PDA

View Full Version : In Defense Of The United States Of America



j2k4
07-04-2003, 12:53 PM
I know I am exhibiting an unhealthy and distasteful level of patriotism by posting this, but I am so twisted I couldn't help myself; I agree with the following 100%, so I will not attempt to dodge the slings and arrows I deserve for this post.




After hearing that the state of Florida changed its opinion and let a Muslim woman have her picture on her driver's license with her face covered this is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in a Tampa newspaper. He did quite a job; didn't he? Read on, please!

IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others.

I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost entirely made up of descendants of immigrants. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.

We speak ENGLISH, NOT Spanish, Portuguese, NOT Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Not Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!
"In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.

If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our life style. Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so! But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

Barbarossa
07-04-2003, 01:13 PM
Very well put argument, and one I totally agree with, and I'm not even American!

;)

j2k4
07-04-2003, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by barbarossa@4 July 2003 - 08:13
Very well put argument, and one I totally agree with, and I'm not even American!

;)
Thank you barbarossa; glad you agree.

Rat Faced
07-04-2003, 02:38 PM
Me too.

Sorry, but "Religious Freedom" doesnt give you the right to not follow the Law of the land.


Or every mass murderer would have a defence of "Sacrificing someone to their God"....If they dont like the Law, lobby to change it through the ballot box, like everyone else is free to do.

myfiles3000
07-04-2003, 02:46 PM
it started off okay, but it quickly descends into something less than lucid. if i have time, i will parse in detail, but off the top: "dilute sovereignty" this appears specious, i have no idea how multicultural could dilute sovereignty, its far too vague to mean anything concreate;

"in god we trust" i guess the separation of church and state isn't as important to others as it is to me;

constant use of first person plural 'we' as though this one voice speaks for all of america, which is just silly -- the point is, there IS NO single cultural identity in any modern open society....this is the basic flaw of the commentary, just as flawed and and inevitably extinct as slavery.

denis123
07-04-2003, 03:13 PM
Are not all Americans, guests in a country, stolen from the Native Indians?

ilw
07-04-2003, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by denis123@4 July 2003 - 17:13
Are not all Americans, guests in a country, stolen from the Native Indians?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Native Indians, lol i had no idea America was in Asia.

denis123
07-04-2003, 03:19 PM
Injuns?

J'Pol
07-04-2003, 03:46 PM
If it were a club and someone wanted to join they would have to follow the rules.

If your Golf Club has a dress code you follow it, or you are not allowed to be part of it. It's not acrimonious, or doesn't have to be. These are our rules, if you don't agree that's okay, you can play elsewhere.

As Geordie Mod says, if you don't like the rules you abide by them and try to change them by consensus. If you can it means that the majority of the members agree with your position and the rules change for everyone.

I take it that anyone who doesn't want their photograph on their driving licence can now chose to wear a veil. Otherwise it would be discrimination, wouldn't it ?

clocker
07-04-2003, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by JPaul@4 July 2003 - 09:46


I take it that anyone who doesn't want their photograph on their driving licence can now chose to wear a veil. Otherwise it would be discrimination, wouldn't it ?
The woman in Florida ( who's name I don't recall) lost her case.
No doubt there will be an appeal.

Till then she will be the veiled woman riding around Tampa on a donkey.

hobbes
07-04-2003, 04:02 PM
grrrr- crazy forum- see below

j2k4
07-04-2003, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by myfiles3000@4 July 2003 - 09:46
it started off okay, but it quickly descends into something less than lucid. if i have time, i will parse in detail, but off the top: "dilute sovereignty" this appears specious, i have no idea how multicultural could dilute sovereignty, its far too vague to mean anything concreate;

"in god we trust" i guess the separation of church and state isn't as important to others as it is to me;


Myfiles-

On the point of dilution of "sovereignty":

You may regard the "melting pot" as an idea whose time has passed, but must we hasten it's exit with legislation?

Historically, the Irish, Italians, and Jews who emigrated to this country around the turn of the 20th century were regarded as being every bit as racially distinct as blacks, Asians, Hispanics and the various Muslims who populate our country today.

The brands of racism practiced at that time were far worse than those of today, yet the outcome of these paroxysms (the melting pot) was a country whose strength of character and unity in the face of external conflict carried the day in two World Wars.

This is the principle, I believe, which constitutes the sovereignty to which this correspondent refers.

Re: "In God We Trust":

The phrase, or some variation of it, appears in various documents of historical importance to this country.

The principle of separation is an appropriate method of simplifying and facilitating the conduct of law-making and government operations.

It's inclusion in the above statement, however, is entirely appropriate, as the author of the missive is not presuming to speak for the government; but merely exercising his right to free speech.

hobbes
07-04-2003, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by clocker+4 July 2003 - 16:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 4 July 2003 - 16:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JPaul@4 July 2003 - 09:46


I take it that anyone who doesn&#39;t want their photograph on their driving licence can now chose to wear a veil. Otherwise it would be discrimination, wouldn&#39;t it ?
The woman in Florida ( who&#39;s name I don&#39;t recall) lost her case.
No doubt there will be an appeal.

Till then she will be the veiled woman riding around Tampa on a donkey. [/b][/quote]
Help&#33;&#33;&#33;

My impression was that she lost her case initially( per Clocker), but reading J2s&#39; post, I got the impression that the decsion was overturned.

Clarification requested because I&#39;m getting very angry.

Remember, this particular lady was arrested for domestic battery, which she had attempted to coverup by veiling the child. She has also been photographed without a veil at least 1 time since her conversion to Islam.

Wouldn&#39;t that be great it all our prisoners converted to Islam, that way all of the mug shots we have on file would contain a picture of eyes and a veiled face.

hobbes
07-04-2003, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by myfiles3000@4 July 2003 - 15:46
it started off okay, but it quickly descends into something less than lucid. if i have time, i will parse in detail, but off the top: "dilute sovereignty" this appears specious, i have no idea how multicultural could dilute sovereignty, its far too vague to mean anything concreate;

"in god we trust" i guess the separation of church and state isn&#39;t as important to others as it is to me;

constant use of first person plural &#39;we&#39; as though this one voice speaks for all of america, which is just silly -- the point is, there IS NO single cultural identity in any modern open society....this is the basic flaw of the commentary, just as flawed and and inevitably extinct as slavery.
Myfiles,

I clearly understand the "dilute sovereignty" part. A country is as strong as the bonds that link the individuals. Here we are linked by the right of the individual to have freedom of speech and religion. Cohesion across our country is strengthened by a central language. Thus, everybody has the obligation speak English.

So in a time of crisis, this is the bond we fall back on. This is exemplified by the situation in Iraq. With Saddam in power, the different factions in Iraq were unified by a hatred for their dictator. Now that he is gone, this unifying thread has unravelled and the country has little common ground. Without Saddam, the different subcultures in Iraq look at each other and say, "You know, I really never liked you". Seems the only thing to unify them again, is resentment towards Americans. (Please look at this as an example- not a start off point about what is right or wrong in Iraq).

So in America, we enjoy the luxury of being strongly unified under a philosophy, not an individual. George Bush is just the monkey dancing to the organ grinder at the moment. Some of our monkeys dance better than others. Some of our monkeys, like to hump the organ grinders legs (cough-Clinton-cough). :P




Our country is deteriorated by cultures who come here and fail to intergrate. We don&#39;t need a "little China", "little Islam", "little Poland", or "little anything", within our midst. These insolubles dissociate the bonds that unify us.

So if you live here, you must abide by the laws which govern the land, and in return you are allowed your individual freedom of religious expression. As Jpaul says, you must first accept to rules of the "club" to join, then you play golf, however you wish.


So myfiles, I am just explaining to you what those words mean to me. As for the next part, I agree with you 100%- separation between the church and state. TBC

J'Pol
07-04-2003, 04:46 PM
Originally posted by hobbes@4 July 2003 - 17:41
As Jpaul says, you must first accept to rules of the "club" to join, then you play golf, however you wish.



