The dimwitted hispanderer sayeth:
"There are those in this country who understand the Christian principles this country was founded on. They understand that their are certain moral truths and absolutes. Knowing this enables people to put aside the concept of legal law, in place of moral law."
Few of the founding fathers and only an an infinitesimal percent of the founding generation would have countenanced such an influx of aliens as we see today. The most pious would have been the most opposed to the arrival of any alien diaspora that would run at cross purposes to cultural norms of the time.
Still today there are millions upon millions of American Christians who if posed the conundrum would consider prescriptive the biblical story of Babel; the "moral absolute" from that story is God's intent is for there to be many cultures and languages who shall remain separate to develop in their own way and for their own good, and not be artificially forced together into (as Jefferson warned) heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted masses.
This drivel from hispandertized is nothing but more crap coming from the mind of an unchurched hypocrite. I don't see the asshatted wonder packing up and moving his butt off that island, but his own "moral absolutes" dictate that he must. And if you think his nonsense through, he should be relocating to a place in which he'd be kafir and dhimmified instantly upon his arrival. If he is to remove the moral stain of "stolen lands" completely from his y chromosome, he's got to move to Iraq, where science currently claims we all originated.
I'd pay good money to see that.
If he doesn't go, then it means he's randomly picked a point in the past before which human migration did not equate to stealing. Everything after that point to him is criminal using his absurdist "moral absolutes."
What a mental invalid. Can we get him into a program or something?
Yep, I love the arbitrary nature of the "absolutes" myself!
Dred Scott dealt with those who were being denied citizenship because the state didn't acknowledge them as human. Nothing of the sort is going on today.
Excluding how YOU dehumanize Mexicans, that is. But yes, the Dred Scott decision and the moral obligation of fixing the immigration problem, differ greatly.
But what about the laws that prohibited blacks from marrying whites? Wasn't it morally correct to set aside those laws? Yes!
When you replace perfectly sensible laws with "emotive" laws, laws based on what you "feel" is right, you more often than not end up with low level anarchy.
Yes, at one time it was "sensible" to prohibit a black from marrying a white person. It's also illegal for gays to marry in some states. What do you "feel" is sensible on that issue Jake?
You see, what you fail to recognize is moral absolutes and truths. It is the reason you find disagreement with churches who recognize these moral absolutes. The fact that you are unwilling admit your grievance with the church says more about YOUR position than it does mine.
And why is your position anything less than emotive? Most of your posts are nothing more than emotional outpourings holding fragilely onto the rule of law, even though it is morally corrupt in some cases.
And? Your point would be what? This has relevance today how? Answer: It doesn't!
But let's take one second to consider this foolishness. Here's what he's saying if you strip it down: Since we were great big MeanyPants back in the day we are now obligated to lay down and die when people aren't happy they come from pitiful excuses for a country.
"A great big meaning pants"? No! That is what you say to someone who took your Luke Skywalker action figure on the playground when you were 8. What we were was rapists, criminals, thieves, invaders and we carried our disease and our cultural ways with us that all but extinguished cultures and ways of life that were here thousands of years before us.
Yes. It does have relevance today Jake. Just because you say it doesn't, doesn't change reality. Did the South Africans owe anything to the Africans? Yes. Was Nelson Mandela considered a terrorist and communist before he became president of South Africa? Yes.
more to follow...
Heh, and to take your analogy how's that been working out in South Africa bro? Or do you not care if the white folks are getting slaughtered so long as there's "justice?"
Why exactly do you hate this country so very much H? Do you even realize that you do? Cuz, you do!
You want it to die, and that my brother I will fight until my final breath.
The lands the Americans supposedly "stole" from Mexico were empty, barren lands, hence the need to "settle" them. The Texians were settlers, one doesn't tend to "settle" bustling lands. And even after the lands were supposedly "stolen" the Mexican government offered to sell two more parcels to the United States including Baja California which makes the claims of Mexican hardship over the loss of these lands a bit hard to swallow.
Thank you for this Jake. Not only do you show the idiocy of your position. But you adequately show how low you will go to justify true crimes, all while condemning the trivial crimes of others. Pathetic.
Lets parse this sucker!
