A Town Willing To Enforce The Law - Page 2

Ibby · 03-13-2007, 09:19 PM

Why should they HAVE to learn English? The whole point of not having an official language is so we can SUPPORT immigrants of all types, among other reasons.

If they dont want to learn english, they don't have to - but at the same time, can't complain that they didnt.

Similarly, integration into society should be neither forbidden nor mandatory; integration is optional, but if you refuse to americanize yourself, don't complain about the consequences.

rigcranop · 03-14-2007, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram

Why should they HAVE to learn English? The whole point of not having an official language is so we can SUPPORT immigrants of all types, among other reasons.

If they dont want to learn english, they don't have to - but at the same time, can't complain that they didnt.

Should we HAVE to support their refusal to learn the english (american) language? Should we provide translations for all the worlds languages in all forms of communications and media? Should we HAVE to train emergency personnel in the worlds languages (at our expense) so they can get the emergency care or services the refusers need? Should we HAVE to train everyone in heavy industry, so that those who refuse to learn the language, can be warned of a dangerous or possibly lethal situation?

piercehawkeye45 · 03-14-2007, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rigcranop

Should we HAVE to support their refusal to learn the english (american) language? Should we provide translations for all the worlds languages in all forms of communications and media? Should we HAVE to train emergency personnel in the worlds languages (at our expense) so they can get the emergency care or services the refusers need? Should we HAVE to train everyone in heavy industry, so that those who refuse to learn the language, can be warned of a dangerous or possibly lethal situation?

Please re-read what he wrote. He said if they refuse to learn the language they should expect not complain about the consequences.

WabUfvot5 · 03-13-2007, 10:11 PM

I see nothing wrong with a stiff fine against those caught hiring illegals - be they citizens or businesses. Not only would it curb illegal immigration but it would promote better working conditions.

xoxoxoBruce · 03-13-2007, 10:32 PM

It's a band-aid, Jebediah. A band-aid on a sore caused by blood poisoning. It's shouldn't be necessary and distracts resources from the real problem.

rigcranop · 03-14-2007, 08:57 PM

This is Brian R,s home turf. Weigh in, sir.

03-15-2007, 12:07 AM

When you read the whole post I can't figure out what he stand for, having English as the standard language or not?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram

Why should they HAVE to learn English? The whole point of not having an official language is so we can SUPPORT immigrants of all types, among other reasons.

If they dont want to learn english, they don't have to - but at the same time, can't complain that they didnt.

Similarly, integration into society should be neither forbidden nor mandatory; integration is optional, but if you refuse to americanize yourself, don't complain about the consequences.

Aliantha · 03-15-2007, 01:30 AM

What he means is if you don't learn the language you just don't get the same service as you would without. That is, no automatic interpretation at tax payers expense for example. So, if you choose not to learn the language, it's on your own head, but we're (you're) not going to subsidise your ignorance.

piercehawkeye45 · 03-15-2007, 01:31 AM

What I got out of it is that we should not force someone to learn English but we should also not go out of our way to accommodate them if they choose not too.

That is my view too so maybe I misread it to satisfy my bias.

rigcranop · 03-15-2007, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

What I got out of it is that we should not force someone to learn English but we should also not go out of our way to accommodate them if they choose not too.

That is my view too so maybe I misread it to satisfy my bias.

I agree with you but he was unclear.

03-15-2007, 01:58 AM

That is my view as well. Our documents, schools, signs, courts, etc, should all be in/conducted in English alone.
If someone chooses to spend their life with their personal interpreter at their side... have at it.

Ibby · 03-15-2007, 02:25 AM

I think government functions - except maybe signs, just for simplicity - should be pan-lingual on demand. End of story.

Businesses, on the other hand, can make the choice for themselves. Immigrants can't complain if a business decides to internally conduct business only in english (though the business may suffer for it).

Standardizing a language for your business is NOT discrimination. Standardizing a language for a country that intentionally and deliberately has no official language just so the 'damn dirty mexicans' wont come over, is.

03-15-2007, 02:35 AM

Pan-lingual for simplicity? Suuuuuurrrre.
Who said Mexicans? Why is everyone who is Latino a Mexican? Why are all non-English speaking immigrants Mexicans?

I can never figure this out?

Ibby · 03-15-2007, 03:19 AM

What?

I said english signs for simplicity, panligualism on demand for all other government functions.