Do I always try to make my points by use of analogy ?

It&#39;s sort of like ..... oh never mind.

j2k4
07-04-2003, 04:48 PM
Hobbes-

I&#39;m not sure of the date of my posted material, I just liked the content.

I did some googling and came up with the following:

WFTV in Orlando, Florida reports that an appeal is underway; "religious freedom", etc.

WFTV also conducted a poll as to whether or not the local populace thought she should be allowed to wear her veil in her Driver&#39;s License photo, with the following results:

Yes, she should be allowed: 133

No, she should not be allowed: 5338

Not sure: 19

That&#39;s 97% against, which is somewhat surprising, given Florida&#39;s large immigrant population.

j2k4
07-04-2003, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by JPaul+4 July 2003 - 11:46--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (JPaul @ 4 July 2003 - 11:46)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@4 July 2003 - 17:41
As Jpaul says, you must first accept to rules of the "club" to join, then you play golf, however you wish.



Do I always try to make my points by use of analogy ?

It&#39;s sort of like ..... oh never mind. [/b][/quote]
I think you&#39;re both genuises. ;)

hobbes
07-04-2003, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by j2k4@4 July 2003 - 13:53
I know I am exhibiting an unhealthy and distasteful level of patriotism by posting this, but I am so twisted I couldn&#39;t help myself; I agree with the following 100%, so I will not attempt to dodge the slings and arrows I deserve for this post.


"In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.


"In God we Trust" was added to coins in the 1860&#39;s at the urging of religious leaders who felt that people would view our country as heathen, if we did not recognize God in some way.

It is not our motto, our motto is "liberty and justice for all" or "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

Here is the original pledge of allegiance:

"I pledge allegiance to my Flag and (to*) the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.&#39;" He considered placing the word, &#39;equality,&#39; in his Pledge, but knew that the state superintendents of education on his committee were against equality for women and African Americans. [ * &#39;to&#39; added in October, 1892. ]

The current version, which includes "under God" was added in the 1950s, in that delightfully McCarthyesque time, to separate us from those Godless Russians.

I am not sure that our founding Fathers would agree with this. From the Declaration of Independence:
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes"


It is true that the bulk of American law came from men of Christian philosophy and these morals are reflected in the laws we follow today, but the law has no role in telling us "which" God we are to trust.

"In God We Trust" is quite obviously a Christian slogan and, therefore; should be confined to Christian churches. Our nation was founded under the belief that individual rights were to be considered above all else and as an extension of these rights, the individual was allowed to pursue his own personal "God".


So, like Myfiles, I think the writer started off strong, but meandered off the path. Myfiles and I just disagree on the exact point in which he did this.

denis123
07-04-2003, 05:10 PM
I agree.(They are both geniuses)

What&#39;s the point of a foto if one is veiled. I only hope she does not drive wearing a veil.

3RA1N1AC
07-04-2003, 05:10 PM
"This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom."


america has never been a homogenous culture, and its identity has not weakened in the past century. in the early days of this country, the culture was composed of englishmen, germans, frenchmen, and more. they did not all speak english. the arrival of the irish and the italians did not weaken america&#39;s identity, nor did the rise of black culture in the 20th century, nor did the arrival of asians/arabs/indians/etc.

this country is the most prolific exporter of "culture" in the world, and you can ask any foreigner what american culture is, and they will absolutely have strong opinions about what it is and why it&#39;s different from theirs. if america&#39;s identity is nothing but mickey mouse, a greasy cheeseburger and a can of coca-cola... well, that&#39;s not the fault of immigrants, is all i can say. what do you expect from a 200 year old country founded and populated almost entirely by non-natives? (hint: in the history of the world, 200 years is a drop in the bucket-- prolly should be a clue as to why america has no deeply rooted sense of identity)

asking a 200 year old country to display a strong sense of national identity seems a bit like asking a newborn child to solve algebra problems.

evilbagpuss
07-04-2003, 05:18 PM
hmm, he starts off with a valid point about the muslim women/veil issue. i.e you have to follow the laws of the land if you wish to live there. Its a shame it turns into drivel after that, Let me explain...


Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others.
[/b]

What is the connection between patriotism and a woman wanting to wear a veil? It sounds like hes arguing that muslim women who want to wear veils for official photos are unpatriotic. Does that mean that any US citizen who disagrees with a specific aspect of US bureaucracy/law is unpatriotic? Perhaps Im missing an obvious link but the 2 things seem completely unrelated to me.


Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity.[/b]

He&#39;s really lost me at this point&#33; The USA has pretty much always been a multicultural community. He doesnt explain this statement at all. In a country as diverse as the USA with its multitude of religeons and races, "our national identity" is a rather ambiguous phrase. I can only assume "our national identity" is a white christian one as he doesnt define the phrase.

His point about language is one I agree with, if I ever emigrate I will, out of respect, learn the lingo of the land.

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@
In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.
[/quote]

This bit irritates me. What does he mean by God? A Christian god? A Jewish one? A <insert religeon here> God? Is he arguing everyone should be Christian in the USA? Is he arguing everyone should be religeous in some form or another? Does this mean atheists are unpatriotic? If hes not arguing these points then is he saying people should lie when taking the oath of allegiance ("one nation under god")? Again, more ambiguity. The point about the seperation of church and state has been covered already but its a very important one in this context.

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4
If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don&#39;t like Uncle Sam, then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don&#39;t care how you did things where you came from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our life style. Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so&#33; But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.
[/quote]

Who is "we"? White Christians? What is "our culture", "our lifestyle"? In the melting pot that is the USA where you have, and always have had a load of different cultures/lifestyles, this point is pretty baseless.

He seems to be arguing for and against diversity in one fell swoop. You have the right to express yourself but if you are critical of the status quo he suggests you "get out of town"&#33;&#33; Perhaps he needs reminding that many white christians (I assume this is "we") are also critical of many areas of US life. After all they are hardly a bunch of androids who agree with everything about the US way of doing things or every minute detail of US bureaucracy. Do they need to "get out of town" too? Or does that only apply to non-white, non-christians?

Conclusion: Ambiguous rubbish starting off with a valid point and covered in pseudo-patriotism to make it more &#39;palatable&#39;.

3RA1N1AC
07-04-2003, 05:21 PM
if you don&#39;t like immigrant culture and foreign languages, then america is obviously not the country for you, so feel free to quit complaining and GET OUT. :lol:

J'Pol
07-04-2003, 06:55 PM
What the author of the article appears to think is that people of different beliefs are all first generation immigrants.

This whole, if you don&#39;t think the same as me then go home thing is preposterous. A lot of the people who don&#39;t think the same as him were born and raised in the USA, it&#39;s just that their parents chose to raise them in their own cultural heritage.

That is entirely different from the concept that people should be willing to abide by the laws of the country which they live in. If they chose not to and leave that is entirely a matter for them.

If however they chose not to abide by the rules and stay then the law enforcement community should deal with the situation. If you don&#39;t want your photograph taken, no problem, no driving licence or passport. If you chose not to wear a crash helmet (UK thing) fine, don&#39;t ride a motorcycle on the public road. If you do you will get arrested - just like everyone else.

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. They also have the right to face the consequences of breaking the rules that the majority have agreed upon. It&#39;s not a difficult concept.

3RA1N1AC
07-04-2003, 10:39 PM
what this veiled woman did was as american as apple pie. if you have a problem with a law in america, you can go to court and challenge it. the court may agree with you or disagree with you, but that is a freedom allowed to everyone in america.

MagicNakor
07-04-2003, 11:26 PM
I must say there there really isn&#39;t a coherent point to this, he starts off saying one thing, switches to another, and then switches again. It&#39;s almost reminiscent of a high school paper. As such, it&#39;s rather difficult to either take a for or against stance on it, since one&#39;d be knee-deep in mush.