The lands weren't stolen because they were barren? Apparently Jake lacks the historical knowledge of seeded lands (its an irrelevant point anyway and I will elaborate on that). And even if he has an understanding of that he lacks the knowledge that Native Americans didn't really settle the land. There were the Olmec, Myans and Aztecs who in some areas did. But the natives who occupied the American South West and West coast, did not. What Ol Jakey tries to pretend didn't happen is that the Spanish conquered the natives and force them to blend in or perish. The Mexican peoples were largely citizens not of choice, but of consequence.
Second, I guess to jake if the land isn't settled, you can take it. Therefore, he shouldnt care if immigrants come into the country and take land that doesn't have houses or currently being settled? Fair enough Jake? Can they just take the land nobody is using?
Lastly, Jake seems to ignore the Spanish-American war. The war that was started over border issues around Texas succession. I wonder why he leaves that fact out? Oh yeah, because America had to illegally steal the land in order to get to the point of the Treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo. Not to mention that the Mexican government only represented the Spanish, not the conquered peoples. It would be like saying the American government spoke for Native Americans in its territory, before it took the territory of Mexico. Its a farce, a lie and it is not reality.
What Jake would have you swallow is the history that makes sense to him, coming from a Euro-centric point of view. Nothing to see here folks.
These "so-called illegals" are exactly that, how on earth have we "engulfed them, changed their world and that they are now forced to live in." If they don't wish to be "engulfed" they are more than welcome to return to their native lands, of which these are most certainly not. To suggest that Mexicans are somehow entitled to live as Mexicans in America?
What Jake doesnt realize is that Many of the Native peoples of Arizona, California and Texas (who were pushed to Texas and Mexico from many reservations from the Americas) didnt have a choice in choosing their way of life. When the Europeans arrived, they robbed the Natives (who were
What Jake doesnt realize is that Many of the Native peoples of Arizona, California and Texas (who were pushed to Texas and Mexico from many reservations from the Americas) didnt have a choice in choosing their way of life. When the Europeans arrived, they robbed the Natives (who were there before them) of their way of life. Forced to live in a capitalistic society, complete with social class determining your position in it. Much like the Blacks in the US. If you had a native American blood in you, you were a second or third class citizen with little chance to advance in society. only the Pure Spanish were able to flourish, as best they could.
What you see when immigrants cross the border is not the Spanish who failed in Mexico, but the second and third class generations offspring. These are the people who suffered through the cultural changes that were forced upon them from the Spanish. When he says they are welcome to return to their own lands, he really doesnt mean that because many of them have homelands in California, New Mexico, Arizona and Texas. No, he does not wan't for them to return to their lands at all. You can return to your lands Jake.
Uh, no. I really don't think so. This is patent, dare I say, Liberal and leftist nonsense. If anything has "engulfed" Mexicans it is their very own poor economic choices, and their inability to move away from feudalism.
Oh yes, those dumb "Mexicans". As if being Mexican represents one race and class of people who come from a land where everyone was treated as equals and had a fair chance to succeed. As if the Natives had a choice.
The Natives had no choice when they were conquered and they had no choice when they were made 2nd, 3rd and 4th class citizens due their bloodline. There was a time in this continent when those with Native blood had to deny it or hide it in order to gain social prestige. You can't pick yourself up from your boot straps if you are an oppressed people and your government didnt adequately build an economy where you had a real chance.
By Hannitized's lights all Mexicans living in what is by any standard, Mexico, have inherited some sort of right to enter the United States in contempt of our laws because a hundred and fifty years ago we fought a war, took some land they were not making use of, and ultimately paid them a rather princely sum for land they weren't making use of!
I see you have learned from the meanie MSM and figured ways to weaken a position by using improper verbiage! "Took some land", "that they werent making use of". HOW PATHETIC.
No Jake. STOLE LAND and INVADED LAND THAT WAS RIPE that they HADN'T HAD TIME TO UTILIZE. Give me a break with that spin. Further, Mexicans left the land that was stolen because the laws Americans made after they invaded its cities made it impossible for them to live comfortably because Americans were racists. So they left were they could at least live without as much h
Or, let's put this another way. Are we really to believe that if the United States hadn't taken this chunk of land that Mexico wouldn't be the corrupt, backwards third world country it is today?