And I was making fun of stupid bigoted rightwingers who only want to make english the official language to spite immigrants, especially illegal ones from mexico - like the article.

xoxoxoBruce · 03-15-2007, 04:29 AM

How many languages are going to be on those sign? You going to let people drive that can't read the signs or the rules? Can you say 6 pound traffic ticket?

How many piles of instructions at the IRS? Or the Post Office? Motor Vehicle Department? Hospital? Menus?
Chinese? Portuguese (which is as common as Spanish in the Americas)? French? Italian? Hindi? German?
Be big signs/piles, methinks.
A common language gives people something is common instead of the division that's eating away Canada.

It's not bigoted to make the country function like a country instead of like the ineffectual UN. Start thinking beyond a hypothetical situation, a classroom exercise in what would be desirable in a perfect world.

The world doesn't work that way, when you look at the realities of execution. When you start putting up the poles and painting signs people can read without stopping in the middle of the road. When you have to take the neighbors house by eminent domain, just to house the piles of instructions.

And pay for it.

03-13-2007, 09:19 PM	#1
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	Why should they HAVE to learn English? The whole point of not having an official language is so we can SUPPORT immigrants of all types, among other reasons. If they dont want to learn english, they don't have to - but at the same time, can't complain that they didnt. Similarly, integration into society should be neither forbidden nor mandatory; integration is optional, but if you refuse to americanize yourself, don't complain about the consequences. __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

03-13-2007, 10:32 PM	#5
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	It's a band-aid, Jebediah. A band-aid on a sore caused by blood poisoning. It's shouldn't be necessary and distracts resources from the real problem. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

03-15-2007, 01:30 AM	#8
Aliantha trying hard to be a better person Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 16,493	What he means is if you don't learn the language you just don't get the same service as you would without. That is, no automatic interpretation at tax payers expense for example. So, if you choose not to learn the language, it's on your own head, but we're (you're) not going to subsidise your ignorance. __________________ Kind words are the music of the world. F. W. Faber

03-15-2007, 02:25 AM	#12
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	I think government functions - except maybe signs, just for simplicity - should be pan-lingual on demand. End of story. Businesses, on the other hand, can make the choice for themselves. Immigrants can't complain if a business decides to internally conduct business only in english (though the business may suffer for it). Standardizing a language for your business is NOT discrimination. Standardizing a language for a country that intentionally and deliberately has no official language just so the 'damn dirty mexicans' wont come over, is. __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

03-15-2007, 03:19 AM	#14
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	What? I said english signs for simplicity, panligualism on demand for all other government functions. And I was making fun of stupid bigoted rightwingers who only want to make english the official language to spite immigrants, especially illegal ones from mexico - like the article. __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

03-13-2007, 10:11 PM	#4
WabUfvot5 Operations Operative Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 634	I see nothing wrong with a stiff fine against those caught hiring illegals - be they citizens or businesses. Not only would it curb illegal immigration but it would promote better working conditions.

03-14-2007, 08:57 PM	#6
rigcranop Resident Denizen Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: s. jersey Posts: 62	This is Brian R,s home turf. Weigh in, sir.

03-15-2007, 01:31 AM	#9
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	What I got out of it is that we should not force someone to learn English but we should also not go out of our way to accommodate them if they choose not too. That is my view too so maybe I misread it to satisfy my bias.

03-15-2007, 01:58 AM	#11
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	That is my view as well. Our documents, schools, signs, courts, etc, should all be in/conducted in English alone. If someone chooses to spend their life with their personal interpreter at their side... have at it.

03-15-2007, 02:35 AM	#13
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	Pan-lingual for simplicity? Suuuuuurrrre. Who said Mexicans? Why is everyone who is Latino a Mexican? Why are all non-English speaking immigrants Mexicans? I can never figure this out?

03-15-2007, 04:29 AM	#15
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	How many languages are going to be on those sign? You going to let people drive that can't read the signs or the rules? Can you say 6 pound traffic ticket? How many piles of instructions at the IRS? Or the Post Office? Motor Vehicle Department? Hospital? Menus? Chinese? Portuguese (which is as common as Spanish in the Americas)? French? Italian? Hindi? German? Be big signs/piles, methinks. A common language gives people something is common instead of the division that's eating away Canada. It's not bigoted to make the country function like a country instead of like the ineffectual UN. Start thinking beyond a hypothetical situation, a classroom exercise in what would be desirable in a perfect world. The world doesn't work that way, when you look at the realities of execution. When you start putting up the poles and painting signs people can read without stopping in the middle of the road. When you have to take the neighbors house by eminent domain, just to house the piles of instructions. And pay for it. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)