:ninja:

j2k4
07-04-2003, 11:27 PM
I think the author&#39;s point about the "right to leave" is this:

Certain citizens have, literally, nothing positive to say about the U.S.; they are as negative about this country as the proverbial "superpatriot" is positive.

I would like to use the analogy of a person sitting on a tack-would it make more sense to rise, and thus remove the tack, or better to stay seated and complain?

Frankly I&#39;d prefer to hear complaints about something else, as I have enough of my own about my country.

EBP-you seem to consider yourself knowledgable enough about the U.S. to denigrate it and a good percentage of it&#39;s citizens, holding forth judgement upon judgement; what made you such a student of the U.S.?

evilbagpuss
07-04-2003, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by j2k4
EBP-you seem to consider yourself knowledgable enough about the U.S. to denigrate it and a good percentage of it&#39;s citizens, holding forth judgement upon judgement; what made you such a student of the U.S.?

Here we go again.... this is a carbon copy of the "The Flame Has Gone Out Under The Melting Pot" thread.

1) j2k4 posts an article.
2) A general consensus is reached that the article isn&#39;t really up to scratch.
3) j2k4 responds by initiating a "j2k4 vs EBP" battle.

At the risk of playing into your hands.... Can you show me precisely where I have denigrated the US and it&#39;s citizens in this thread?

j2k4
07-05-2003, 01:27 AM
Originally posted by evilbagpuss+4 July 2003 - 18:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (evilbagpuss @ 4 July 2003 - 18:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4
EBP-you seem to consider yourself knowledgable enough about the U.S. to denigrate it and a good percentage of it&#39;s citizens, holding forth judgement upon judgement; what made you such a student of the U.S.?

Here we go again.... this is a carbon copy of the "The Flame Has Gone Out Under The Melting Pot" thread.

1) j2k4 posts an article.
2) A general consensus is reached that the article isn&#39;t really up to scratch.
3) j2k4 responds by initiating a "j2k4 vs EBP" battle.

At the risk of playing into your hands.... Can you show me precisely where I have denigrated the US and it&#39;s citizens in this thread? [/b][/quote]
Never mind.

evilbagpuss
07-05-2003, 01:38 AM
Originally posted by j2k4
Never mind.

I&#39;m sorry but I do mind when people throw accusations at me but refuse to support them.

If "never mind" = an apology or a retraction of said accusation... dont worry about it.

echidna
07-05-2003, 03:07 PM
Originally posted by myfiles3000@5 July 2003 - 00:46
-- the point is, there IS NO single cultural identity in any modern open society....this is the basic flaw of the commentary, just as flawed and and inevitably extinct as slavery.
precisely
and coincidentally chirac is on a very similar trip (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/04/1057179156950.html) which i hope serves to remind some of the francophobes of the concurrence of policy, after all the idea of a nation was a french one

i have to point out that &#39;ethnic communities&#39; or subcultures or what ever, preserve and develop crafts and music and theatre and most importantly food, which came with the immigrants or the communities immigrant fore bares
there is just to much good cooking involved to treat it too flippantly, i would find my country a far poorer place without the fabulous food halls of city chinatowns, the excellent variations of kebabs and falafel [christian, Muslim and Israeli in different regions and all soooo tasty] not to mention the indian communities and the turkish sweets and the vietnamese bakers or the japanese [and korean] sushi explosion
then, there is the succulent grease of the fish and chip shop legacy/tradition from the masses of Catholic dissidents transported from ireland and the prohibition for catholics to eat &#39;meat&#39; on friday [hey popey isn&#39;t a fish an animal?]
italian coffee turkish coffee there is to much to mention
mono-culturalists are tongue traitors

Rat Faced
07-05-2003, 05:10 PM
You&#39;ve lost me...easy done.

That was double dutch.

As i have said, no one is above a nations laws...for whatever reasons, wether it is religious or just coz they are so damn rich and influential.

And there were "nations" around when both the French and the British were living in caves.....so i&#39;ll not agree with that one.

hobbes
07-05-2003, 05:19 PM
In regard to cultural identity:
Our culture, as described in my post above, is unified under a philosophy which treasures the rights of the individual above all else. Kind of a novel idea, to bind a country together based on a philosophy, rather than on a common ancestry or religion.


Take any American off the street and ask him what we are about. He will tell you that we are about freedom of speech and freedom of religion. We allow all kinds of extremist groups in this country (Nazi&#39;s, KKK) to assemble and speak out, as long as the do so peaceably, within the constraints of our legal system (sorry, no veil). So although many would love to see these fringe elements disassembled, we must embrace their right to exist, and defend it as necessary.
Doesn&#39;t that seem insane&#33; A black man defending the right of the KKK to exist, simply because he believes in individual freedom?


So our cultural identity is not defined by race, religion, or ancestry, but rather philosophy.


In regard to ethnic communities or sub-cultures, we are not asking you to abandon your past any more than we ask you to give up your religion. What we ask is that you step up to your new society. Speak English, send your kids to school (vs homeschool), show up at the PTA meetings and football games. Do not isolate yourselves into little communities, do not prevent your children from mixing with others.

We do have strong German and Irish areas in St. Louis and these little communities celebrate several cultural holidays, which are open to all, giving the people a chance to "show off" their past to others, while maintaining cultural identity. These people are English speaking Americans first, as they form an integral part of the community, but retain a cultural identity, which adds to our society rather than leeching off it.

thewizeard
07-05-2003, 05:29 PM
USA

Truth persuades by teaching, but does not teach by persuading.

All truth passes through three stages.

First, it is rediculed.

Second, it is violently opposed

Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

sonicbum
07-05-2003, 06:08 PM
Originally posted by j2k4@4 July 2003 - 16:48
Yes, she should be allowed: 133

No, she should not be allowed: 5338

Not sure: 19

That&#39;s 97% against, which is somewhat surprising, given Florida&#39;s large immigrant population.
most of the immigrants dont have phones to take the survey, even if they had a phone some probably cant speak english to take the survey :ph34r:

3RA1N1AC
07-05-2003, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by hobbes@5 July 2003 - 09:19
In regard to ethnic communities or sub-cultures, we are not asking you to abandon your past any more than we ask you to give up your religion. What we ask is that you step up to your new society. Speak English, send your kids to school (vs homeschool), show up at the PTA meetings and football games. Do not isolate yourselves into little communities, do not prevent your children from mixing with others.
who is we? i and several other forum members have been disagreeing with the article as posted at the beginning of the thread. and that article IS demanding assimilation from people the moment they step off the boat, on one hand claiming to not be anti-immigrant while on the other hand cursing cultural diversity.

i understand your points, but you&#39;re diverting the argument toward a moderate assimilationist idea rather than the hardline conservative one (expressed in the first post) that we were originally debating. your opinion is valid, but it seems like your use of "we" is trying to apologize for the people whose views are actually a bit more uncompromising than your own.

edit: well, actually i don&#39;t even know WHAT view you&#39;re presenting-- in one post you say you dislike ethnic minorities centralizing in distinct communities, and then in another post you congratulate germans and irish for maintaining their sense of ethnicity while participating in mainstream society. which is it? if you&#39;re implying that newer immigrants are somehow worse than them... i&#39;d say you&#39;re ignoring the fact that it takes time to assimilate, and people like the irish have a head start of several generations over the latest wave of immigrants.

either way, i still think the whole "speak the majority language or get out" idea is baloney. at least in america, where diversity of language was the norm for a much longer time than the united states has existed-- how many native american languages were spoken on the continent before the europeans showed up? i can&#39;t think of a single moral or ethical obligation to impose an official language on a country. just because it&#39;s more convenient, that doesn&#39;t make it more correct. and i hold the u.s. constitution in extremely high regard, as an ingenious document which tried to establish a fair and balanced legal guideline for the country, leaving much open to interpretation so that it would continue to be relevant after more than 2 centuries-- so i think it&#39;s worth pointing out that the constitution neglected to designate an official language for the united states, and i like to think it was with good reason.

j2k4
07-05-2003, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by evilbagpuss+4 July 2003 - 20:38--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (evilbagpuss @ 4 July 2003 - 20:38)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4
Never mind.

