Immigration Threads on TFL.

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Al Norris

Moderator Emeritus
Enough with the innuendos and slurs... Or should I just close all "immigration" threads on General Principle, because we all know where they lead?

Unlawful immigration is a contentious issue. It is also highly divisive. I recognize this. (Hopefully) You all recognize this, regardless of where you stand on the issue.

So...

Do we close all these kinds of threads, or can we actually debate the issue without ad hominems; racial slurs; innuendo or any other of the many demeaning ways to argue?

Now's the time to speak up about this, folks. My patience with the manner in which people post in these threads is about at an end.

You folks tell me... 'Cause left the way it is, they are all gonna get closed... As soon as I see them.
 
Last edited:
Personally I believe illegal immigration to be an important issue and not a race issue, however many posters use racial remarks as a method to shutdown immigration threads in order to prevent debate on this and other boards, a shame in my opinion.
 
Al, if I was a wagering man, I'd start a pool on how long any of these threads could go before each one sank into the muck. Then I'd wager that the time would be pretty short for each one. I hate to see us have to curtail these threads but experience is a very good teacher. ;)
Don
 
I say keep on closing them if they go out of hand. Only other options would monopolize moderator time (managing 10 day bans for individuals, warnings in threads first, etc)

More importantly, I do think it valuable that certain threads do wander. No issue is so black and white that it exists by itself.
 
Don, if I was a wagering man... I wouldn't wager against you.

That said, I would really hate to add another verboten topic to the list.
 
I agree that it should stay on topic and should not become a racial issue.

As far as I'm concerned, if youre born in America, or a lawful, legal citizen, then youre an American... your herritage or your color doesnt matter to me.

I'm against illegal imigration, regardless of the country of origin. I'm as much against Mexicans coming across our southern border as I am of Canadians coming illegally across the northern one.

I feel that illegal immagration is an important topic, and I'd hate to see it banned from discussion.

I'd urge the other TFL members to leave race out of the discussion and simply stay on the topic, so our moderators dont have to make the descision for us.
 
Yes, and I'll try to reign in my emotional arguments and avoid such weasel comments in the future. Mea culpa. :o
 
I say just take away someones posting privileges if they start using racial slurs. Make "No racial slurs" a rule but I think it already is. I just don't feel like looking it up right now.
 
It seems to me that there are only a couple of people who are on the "I don't have an argument, so I'll just call you racist" bandwagon. I think I illustrated that point very nicely in the thread of mine you just locked. Unfortunately, they will ruin good, even if a little spirited, debate.
 
I figure an inability to discuss illegal immigration in a civil manner indicates an inability to discuss other divisive subjects (oh, say guns) in the same civil manner. I say leave the topic open and boot from the boards anyone who can't behave themselves. Illegal immigration and what we do about it is a one in a lifetime, nation-busting topic. The stakes are far to high to avoid discussion because of immaturity. Purge the immature from our midst.
 
What can be said about illegal immigration that hasn't been said 10 times already? If a current event is so compelling, let a moderator start a thread. I think it is too much work for a mod to keep illegal immigration threads confined to something they are happy to host. It's like babysitting.
 
I think it would be unfortunate if, because of abuse and error on the part of some, the general freedom of all was restricted, and I think Antipas's statement about not wanting to add another topic to the list reflects my own feelings. Now that people know the issue and that the entire topic is at risk, I suggest a probationary period while this sticky remains up. If you see misbehavior by many, by all means, go ahead and add another to the list. If by a few, given this warning, I believe you are quite correct in weeding them out but allowing the topic to continue. If by none, then we might freely keep it up.

Thus, my suggestion is a probationary period while this sticky remains up, now that people know what is at stake/what mod feelings are.
 
Illegal immigration has become a MAJOR issue. It has NOTHING to do with racial issues, and if anyone posts anything racially-motivated in the guise of it pertaining to illegal immigration should be dealt with severely! I don't think that anyone would grip with, say, a 1-month "suspension" for a first offense, and increasing penalties after that....all the way to permanent lock-out. Perhaps, instead of shouldering all of the blame, you could place the "offending" post into a poll question, for all to vote on (?)....i.e. "Poll question: Is this post to the point of being offensive enough to warrant a 1-month suspension of the member? YES or NO?"

