) and stick to parental citizenship.

I've lived in countries which operate this way. Several of them use it as a method to strengthen the nation's welfare state for the "right people" by creating a permanent underclass of (taxed) non-citizen residents. This quickly spirals into a police state the likes of which would give many posters here an erection.

I'm not particularly fond of birthright citizenship, but if we get rid of it, I think that all children of green card holders should receive citizenship. Temp visas not, generally.

[VIDEODROME]

Yeah, that's not how public defenders work. The government doesn't abduct a lawyer off of the street and assign them to a defendant.

I tossed that out like that because one of Rand Paul's complaints about a Right to Healthcare is that he as a doctor would be conscripted. I don't agree with it, but I wondered if others feel that a Right leads to people being conscripted to do a job.

[timosman]

Which God? or God(s)? The Bible only list 10 rules, why only 10?

[Swordsmyth]

Ok, I just want you to be consistent here. You seem to be saying God grants us rights, but those rights don't include free movement, and we are not free to move across an invisible line unless either God tells us to, or the state says it's ok.

Unless GOD or the current owners say it is ok.

First of all, no, absolutely and demonstrably incorrect. The Chinese that were specifically legislated against in 1875 were practically from another planet. They would have had zero interaction with Western culture.
Today, there is no "illegal" immigrant today who hasn't seen American TV and probably grew up watching the exact same cartoons you did. The best case you can make is that they have a false impression where everyone here is blond and beautiful and rich.

Almost all societies back then were some degree of minarchist and free-marketist, they had not developed the communism and nanny-statism that are ubiquitous in the rest of the world today, also I was talking about before the Chinese started coming, that is the era when travel technology became a game changer and the immigration laws were enacted in response to a flood of alien foreigners arriving and setting up "China Towns" where they slowed assimilation to a stand still.

Second, are you waxing nostalgic about the time when you could round up ethnicities and kick them out? The legal approach to immigration is identical to the legal approach to gun control: both were instituted for racist reasons. The first laws in each category were specifically targeting minorities.
Times do change, but the fundamental reasons for immigration and gun controls do not.

I didn't say that it was better to round them up and kick them out, I said that is how it was handled back then, controlling immigration in the first place is much better and more fair.
Racism has nothing to do with it either, the Chinese were targeted because as you pointed out their culture was particularly alien to ours and as I pointed out they were lumping up in "China Towns" and not assimilating, even if some people were racist back then it has nothing to do with me or modern conservatives, I don't want too many swedes allowed in any more than I want too many Chinese or too many Ethiopians or too many Russians or too many of any kind of foreigners.

[Swordsmyth]

Luke 4
Full context


I question your authority.

What authority?
I have no authority.
GOD may let the devil control most of the world most of the time but he has divine title to his creation and a perfect right to give stewardship over any part of it to anyone, he did so with the children of Israel in the days of Moses and Joshua.

[Swordsmyth]

I've lived in countries which operate this way. Several of them use it as a method to strengthen the nation's welfare state for the "right people" by creating a permanent underclass of (taxed) non-citizen residents. This quickly spirals into a police state the likes of which would give many posters here an erection.

I'm not particularly fond of birthright citizenship, but if we get rid of it, I think that all children of green card holders should receive citizenship. Temp visas not, generally.

Or you could give the children of green card holders their own green cards and they could qualify for citizenship just like their parents.

[fisharmor]

Unless GOD or the current owners say it is ok.

That's a convenient dodge. If I proclaim that agents of the state are not welcome on my property, it's not going to go well for me. The bottom line is, I pay property tax, which means it's not my property.
The state is the only real property owner, thus the state has final say over who can and cannot enter my property.
Every single one of your arguments leads directly to the overarching state you claim to be against. I'm not sure where you're getting lost on that.

Almost all societies back then were some degree of minarchist and free-marketist, they had not developed the communism and nanny-statism that are ubiquitous in the rest of the world today,

Dude, China was an empire that IIRC was still practicing legalism. We're talking about a society that pioneered the idea of rounding up all the dissenting scholars and burying them alive.

also I was talking about before the Chinese started coming, that is the era when travel technology became a game changer and the immigration laws were enacted in response to a flood of alien foreigners arriving and setting up "China Towns" where they slowed assimilation to a stand still.

I stand corrected, there's a good 40% of the time when your arguments lead directly to racism.

I didn't say that it was better to round them up and kick them out, I said that is how it was handled back then, controlling immigration in the first place is much better and more fair.
Racism has nothing to do with it either, the Chinese were targeted because as you pointed out their culture was particularly alien to ours and as I pointed out they were lumping up in "China Towns" and not assimilating, even if some people were racist back then it has nothing to do with me or modern conservatives, I don't want too many swedes allowed in any more than I want too many Chinese or too many Ethiopians or too many Russians or too many of any kind of foreigners.