I&#39;m sorry but I do mind when people throw accusations at me but refuse to support them.

If "never mind" = an apology or a retraction of said accusation... dont worry about it. [/b][/quote]
It is neither another apology nor a retraction.

I am currently mulling methods for confronting you with proof of your trespasses while keeping within reasonable bounds of good taste.

I am loathe to create a new thread merely for purposes of pointing out what I feel constitutes proof of your, shall we say, lack of decorum?

You will know when or what I conclude, EBP.

evilbagpuss
07-05-2003, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by j2k4
It is neither another apology nor a retraction.

I am currently mulling methods for confronting you with proof of your trespasses while keeping within reasonable bounds of good taste.

I am loathe to create a new thread merely for purposes of pointing out what I feel constitutes proof of your, shall we say, lack of decorum?

You will know when or what I conclude, EBP.

I see.. so you made the accusation and are now scrambling around looking for evidence to support it. Shouldnt the conclusion come first then the accusation?

Oh dear we&#39;re now in "OT EBP vs j2k4 land".. again. Congratulations.

It would be interesting to see you attempt to answer my critique of the article. Highly unlikely, going by past experience, but definitely interesting.

I guess your version of decorum involves avoiding the topic and inititating a personal attack, its obviously become a favourite diversionary tactic of yours.

FYI the only person I &#39;denigrated&#39;, for want of a better word, in this thread was the author of the article. I hope that helps you with this childish vendetta you seemed to be obsessed with at the moment.

thewizeard
07-05-2003, 08:38 PM
I think if you carry on like this you will end what has been for the rest an interesting topic.You can always agree to disagree&#33;

What did you(both) think of MagicNakors comments?

hobbes
07-05-2003, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+5 July 2003 - 20:07--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC &#064; 5 July 2003 - 20:07)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@5 July 2003 - 09:19
In regard to ethnic communities or sub-cultures, we are not asking you to abandon your past any more than we ask you to give up your religion. What we ask is that you step up to your new society. Speak English, send your kids to school (vs homeschool), show up at the PTA meetings and football games. Do not isolate yourselves into little communities, do not prevent your children from mixing with others.
who is we? i and several other forum members have been disagreeing with the article as posted at the beginning of the thread. and that article IS demanding assimilation from people the moment they step off the boat, on one hand claiming to not be anti-immigrant while on the other hand cursing cultural diversity.

i understand your points, but you&#39;re diverting the argument toward a moderate assimilationist idea rather than the hardline conservative one (expressed in the first post) that we were originally debating. your opinion is valid, but it seems like your use of "we" is trying to apologize for the people whose views are actually a bit more uncompromising than your own.

edit: well, actually i don&#39;t even know WHAT view you&#39;re presenting-- in one post you say you dislike ethnic minorities centralizing in distinct communities, and then in another post you congratulate germans and irish for maintaining their sense of ethnicity while participating in mainstream society. which is it? if you&#39;re implying that newer immigrants are somehow worse than them... i&#39;d say you&#39;re ignoring the fact that it takes time to assimilate, and people like the irish have a head start of several generations over the latest wave of immigrants.

either way, i still think the whole "speak the majority language or get out" idea is baloney. at least in america, where diversity of language was the norm for a much longer time than the united states has existed-- how many native american languages were spoken on the continent before the europeans showed up? i can&#39;t think of a single moral or ethical obligation to impose an official language on a country. just because it&#39;s more convenient, that doesn&#39;t make it more correct. and i hold the u.s. constitution in extremely high regard, as an ingenious document which tried to establish a fair and balanced legal guideline for the country, leaving much open to interpretation so that it would continue to be relevant after more than 2 centuries-- so i think it&#39;s worth pointing out that the constitution neglected to designate an official language for the united states, and i like to think it was with good reason.[/b][/quote]
Brainiac,

Unlike many here, I have read every post in this thread, including yours. My post was not to defend anyone, as my multiple previos posts indicate. I was just giving my "take" on what the author meant.

You aver that the original poster wants assimilation off the boat. That is nowhere to be found in the original text, I suggest this comes from your personal spin.

The author is in no way stating that you cannot speak your native tongue, but stresses that English is a language you need to learn to communicate with those in your community. A very similar thing goes on in India. Many different languages are spoken there, and if not for English, an Indian traveling in his own country would not be able to communicate. The language chosen is not the issue, the issue is that there needs to be a central language. The Chinese have done something similar.

In the US, our Declaration of Independence was written in English AND English is the official language of all 50 states, except New Mexico (English and Spanish are official). This means that all official documents are kept in English.

As for native Americans, they were independent nomadic tribes who lived on the land we now call the United States. It is nonsensical to think they would have a unified language.

Language is neither a moral nor an ethic issue, in fact, that doesn&#39;t even make sense. People can live here and not speak English, there is no law mandating it, and no one is one requesting such a law. We are merely stating that, like the dollar, English is the "currency" we are using.

Wouldn&#39;t it be great if we all used different currencies for trade, the chaos would be endless. Not a bad analogy, eh, JPaul?


I never stated that I did not like ethnic minorities centralizing in district communities. You are gestalting my post, not reading it. Each word was carefully chosen. I stated that I don&#39;t like them ISOLATING themselves from the general community. The idea of maintaining cultural identity while becoming part of the community was the salient point to garner. Human nature dictates that people in a strange land will gravitate toward something familiar and this is how these communities begin.

You chose to use the word "assimilate" which again demonstrates your spin. Reading the same post, I saw the word "participate". When you come to America to enjoy its opportunities and individual freedoms, your role is to learn the language and participate in your community and abide by the laws which have been set. That philosophy is hardly intolerant. It basically says, "Welcome to America, go get your stuff put away, and come join the community, don&#39;t alienate yourself and be a stranger.


My final word is this: A common language is essential for communication. It should be just as useful in California as it is in Maine. We have chosen English, and it is every citizens obligation to learn this language. Any others you know will count for extra credit ( I&#39;m pretty good with Spanish). It would be absurd for everyone to need to learn every spoken language. A common language is an essential bonding element in a society.

3RA1N1AC
07-05-2003, 11:52 PM
"spin" is a loaded term. it sounds a bit spin-ish of you to refer to my interpretation as "spin" and your interpretation as "my take on what the author meant." it strikes me as hypocritical.

blaming foreign cultures for the weakening of america&#39;s identity and advising people to love it or leave isn&#39;t intolerant in the least. alright. fair enough. i&#39;m just spinning.

the more i read that article, however, the more i take issue with it. rambling from one non sequitir to another, it manages to get so many things wrong. we didn&#39;t adopt "in god we trust" as the national motto because the nation was founded by christians, rather in a popular swell of religious fervor a century after the country was founded. the "christians" who founded the nation chose "e pluribus unum" as the national motto, which wasn&#39;t good enough for patriots of the late 1800s who surely knew better than thomas jefferson and benjamin franklin. sure, replace a motto underscoring a basic democratic ideal with one that erodes the division of church and state. excellent idea. defacing government institutions and the currency with religious slogans should provide christians with something to gloat about. call that spin, if you will.

"In the US, our Declaration of Independence was written in English AND English is the official language of all 50 states, except New Mexico (English and Spanish are official). This means that all official documents are kept in English."

state laws tend to be more wrongheaded than federal laws. there are plenty of examples i can think of, but none of which i&#39;ll bother to name. instead, i&#39;d like to read a rational explanation of why non-english speakers are such a problem in this country. exactly what about their lack of english comprehension is damaging to america, and toward what end? is it a legitimate threat, or a mere annoyance? if there is a problem, is the problem actually growing... or is the author of that rant simply attacking a straw man?