Personally, I haven't posted anything that has been deleted by any of the moderators, but I know that some members have questioned the reason why THEIR posts have been deleted. Perhaps for "good reason", or merely on a "whim" by one of the moderators?

I've often wondered why there have been so many "Polls" posted. Some have been downright "childish", in my opinion! Sure, some people just can't make decisions on their own, and maybe they are seeking advice from others that may be knowledgeable, but....you'll never see me asking "Chevy or Ford?"....maybe because I prefer Dodge! HAHA!
 
Illegal immigration is a very important political subject and should not be about race.

But I find some are so biased against any race that they cannot help but have their bias come through when posting. Then there are others that are for illegal immigration and find it easy to get a thread closed that is not going their way by making race an issue.

Both are wrong. Anyway, these debates will probably not be allowed here for many reasons. There are other non-gun sites that hold these debates so there are other places to post views on immigration issues.

I hope we never ban 9mm VS 45ACP, I would still like to have some fun in life.:rolleyes:

Added Note: Illegal immigration is clearly one of the hot topics in this Country today. When you say that you have a political debate area, but you want to ban debate on a hot nation wide topic, then you have to wonder why you even have such an option. So, if someone uses Race then just ban them...works for me.
 
keeping race out of the argument as good...but what about the "language and culture" arguments? not trying to be a pain in the ass, I just want to know where the line is :o
 
Illegal immigration has nothing to do with race. Illegals come from all even the world in every shade that humans have. I am a big supporter of the anti illegal immigration effort regardless of there skin color or ethnic background.
 
Illegal immigration has nothing to do with race. Illegals come from all even the world in every shade that humans have. I am a big supporter of the anti illegal immigration effort regardless of there skin color or ethnic background.
Click to expand...

Though this is true, obviously a large percentage of our illegal immigrants come from a specific region (Latin America). Which is why nearly all arguments regarding illegal immigration center on Mexican/Hispanic immigration. Which is why cultural/ethnic arguments almost always come into play.

And, unfortunately at that point the racism that some members obviously harbor also has a tendency to show up as well.
 
Redworm, the definitive answer is that "language and culture" is more about "multiculturalism v. melting pot" than it is an immigration issue.

Two decidedly different issues here.
 
Redworm, the definitive answer is that "language and culture" is more about "multiculturalism v. melting pot" than it is an immigration issue.

Two decidedly different issues here.
Click to expand...

Well, in general any discussion involving illegal immigration is going end up involving a discussion of increasing legal immigration and what restrictions should be placed on it. Since one of the easiest ways to decrease undocumented immigration (and thus help secure our borders) is to increase documented immigration.

Really, it seems like any debate on illegal immigration is going to end up coming down to either "let them in legally" or "build a gigantic wall." It seems like one of the larger arguments for the latter is complaints about possible cultural effects on our country of letting so many from one place in, as well as the "threat" of bilingualism. The other, of course, being the economic impact of allowing so many lower class people immigrate.

Then again, if we should separate the cultural/language argument from the immigration argument shouldn't we also separate the poverty/social-services argument from the immigration argument? Because really the problems with our welfare/healthcare/education/etc. systems aren't directly related to immigration, either.

I just don't think it's entirely possible to separate the cultural/language argument from the immigration debate.
 
Juan said:
I just don't think it's entirely possible to separate the cultural/language argument from the immigration debate.
Click to expand...
The other arguments aside, I think it can (but then I still believe in the goodness of man. :D ).

We have 250 (or so - dating from 1700) years of history that says that the "melting pot" (cultural assimilation) ideal has served America very well. We have only a scant 25 or so years on the multicutural experiment. So far, it has been shown to divide us.

Prime example is what another influx of a certain culture has done to Great Briton and France, where multiculturalism has its roots. Because of their geographical size, the results have been exponential, as compared to America.

Of course, it can be argued that there has not been enough time for the experiment to really be proven or disproven. Considering the turmoil over "culture" in the two countries I mentioned, do we really need more time?

Really, Juan, I'm more than willing to discuss this theme... But not in this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top