Ever heard of the Gold Rush Jake? Where did that take place Jake?
And aside from that. You still arent dealing with the fact that peoples were oppressed and that the Spanish didnt give the same opportunity to non-pure Spanish.
Why? It's not as if we took a majority of their resources, we didn't. Would the restoration of this land magically turn Mexico's poor economic judgment around? Would they suddenly fall out of love with socialism? (Pemex, the largest business in Mexico is owned by the state, that is socialism by every definiton I am aware of)(Just anticipating H's attempt to suggest that Mexico isn't really a socialist country, yes H, it is)
Or let's ask another question. Where would the US be if they hadn't took the land. Without the Goldrush, the grounds to breed cattle and develop lands...where would the U.S. be? Do you have any idea how much GPA California alone brings to the economy? Now take Texas oil and Oregon out of the picture as well. You tell me Jake.
To follow that line of thinking, are we to believe that if Atzlan were to spring into existence tomorrow people wouldn't still be pouring over the American border? Of course they would, to get to where the money is fool! You could give Mexico all the land in the world and so long as you have to bribe school teachers for grades it will remain a backwards country.
And even if we put aside that most of the capital exists on the coast of the US, you still arent dealing with the core issue. Mexicans arent simply the Spanish. You just don't get it. How well versed were the Aztecs or any Native American culture on Capitalism? Especially since they weren't invited to participate in it except as slave like servants. You just dont see injustice because you are too embarrassed to.
This idea that we somehow bear responsibility for Mexico's poor choices has never made a lick of sense to me, we have carried this country on our back, bailing them out when they forgot that they couldn't take ALL the money as bribes in the 90's. NAFTA, which if they weren't complete retards actually could have helped them, but no, it's all Mr. Meanie pants America's fault that Mexico is filled with corrupt economic retards who are a hell of a lot better at pointing fingers than fixing their own shithole country!
That is not my argument at all. Youre just venting now.
If they're engulfed here perhaps it's because they are somewhere they ain't supposed to be. Maybe it's because they have become expert at blaming others for their own failures. Maybe most of all they have forgotten that at the end of the day Mexico is a sovereign nation, not our retarded cousin, and that change begins at home, not protesting in other countries streets
If they're engulfed here perhaps it's because they are somewhere they ain't supposed to be. Maybe it's because they have become expert at blaming others for their own failures. Maybe most of all they have forgotten that at the end of the day Mexico is a sovereign nation, not our retarded cousin, and that change begins at home, not protesting in other countries streets demanding what the sinkhole of a country you came from is incapable of providing!
Yes, yes, yes. Because the Lord God knows how Americans NEVER, EVERY stole land form the Natives, then gave them reservations, THEN TOOK THE LAND AGAIN, and made more reservations, THEN TOOK THAT LAND AS WELL...to benefit financially. Our whole country is based upon STEALING AND INVADING lands you idiot. Oh, but that right to be invaders, thieves is only reserved for Americans? What?
And this is my ultimate complaint with these folks. They escape here illegally from a country that is incapable of providing them with the ability to make a decent living,
YES! Just like the people did from ENGLAND, IRELAND and everywhere else....YOU IDIOT.
... this is understandable, but then they march in our streets, denigrating this country? I'll be goddamned if I'll accept that!
Nobody want's that. But then you arent exactly welcoming them, are you? You haven't said one positive thing about those who do march with only American flags. I call bullshit.
..At that point you can shoot every one in the head and I'll cheer!
Barbarian-savage. Criminal and low-life!
You do not break into this country illegally then have the temerity to tell me we're oppressing you? Fuck you and the Burro you rode in on you sacks of crap! Peddle this nonsense to a "conservative" like Hannitized, I'm sure he'll weep big tears for ya!
No, I will recognize a valid argument and put a crappy one to rest. But you are the ones who wronged them and theirs first Jake. You are!
Now you see it from their side for the first time. Now you know what it feels like to be them. How does it feel? How does it feel Jake to have something that is yours taken from you and them told you are an invader? Because YOU are the invader.
And this alleged valid argument is what?
Commenting by HaloScan