"Wouldn&#39;t it be great if we all used different currencies for trade, the chaos would be endless."

i disagree. that&#39;s hyperbolic.

also, if "gestalt" has indeed become a verb, thanks for teaching me something new. i&#39;d only previously encountered it as a noun.

clocker
07-05-2003, 11:55 PM
I must agree with Hobbes on the necessity for a common language.

In California, surely the poster child for PC gone amok, the test for a drivers license is available in twenty languages...

Besides English, the basic Class C written driver license exam is also available in the following languages:

Amharic Hindi Portuguese Tagalog
Armenian Hmong Punjabi Thai
Arabic Japanese Russian Tongan
Cambodian Korean Samoan Vietnamese
Chinese Laotian Spanish Farsi/Persian .

You may call me jingoistic or even racist if you please, but I don&#39;t understand how you could even consider issuing a permit to someone who, at the very outset of the process, is admitting that they are unable to understand the language that is used on all the highway signs.
Does Speed Limit 65
mean anything to a person who took the test in Laotian?

Rat Faced
07-06-2003, 12:08 AM
I would think that 65 would mean the same.

As to most Highway Signs, the reason that they generally only have a name and distance is due to the fact that its dangerous to read while driving...just a thought. (Im generally going too fast to even read the town/distance anyway ;) )

j2k4
07-06-2003, 12:36 AM
Originally posted by evilbagpuss+5 July 2003 - 14:58--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (evilbagpuss &#064; 5 July 2003 - 14:58)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-j2k4
It is neither another apology nor a retraction.

I am currently mulling methods for confronting you with proof of your trespasses while keeping within reasonable bounds of good taste.

I am loathe to create a new thread merely for purposes of pointing out what I feel constitutes proof of your, shall we say, lack of decorum?

You will know when or what I conclude, EBP.

I see.. so you made the accusation and are now scrambling around looking for evidence to support it. Shouldnt the conclusion come first then the accusation?

Oh dear we&#39;re now in "OT EBP vs j2k4 land".. again. Congratulations.

It would be interesting to see you attempt to answer my critique of the article. Highly unlikely, going by past experience, but definitely interesting.

I guess your version of decorum involves avoiding the topic and inititating a personal attack, its obviously become a favourite diversionary tactic of yours.

FYI the only person I &#39;denigrated&#39;, for want of a better word, in this thread was the author of the article. I hope that helps you with this childish vendetta you seemed to be obsessed with at the moment.[/b][/quote]
You have me all wrong.

I intend to re-introduce some of your posts (many, certainly not all) that fit my definition of disrespect; not just to me, but to others as well.

I am searching for an option which would introduce, in a suitable yet tasteful fashion, posts which are indicative of your overall intent and tenor.

No reason to get antsy.

hobbes
07-06-2003, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC@6 July 2003 - 00:52
"spin" is a loaded term.&nbsp; it sounds a bit spin-ish of you to refer to my interpretation as "spin" and your interpretation as "my take on what the author meant."&nbsp; it strikes me as hypocritical.

blaming foreign cultures for the weakening of america&#39;s identity and advising people to love it or leave isn&#39;t intolerant in the least.&nbsp; alright.&nbsp; fair enough.&nbsp; i&#39;m just spinning.

the more i read that article, however, the more i take issue with it.&nbsp; rambling from one non sequitir to another, it manages to get so many things wrong.&nbsp; we didn&#39;t adopt "in god we trust" as the national motto because the nation was founded by christians, rather in a popular swell of religious fervor a century after the country was founded.&nbsp; the "christians" who founded the nation chose "e pluribus unum" as the national motto, which wasn&#39;t good enough for patriots of the late 1800s who surely knew better than thomas jefferson and benjamin franklin.&nbsp; sure, replace a motto underscoring a basic democratic ideal with one that erodes the division of church and state.&nbsp; excellent idea.&nbsp; defacing government institutions and the currency with religious slogans should provide christians with something to gloat about.&nbsp; call that spin, if you will.

"In the US, our Declaration of Independence was written in English AND English is the official language of all 50 states, except New Mexico (English and Spanish are official). This means that all official documents are kept in English."

state laws tend to be more wrongheaded than federal laws.&nbsp; there are plenty of examples i can think of, but none of which i&#39;ll bother to name.&nbsp; instead, i&#39;d like to read a rational explanation of why non-english speakers are such a problem in this country.&nbsp; exactly what about their lack of english comprehension is damaging to america, and toward what end?&nbsp; is it a legitimate threat, or a mere annoyance?&nbsp; if there is a problem, is the problem actually growing... or is the author of that rant simply attacking a straw man?

"Wouldn&#39;t it be great if we all used different currencies for trade, the chaos would be endless."

i disagree.&nbsp; that&#39;s hyperbolic.

also, if "gestalt" has indeed become a verb, thanks for teaching me something new.&nbsp; i&#39;d only previously encountered it as a noun.



Hey Brainiac,

We all have spin, I am not exempt. Let us not quibble the original post, as we both find it flawed. I was pointing out that the same words can produce different interpretations.

I have already voiced my objections to the original post and tried to clarify to you my postion on the subject.

Tell me what you think I have wrong, other than quibbling the use of a single word, and we can address that.

Why is a good idea for people, unified under the citizenship of one country and adhering to the same philosophy, not be able to communicate?

You declare that state laws are more "wrongheaded". Sure, if a policy is unique to a state, but this one is accepted by them all.

My bottom line, within a country people should have the ability to communicate with one another. Right or wrong?

Actually, in the old west, banks issued their own money. People would take this money to another area and it would be worthless because these people had no faith in the issuer to recompensate them in equivalent gold. This WAS chaos&#33;


Anyway, let us get back to me and you. Read all my posts and tell me what you think is incorrect.

I will listen open-mindly and respond, my take is that we are argueing the same thing, with slightly different ways of expressing it.

evilbagpuss
07-06-2003, 01:10 AM
Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>You have me all wrong.[/b]

After seeing the same diversionary &#39;tactic&#39; displayed twice in such a short space of time I seriously doubt that.


Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I take this opportunity to render my most humble apologies to evilbagpuss and the rest of my board colleagues for my errant behavior in this and other threads in the forum.

I generally try to maintain a higher standard than I have exhibited the past couple of weeks.

I will re-dedicate myself to the attainment of that goal.[/b]

The day after posting this in the "The Flame Has Gone Out Under The Melting Pot" thread you pull exactly the same stunt..

<!--QuoteBegin-EBP@
1) j2k4 posts an article.
2) A general consensus is reached that the article isn&#39;t really up to scratch.
3) j2k4 responds by initiating a "j2k4 vs EBP" battle.[/quote]

Unless the above quote was sarcasm.. in which case you clearly dont understand the true nature of your &#39;cunning&#39; "3 step plan".

Perhaps this is why no one has replied to your "News From Iraq" post? I dont want you to get any further than step 1 either.

Until you make the illusion of being "Mr Reasonable" a reality I cant see anything constructive coming from communicating with you. Oh and if you want to talk about disrespect speak to your partner S+A about his "all muslims are evil" post... or let me guess thats &#39;different&#39; eh? I assume so as you seemed quite happy to stand shoulder to shoulder with him on that one.

Oh and before you pull your usual trick.. lets look at whats happened here. You posted an article, I responded to the content of that article in a similar manner to many others in this thread and you come back with this..