This isn't some college professor redefining terms here to make the argument that it's racist not to go see Black Panther. This is a fellow libertarian pointing out the fact that being against a particular ethnicity simply because they are different is kind of the classic dictionary definition of racism.

[fisharmor]

I will, however, grant you that you could simply be anti-markets, because you don't trust "white" society to survive a market of ideas.
In the opinion of this free marketeer, if "white" society can't compete, it's unfit to exist.

[VIDEODROME]

Are things like ChinaTowns or Little Italys necessarily a bad thing in a country as large as ours?

I do think integration is kind of an issue, but it might be interesting to address that through partnership with these communities. For example if the criminal elements from their homelands try to move in as well like organized crime, drug dealers, or human traffickers. If a partnership helps keep these communities clean, maybe they can be interesting hubs of tourism which could also be assisted with being partners with them.

[Swordsmyth]

That's a convenient dodge. If I proclaim that agents of the state are not welcome on my property, it's not going to go well for me. The bottom line is, I pay property tax, which means it's not my property.
The state is the only real property owner, thus the state has final say over who can and cannot enter my property.
Every single one of your arguments leads directly to the overarching state you claim to be against. I'm not sure where you're getting lost on that.

You are the anarchist, I am a minarchist, I believe that nations exist for an important purpose and some government is necessary to preserve liberty.

Dude, China was an empire that IIRC was still practicing legalism. We're talking about a society that pioneered the idea of rounding up all the dissenting scholars and burying them alive.

But they didn't have modern bureaucracy micromanaging every little thing, in any case they were the problem that required a change in policy, if China was as bad as you say back then we should indeed be grateful their numbers were limited to minimize their influence on our society.

I stand corrected, there's a good 40% of the time when your arguments lead directly to racism.

It isn't about race, it is about culture, those that assimilated and joined American culture are not a problem and I would object to allowing in too many people of any race who lumped up in ethnic enclaves and didn't assimilate.

This isn't some college professor redefining terms here to make the argument that it's racist not to go see Black Panther. This is a fellow libertarian pointing out the fact that being against a particular ethnicity simply because they are different is kind of the classic dictionary definition of racism.

I'm not against an ethnicity, I'm against allowing in too many of any kind of foreigners who will undermine our liberty.

[Swordsmyth]

Are things like ChinaTowns or Little Italys necessarily a bad thing in a country as large as ours?

I do think integration is kind of an issue, but it might be interesting to address that through partnership with these communities. For example if the criminal elements from their homelands try to move in as well like organized crime, drug dealers, or human traffickers. If a partnership helps keep these communities clean, maybe they can be interesting hubs of tourism which could also be assisted with being partners with them.

It is a matter of scale, the bigger they are the less contact with American culture their occupants have and the slower they assimilate, if they are large enough assimilation stops altogether.

[Swordsmyth]

I will, however, grant you that you could simply be anti-markets, because you don't trust "white" society to survive a market of ideas.
In the opinion of this free marketeer, if "white" society can't compete, it's unfit to exist.

All things tend towards chaos, liberty is like a garden if you don't keep out the weeds it disappears.
If you think liberty should be allowed to succumb to "market forces" then you don't really love it or belong here.
This isn't about "white" society Mr. racist, it is about liberty.

[AuH20]

All things tend towards chaos, liberty is like a garden if you don't keep out the weeds it disappears.
If you think liberty should be allowed to succumb to "market forces" then you don't really love it or belong here.
This isn't about "white" society Mr. racist, it is about liberty.

But we've completed removed the 'market forces' aspect of all this, when states & local communities are legally bound to provide schooling and 'emergency' health care. Many in our media are being disingenuous when they classify this solely as a 'right to immigrate.' It's far more intrusive and expansive than merely crossing a border.

[Thor]

All things tend towards chaos, liberty is like a garden if you don't keep out the weeds it disappears.
If you think liberty should be allowed to succumb to "market forces" then you don't really love it or belong here.
This isn't about "white" society Mr. racist, it is about liberty.

But we've completed removed the 'market forces' aspect of all this, when states & local communities are legally bound to provide schooling and 'emergency' health care. Many in our media are being disingenuous when they classify this solely as a 'right to immigrate.' It's far more intrusive and expansive than merely crossing a border.

Both of these statements are true. Market forces being "au naturel" or rigged.

[TheCount]

Or you could give the children of green card holders their own green cards and they could qualify for citizenship just like their parents.

And then the SS of the future will declare that naturalization has to end for the preservation of the white race... And then we just revert to slavery.

[Swordsmyth]

And then the SS of the future will declare that naturalization has to end for the preservation of the white race... And then we just revert to slavery.

You are delusional.