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4
EBP-you seem to consider yourself knowledgable enough about the U.S. to denigrate it and a good percentage of it&#39;s citizens, holding forth judgement upon judgement; what made you such a student of the U.S.? [/quote]

You then have the audacity to mention decorum in the same thread as if I&#39;m the one being unreasonable here. What a joke.

funny_bunny
07-06-2003, 01:12 AM
First, I&#39;m white and English, I have an Asian wife and really couldn&#39;t care less what colour a persons skin is or what their religious and political beliefs are. However&#33;
Several years ago a story broke in this country (England) which had me frothing at the mouth with rage. A woman, who, since childhood had adored and collected toys and ornaments of pigs was told by the local council that she would have to remove all such objects from anywhere in her home that could be seen from the street. Let me say that again.
REMOVE ALL SUCH OBJECTS....THAT COULD BE SEEN....
The reason? The local Muslim community walked past her home to their place of worship and, as we all know, the pig is "Unclean" and, therefore &#39;offensive&#39; to Muslims. The woman refused so the council obtained a Court-Order and confiscated her entire collection&#33;
The English effectively apologised to foriegners for being English and living in England.
If the story is true about the Muslim woman in Florida and she has been allowed to keep her face veiled then the Americans are apologising for being Americans in America and having American laws&#33; Nice, Eh?
If this doesn&#39;t start a war I&#39;ll say more later.

echidna
07-06-2003, 01:42 AM
[sleep deprivation deprives this post of much of it&#39;s potential grammatical structure]

i believe that language and culture reinforce each other, and arabic speakers make fantastic baklava aka. tolerance and diversity are &#39;intensive&#39; aspects of a (post)modern society, they are not the easy and familiar road, but the effort is well worth making

i agree that being able to communicate in the state tongue is very useful and that photographic ID needs some kind of viable depiction in order to have any value
the tone of the article, however, is forceful and demanding of conformity

denial of language was a central feature of many genocides in ireland and australia and proved terribly effective in the forced erosion of culture

i know that there is no prohibition of language being suggested, but i also have seen how intolerant xenophobes can become at two speakers of a different tongue having a conversation in their earshot, this reaction is petty and if pervasive enough i would think fascist

it would be a lesser world if africa had been forgotten in america before the blues could coagulate, who knows what might not be if society homogenises itself too quickly

any gweilo who, as i have, has had the pleasure of eating yum cha in the company of a chinese speaking host, can tell you the experience with the chinese speaker is far superior to eating with other non chinese people

i think that the perceptions of communities being seen to be &#39;isolating&#39; rather than &#39;centralising&#39; should be carefully investigated
as hobbes says
Human nature dictates that people in a strange land will gravitate toward something familiar and this is how these communities begin.
and this is also the way that people who meet someone strange in their land may gravitate to something familiar and develop xenophobia

our way or the highway makes for a boring sounding town

difference and change are the only constant factors in the world, they should be respected appreciated and utilised not avoided or feared

hobbes
07-06-2003, 02:11 AM
Again. It seems to go back to "how you express yourself", rather than "what you have to say".

This was a main point in another recent thread.

We should all bear in mind the potential reader, and direct our posts to the person on the fence, willing to see the other point of view. And this takes a great deal of tack for the thread to effectively reach it&#39;s target.

In my office, the Indians feel more comfortably speaking in Hindi, rather than English when conversing amongst themselves. I always ask them what they are trying to hide? As always it is nothing, and we all, in good spirits, go off and have lunch together.

Isn&#39;t interseting how ominous a conversation sounds when you can&#39;t understand it and you are in your homeland. Yes, this is the origin of xenophobia. However, if you have bothered to get to know your co-workers, these conversations are merely interesting, not really a threat.

PS: Indian food is too vegetarian for my taste, all I like is tandoori chicken and nan. :P

echidna
07-06-2003, 02:47 AM
hobbes i&#39;m not implying any xenophobia on any member here
just that the article j2 chose seemed a bit too gung ho in an uncool mussolini kinda way

if i ever catch up with you in one of these cities at the arse end of the earth i&#39;ll show you some excellent meaty subcontinental delights :P

hobbes
07-06-2003, 03:36 AM
Hmmmm, meaty&#33;&#33;&#33;

Sounds delicious&#33; I think that would would be great fun.

You are absolutely right, the article is very gung ho and therefore, brings out the rebel in us all.

I think J2K4, would like to join us as well, despite his rather polar views.

People are people, that is all I know.

No matter how hard I criticise, believe me, I would respect you all in person, as people seeking the truth and questioning the party line. Take care and keep the food rolling.

Respectfully,

Hobbes

myfiles3000
07-06-2003, 04:59 PM
So our cultural identity is not defined by race, religion, or ancestry, but rather philosophy.

there is no universal cultural identity, damn it&#33;

the only thing unifies (legal) americans is a passport. its a bureatric identity not cultural.



Speak English, send your kids to school (vs homeschool), show up at the PTA meetings and football games.&nbsp; Do not isolate yourselves into little communities, do not prevent your children from mixing with others.

this is so patronizing. everyone is free to live an isolated existence as long as they&#39;re not breaking the law. I can&#39;t help but feel all this emphasis on speaking English is the product of anglophones feeling threatened by the fast growing latin american communities.

Neil__
07-06-2003, 05:16 PM
What an incredibly smallminded man to write such an article.

Neil

hobbes
07-06-2003, 06:34 PM
Originally posted by myfiles3000@6 July 2003 - 17:59

So our cultural identity is not defined by race, religion, or ancestry, but rather philosophy.

there is no universal cultural identity, damn it&#33;

the only thing unifies (legal) americans is a passport. its a bureatric identity not cultural.



Speak English, send your kids to school (vs homeschool), show up at the PTA meetings and football games. Do not isolate yourselves into little communities, do not prevent your children from mixing with others.

this is so patronizing. everyone is free to live an isolated existence as long as they&#39;re not breaking the law. I can&#39;t help but feel all this emphasis on speaking English is the product of anglophones feeling threatened by the fast growing latin american communities.
Myfiles, this is very narrow minded of you. There are plenty of things that bind Americans. I could tour the country asking people what it means to be American. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and justice would be the common thread, the ideal we are pursuing. Not to mention our unity through professional sports, rock and roll, the spirit of invention, the spirit of adventure, mass production, automobiles, etc. I would say America does have a culture (with good and bad elements), but beneath this there are many sub-cultures.



To say we are strangers with a common passport is not supported by what I see everyday.

A great example is the Macys 4th of July Celebration. In the audience I saw black people, white people, asian people, hispanic people all standing shoulder to shoulder with little flags in their hands. Unified under passports, hardly, they were celebrating what this country provides them: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That is what is so great about America, potentially. When people of different cultures mix freely, they find that although they may look different, people are basically people. The key point in "mixing" is that you must first interact (not seclude yourself in your own community) and second you must be able to communicate. A common language is a great facilitator.



My post was in no way was motivated by latin american communities. The irony is that by not learning English, these people remain limited in their ability to ascend the financial ladder. I live in San Antonio, Texas so I am not talking about statistics on a sheet of paper as you are, I live with these people.

I deal with people daily, who have lived their entire lives in the States and don&#39;t speak a word of English. These people function as nannys(sp), janitors, lawn service personnel, etc.. By failing to integrate they have left themselves in the economic cellar, with now way out.

So, I guess we could accomodate them by learning Spanish, so they can lead our corporations and pilot the US into the future, or they can learn English and help themselves.


PS: I believe it was an American who invented the Anglophone. <_<
And what is up with the "&#33;" and "damn it", what uncouth culture are you a product of? :lol:

Neil__
07-06-2003, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by hobbes+6 July 2003 - 19:34--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 6 July 2003 - 19:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-myfiles3000@6 July 2003 - 17:59

So our cultural identity is not defined by race, religion, or ancestry, but rather philosophy.

there is no universal cultural identity, damn it&#33;

the only thing unifies (legal) americans is a passport. its a bureatric identity not cultural.



Speak English, send your kids to school (vs homeschool), show up at the PTA meetings and football games. Do not isolate yourselves into little communities, do not prevent your children from mixing with others.

this is so patronizing. everyone is free to live an isolated existence as long as they&#39;re not breaking the law. I can&#39;t help but feel all this emphasis on speaking English is the product of anglophones feeling threatened by the fast growing latin american communities.
Myfiles, this is very narrow minded of you. There are plenty of things that bind Americans. I could tour the country asking people what it means to be American. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and justice would be the common thread, the ideal we are pursuing. Not to mention our unity through professional sports, rock and roll, the spirit of invention, the spirit of adventure, mass production, automobiles, etc. I would say America does have a culture (with good and bad elements), but beneath this there are many sub-cultures.



To say we are strangers with a common passport is not supported by what I see everyday.

A great example is the Macys 4th of July Celebration. In the audience I saw black people, white people, asian people, hispanic people all standing shoulder to shoulder with little flags in their hands. Unified under passports, hardly, they were celebrating what this country provides them: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That is what is so great about America, potentially. When people of different cultures mix freely, they find that although they may look different people are basically people. The key point in "mixing" is that you must first interact (not seclude yourself in your own community) and second you must be able to communicate. A common language is a great facilitator.



My post was in no way was motivated by latin american communities. The irony is that by not learning English, these people remain limited in their ability to ascend the financial ladder. I live in San Antonio, Texas so I am not talking about statistics on a sheet of paper as you are, I live with these people.

I deal with people daily, who have lived their entire lives in the States and don&#39;t speak a word of English. These people function as nannys(sp), janitors, lawn service personnel, etc.. By failing to integrate they have left themselves in the economic cellar, with now way out.

So, I guess we could accomodate them by learning Spanish, so they can lead our corporations and pilot the US into the future, or they can learn English and help themselves.


PS: I believe it was an American who invented the Anglophone. <_<
And what is up with the "&#33;" and "damn it", what uncouth culture are you a product of? :lol: [/b][/quote]
[/QUOTE][QUOTE]

Why does Patriotism have to be so dull.

j2k4
07-06-2003, 07:30 PM
I know positively that the United States has NO culture; The BBC said so. :D

Neil__
07-06-2003, 07:33 PM
Originally posted by j2k4@6 July 2003 - 20:30
I know positively that the United States has NO culture; The BBC said so. :D



That might be the problem.
NEVER listen to the T.V.
IT LIES.

Neil

j2k4
07-06-2003, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by Neil__+6 July 2003 - 14:33--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Neil__ &#064; 6 July 2003 - 14:33)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@6 July 2003 - 20:30
I know positively that the United States has NO culture; The BBC said so. :D



That might be the problem.
NEVER listen to the T.V.
IT LIES.

Neil[/b][/quote]
All T.V. lies; EXCEPT the BBC.

I read that right in this forum, so it&#39;s gotta be true.

Rat Faced
07-06-2003, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by j2k4@6 July 2003 - 19:30
I know positively that the United States has NO culture; The BBC said so. :D
I disagree, it has 50 conflicting cultures.


That means the lowest common denominator is what the world see&#39;s...


McDonalds and Coke.....and not those lovely T-Bones and Californian Wine.



The only "True" America the world see&#39;s is the Foreign Policy and the Interest Rates...These are the parts that affect "US".

I have no idea about Domestic Policy in the USA; I can "assume" that it is Right Wing at the moment from the Centre, ie Government helping the Rich at the expense of the poor.... eg Major problems in Public Schools and Hospitals, linked to Tax cuts for the Richest and for Business&#39;

The States themselves, policy being decided locally by whichever party is in favour there at the moment; so some with large State Taxes and good facilities, others with low State taxes and poor facilities...so local issues will vary Hugely, depending upon your zip code.


However, i have no idea where Federal Government responsibility ends and State begins and what Tax Raising powers each has etc etc.

Neil__
07-06-2003, 08:01 PM
They do have a forign policy.
Jerry said so.
Neil.

P.S. in his "Final Thought"

j2k4
07-06-2003, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by Rat Faced+6 July 2003 - 14:47--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rat Faced @ 6 July 2003 - 14:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@6 July 2003 - 19:30
I know positively that the United States has NO culture; The BBC said so. :D
I disagree, it has 50 conflicting cultures.


That means the lowest common denominator is what the world see&#39;s...


McDonalds and Coke.....and not those lovely T-Bones and Californian Wine.



The only "True" America the world see&#39;s is the Foreign Policy and the Interest Rates...These are the parts that affect "US".

I have no idea about Domestic Policy in the USA; I can "assume" that it is Right Wing at the moment from the Centre, ie Government helping the Rich at the expense of the poor.... eg Major problems in Public Schools and Hospitals, linked to Tax cuts for the Richest and for Business&#39;

The States themselves, policy being decided locally by whichever party is in favour there at the moment; so some with large State Taxes and good facilities, others with low State taxes and poor facilities...so local issues will vary Hugely, depending upon your zip code.


However, i have no idea where Federal Government responsibility ends and State begins and what Tax Raising powers each has etc etc. [/b][/quote]
I will have to do some posting in the near future in aid of your understanding of what it means to have Republicans in charge, Rat.

Too many irons in the fire just now; I have accumulated a bit of a back-log, and am, as I type this, getting ready for a new take on the abortion issue.

Neil__
07-06-2003, 08:23 PM
Please no more SPAM/propogander please?


EEK. :angry:

Neil.

Neil__
07-06-2003, 10:30 PM
And I thank you for your enlightenment.
I&#39;ll be sure to look them up.

Neil.

3RA1N1AC
07-08-2003, 02:05 AM
Originally posted by hobbes@5 July 2003 - 17:02
I will listen open-mindly and respond, my take is that we are argueing the same thing, with slightly different ways of expressing it.
that may be true. the absolute inverse of "english-only" or "english-first" isn&#39;t really a belief that anyone holds.

an underlying point i&#39;ve wanted to make, and perhaps not expressed clearly enough, is that i think the issue of people not speaking english in the u.s. has been blown out of proportion.

it appears to me that the vast majority of immigrants do learn english; and of the ones who don&#39;t, most have children who do. it might be irritating to constantly be around people who refuse to speak the common language, yet from my personal experience (a life spent mostly in california, a state as metropolitan as any) i reckon that immigrants shed their foreign cultures/languages as fast in 2003 as they ever have.

it just seems to me that a mountain-out-of-a-molehill complaint is often lodged about the natural pace with which immigrants make their transition into mainstream society. as far as i&#39;m concerned, that particular aspect of our society is not broken and it doesn&#39;t need to be fixed. with a few very unusual exceptions like the pennsylvania dutch, the overwhelming trend is for cultural/language barriers to fall away naturally and mainstream society just needs to be patient.

if it is a problem, it&#39;s a problem so miniscule that it isn&#39;t worth complaining about, imho.

j2k4
07-08-2003, 04:23 AM
Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+7 July 2003 - 21:05--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC @ 7 July 2003 - 21:05)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@5 July 2003 - 17:02
I will listen open-mindly and respond, my take is that we are argueing the same thing, with slightly different ways of expressing it.
that may be true. the absolute inverse of "english-only" or "english-first" isn&#39;t really a belief that anyone holds.

an underlying point i&#39;ve wanted to make, and perhaps not expressed clearly enough, is that i think the issue of people not speaking english in the u.s. has been blown out of proportion.

it appears to me that the vast majority of immigrants do learn english; and of the ones who don&#39;t, most have children who do. it might be irritating to constantly be around people who refuse to speak the common language, yet from my personal experience (a life spent mostly in california, a state as metropolitan as any) i reckon that immigrants shed their foreign cultures/languages as fast in 2003 as they ever have.

it just seems to me that a mountain-out-of-a-molehill complaint is often lodged about the natural pace with which immigrants make their transition into mainstream society. as far as i&#39;m concerned, that particular aspect of our society is not broken and it doesn&#39;t need to be fixed. with a few very unusual exceptions like the pennsylvania dutch, the overwhelming trend is for cultural/language barriers to fall away naturally and mainstream society just needs to be patient.

if it is a problem, it&#39;s a problem so miniscule that it isn&#39;t worth complaining about, imho. [/b][/quote]
I agree, though I see such "honoraria"(?) as spanish being declared the official "second language" of, I believe, New Mexico, as 1) counterproductive; 2) serving no purpose; 3) pandering; and 4) pretty f**king silly.

Neil__
07-09-2003, 01:58 PM
j2k4
What&#39;s the proportion of New Mexican&#39;s that can speak Spanish?
Not only Spanish but have the ability.

Neil

j2k4
07-09-2003, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by Neil__@9 July 2003 - 08:58
j2k4
What&#39;s the proportion of New Mexican&#39;s that can speak Spanish?
Not only Spanish but have the ability.

Neil
I don&#39;t know; how does that weigh on my point?

There is no need anywhere in this country for an "official second language".

What the U.S. is should not be subject to eternal adjustment everytime someone emigrates.

Why is it that "naturalization" is no longer looked upon as necessary?

Neil__
07-09-2003, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by j2k4+9 July 2003 - 15:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 9 July 2003 - 15:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Neil__@9 July 2003 - 08:58
j2k4
What&#39;s the proportion of New Mexican&#39;s that can speak Spanish?
Not only Spanish but have the ability.

Neil
I don&#39;t know; how does that weigh on my point?

There is no need anywhere in this country for an "official second language".

What the U.S. is should not be subject to eternal adjustment everytime someone emigrates.

Why is it that "naturalization" is no longer looked upon as necessary? [/b][/quote]



That&#39;s a little too close to the Klan for me.
I&#39;m not saying you&#39;re racist but where does that road go.

Neil.

j2k4
07-09-2003, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by Neil__+9 July 2003 - 09:47--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Neil__ @ 9 July 2003 - 09:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by j2k4@9 July 2003 - 15:23
<!--QuoteBegin-Neil__@9 July 2003 - 08:58
j2k4
What&#39;s the proportion of New Mexican&#39;s that can speak Spanish?
Not only Spanish but have the ability.

Neil
I don&#39;t know; how does that weigh on my point?

There is no need anywhere in this country for an "official second language".

What the U.S. is should not be subject to eternal adjustment everytime someone emigrates.

Why is it that "naturalization" is no longer looked upon as necessary?



That&#39;s a little too close to the Klan for me.
I&#39;m not saying you&#39;re racist but where does that road go.

Neil. [/b][/quote]
Naturalization classes?

Have been and still are part of a legal and official entry into the U.S. for purposes of immigration.

Certain facts and relevancies are imparted to the emigres; there is certainly nothing "racist" or at all sinister involved, Neil.

It&#39;s just that with the ease of entering illegally, no one can be "bothered" to actually "nod" at the process.

Neil__
07-09-2003, 03:18 PM
What the U.S. is should not be subject to eternal adjustment everytime someone emigrates.
Lessons in what it takes to be an American Citizen are fine in principle
and Illegal Imigrants are a real sore point

but

It&#39;s the above line that can be misinterpretedand I never said I had a problem with your point
smacks of diluting the races if you go too far down that road
thats all and you have to be careful not to give the bigoted any excuse


Sorry j2k4 hope I didn&#39;t offend

Neil

j2k4
07-09-2003, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by Neil__@9 July 2003 - 10:18

What the U.S. is should not be subject to eternal adjustment everytime someone emigrates.
Lessons in what it takes to be an American Citizen are fine in principle
and Illegal Imigrants are a real sore point

but

It&#39;s the above line that can be misinterpretedand I never said I had a problem with your point
smacks of diluting the races if you go too far down that road
thats all and you have to be careful not to give the bigoted any excuse


Sorry j2k4 hope I didn&#39;t offend

Neil
Re: offending-not to worry, but I&#39;m stymied as to you get to the "Klan" from here?

Rat Faced
07-09-2003, 07:43 PM
Uk has 7 "official" languages, and between 20-25% of the population.

In addition, the whole country is about 1/3 the size of Texas...we dont have problems with it.



Official Languages of the UK:

English, Scots Gaelic, Welsh Gaelic, Irish Gaelic, Cornish, Manx, French...



There are probably more people speaking Hindi or Mandarin (Chinese) than 6 of these "official" languages lumped together, again not really a problem.

Most speak English as a 2nd language, and then the children end up speaking English as the 1st language, as they are brought up here.


The point im trying to make (and probably failing) is that English will be the predominant language...no matter how many languages are "official" or not. Just relax to it, and look at it as trying to make the people feel better in themselves..= less tension all around.

j2k4
07-10-2003, 03:55 AM
Originally posted by Rat Faced@9 July 2003 - 14:43
The point im trying to make (and probably failing) is that English will be the predominant language...no matter how many languages are "official" or not. Just relax to it, and look at it as trying to make the people feel better in themselves..= less tension all around.
Maybe so, Rat.

It&#39;s difficult to see such issues clearly when such a thing is done in aid of a horribly ineffective immigration policy.

ilw
07-10-2003, 11:29 AM
The comparisons about the uk&#39;s other official languages doesn&#39;t really hold against the US problem because England isn&#39;t being flooded with speakers of another very much alive language. In the UK all the languages mentioned are basically dead except in remote rural villages in north wales, scotland or on little islands.
If a large portion of Britains immigrants came from say France then there might actually be a language problem, but because the large number of immigrants that Britain receives are mostly from a wide variety of countries and speak a wide variety of languages. Basically the rather confused point i am trying to make is that there is no significant second language in Britain and not any large areas where the majority of inhabitants speak a single other language.

Neil__
07-10-2003, 04:17 PM
ilw

Immigrants tend to come to the U.K. because they sppek english as a second language and will find it much easier to fit in.
there are many countries in Europe that give them a better chance of success so the non native language speakers usuall go elsewhere

And I can assure you that the french are excellent english speakers with high levels of fluency so apart from the rivalry there wouldn&#39;t be a problem.

Neil

Rat Faced
07-10-2003, 05:06 PM
Scots Gaelic and especially Welsh are not dead languages.

However I did point out that more people speak Hindi or Mandaran than all the other languages put together.


I think it spices up the language..so many accents in such a small country ;)

Neil__
07-10-2003, 05:26 PM
and so much culture.

Neil

myfiles3000
07-10-2003, 06:49 PM
1) Go to google
2) Type: weapons of mass destruction
3) Click on the "I&#39;m Feeling Lucky" button (not the search button)
4) Read the whole error message carefully...

Neil__
07-10-2003, 07:07 PM
fantastic
havent seen that before

LOL

:D :rolleyes: B) :) :huh: :o :blink: :lol:

Neil

hobbes
07-10-2003, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by myfiles3000@10 July 2003 - 19:49
1) Go to google
2) Type: weapons of mass destruction
3) Click on the "I&#39;m Feeling Lucky" button (not the search button)
4) Read the whole error message carefully...
Wow, and I was becoming skeptical&#33;

I get a pop-up of a map of Iraq, with many mobile red dots moving about. Very clever, they are in trucks, being driven around the country.

Let me pick up my Bat phone and give GWB a holler.

Thanks Myfiles, who would have picked you to locate those weapons.

Rat Faced
07-10-2003, 11:20 PM
I particularly like the "Doctor Strangelove", when you press the "bomb" link.

:lol: :lol:

echidna
07-23-2003, 04:56 AM
Originally posted by myfiles3000@11 July 2003 - 04:49
1) Go to google
2) Type: weapons of mass destruction
3) Click on the "I&#39;m Feeling Lucky" button (not the search button)
4) Read the whole error message carefully...
i already posted this gag here over a week before this post (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/bb/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=43433&hl=google&view=findpost&p=350465)
i know that you can&#39;t search out everything that may&#39;ve been posted, but redundant duplication just clogs the board, hope there was was no thunder stealing intended :: good gag though isn&#39;t it :lol: