Shocking Boston Globe editorial

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Hmm, this is a special and complicated case. I´m split on this:

On the one hand he's an illegal who escaped a deportation order and now comitted a crime.

That should be enough reason to deport him.

On the other hand he's in the US for about 80% of his lifetime, so deporting him to Kenya would A) be a big cultural shock B) a financial and social shock, because he has most of his belongings and relatives in the US and C) it shows that the US immigration system is a failure and must be reformed.

What it shows is that laws with regard to illegal aliens are not enforced.

Oh, and a couple of things NOT mentioned in the Globe editorial is how he obtained a Social Security number and drivers license.

Did he engage in fraud to obtain those documents or did the respective governments just ignore the law there as well?

Do you actually care about the moral character of laws or do you encourage that people follow them just because they are laws?

Excuse me but,

(a) he ignored an order of deportation,
(b) he somehow obtained a social security number, which should never have been issued to him,
(c) he somehow obtained a drivers license which should never have been issued to him.

So, do we get to ignore any laws we don't like?

Okay, I can play this game too.

So, do you never believe that civil disobedience is justified?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Hmm, this is a special and complicated case. I´m split on this:

On the one hand he's an illegal who escaped a deportation order and now comitted a crime.

That should be enough reason to deport him.

On the other hand he's in the US for about 80% of his lifetime, so deporting him to Kenya would A) be a big cultural shock B) a financial and social shock, because he has most of his belongings and relatives in the US and C) it shows that the US immigration system is a failure and must be reformed.

What it shows is that laws with regard to illegal aliens are not enforced.

Oh, and a couple of things NOT mentioned in the Globe editorial is how he obtained a Social Security number and drivers license.

Did he engage in fraud to obtain those documents or did the respective governments just ignore the law there as well?

Do you actually care about the moral character of laws or do you encourage that people follow them just because they are laws?

Excuse me but,

(a) he ignored an order of deportation,
(b) he somehow obtained a social security number, which should never have been issued to him,
(c) he somehow obtained a drivers license which should never have been issued to him.

So, do we get to ignore any laws we don't like?

Okay, I can play this game too.

So, do you never believe that civil disobedience is justified?

You may like playing games, but apparently are unable to answer a simple question.

Oh, and BTW, is this the result you are trying to obtain:

http://www.milforddailynews.com/news/state/x911396896/Family-of-motorcyclist-who-died-are-broken-hearted

[BigSkyBob]

Fellow citizens have a different set of moral obligations to each other than human being, in general, have to each other.

This is a faintly terrifying concept. I know it's uncomfortable realization how petty human distinctions are, but do you that there is absolutely no inherent ontological difference whatsoever between yourself and DaiTenTarou or GrandCielJean?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As much so as anybody with proven intent of domestic terrorism would be, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As much so as any other ex-con, yes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Never. We have plenty of people free on our streets who mean us harm, they just happen to have been here since before they started meaning us harm. The categories of people you listed have as much right to be here as any serial domestic criminal (granted, sometimes that isn't very much, because of the police power, but it's not a right to which their geographic origin should be prejudicial).

I am perfectly willing to take our differences to the electorate.

[J. J.]

Did Bush or Cheney ever admit to using cocaine?!  Please post a document or link.  That is very interesting.  I never heard about that.

Actually, Bush could only claim that he had not broken any drug laws starting from a certain year, and refused to discuss his past, so you can draw your own conclusions from that, but either way if someone using cocaine is somehow as much of a societal risk as a drunk person operating a motor vehicle, then you need to examine your priorities.

But, he never said that he used "blow."  I think it was a felony at the time Obama did it, which DUI is not, but I'll add again that he was not in public office when he did it.  (The only thing I found annoying was the he could afford it at the time.) 

Still, if any one of these three were illegal aliens at the time they did it, and were caught, I'd favor deporting them.

[Link]

I must confess that I was shocked to see an editorial from the Boston Globe with some intelligence.  

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2011/09/01/with_dui_arrest_obamas_uncle_should_be_subject_to_deportation/

Yawn.  The guy has been in the country for almost half a century and he's gotten one dui.  Wow.  That puts him in the same category as W Bush and Cheney.  Except they got theirs A LOT faster.  They even got theirs before all this 0.08% MADD craziness started.  Where was your outrage when they were made the chief law enforcement officer of the land and his number two?

More false outrage from a right wing poster.

Link,

You are wrong!

First, he ignored an order of deportation.

Second, he obtained a social security number which should never have been issued to him.  Was this a case of agency incompetence, fraud or what?

Third, he obtained a drivers license which should never have been issued to him.  Same questions as SSN.

Finally, yes, he hasn't killed anyone YET.  Is that what you a waiting for?

I noticed once I illustrated the hypocrisy of your OP and the article now you won't even touch the DUI issue.  That was all I was trying to get you to do.

Yes. The man does appear to be in the country illegally.  Open a thread to discuss ALL illegal immigrants, but for heaven sake stop trying to make these tenuous links to the President and quit pretending one misdemeanor in half a century constitutes a crime spree.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Hmm, this is a special and complicated case. I´m split on this:

On the one hand he's an illegal who escaped a deportation order and now comitted a crime.

That should be enough reason to deport him.

On the other hand he's in the US for about 80% of his lifetime, so deporting him to Kenya would A) be a big cultural shock B) a financial and social shock, because he has most of his belongings and relatives in the US and C) it shows that the US immigration system is a failure and must be reformed.

What it shows is that laws with regard to illegal aliens are not enforced.

Oh, and a couple of things NOT mentioned in the Globe editorial is how he obtained a Social Security number and drivers license.

Did he engage in fraud to obtain those documents or did the respective governments just ignore the law there as well?

Do you actually care about the moral character of laws or do you encourage that people follow them just because they are laws?

Excuse me but,

(a) he ignored an order of deportation,
(b) he somehow obtained a social security number, which should never have been issued to him,
(c) he somehow obtained a drivers license which should never have been issued to him.

So, do we get to ignore any laws we don't like?

Okay, I can play this game too.

So, do you never believe that civil disobedience is justified?

You may like playing games, but apparently are unable to answer a simple question.

Oh, and BTW, is this the result you are trying to obtain:

http://www.milforddailynews.com/news/state/x911396896/Family-of-motorcyclist-who-died-are-broken-hearted

Okay, fine, the answer to the question is 'only if they're flagrantly immoral'. I should think the answer to that was implied in my own question, but I'm not used to talking to people with your level of single-issue myopia, sorry.

What in the name of God ing almighty does that have to do with the man's immigration status?

[Gustaf]

I have BS Bob on ignore but I can't ignore this one.

The government only has the moral claim to draft people from its own territory because it's its own territory that's being attacked (if it is being attacked; in situations with large military alliances, such as World War II, I'd support conscription and service being handled at an international level). The only territorially-limited thing that a government has the moral claim to do under normal circumstances is to regulate the inherently immoral (but necessary in a fallen world) affair of the exchange of money for goods and services. Citizenship is only a moral concept insofar as the character of the human race is conflict and this has to be done at a local level. If I went to India, I would want to be subject to the tax and other laws thereof; if I was staying on the land in India and India was attacked, if the government forced anybody to take life, I'd want to be treated the same (well, the same as an Indian conscientious objector would be).

People have the right to choose where on this earth to make their abode.

What do you think a state is, exactly? And that's a genuine question.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I have BS Bob on ignore but I can't ignore this one.

The government only has the moral claim to draft people from its own territory because it's its own territory that's being attacked (if it is being attacked; in situations with large military alliances, such as World War II, I'd support conscription and service being handled at an international level). The only territorially-limited thing that a government has the moral claim to do under normal circumstances is to regulate the inherently immoral (but necessary in a fallen world) affair of the exchange of money for goods and services. Citizenship is only a moral concept insofar as the character of the human race is conflict and this has to be done at a local level. If I went to India, I would want to be subject to the tax and other laws thereof; if I was staying on the land in India and India was attacked, if the government forced anybody to take life, I'd want to be treated the same (well, the same as an Indian conscientious objector would be).

People have the right to choose where on this earth to make their abode.

What do you think a state is, exactly? And that's a genuine question.

A ceremonial unit that's also a unit for fiscal purposes, basically. That's an idealistic answer and it's clearly not how things typically actually work, particularly when it's under some manner of threat or another, but I find it a lot more helpful than the idea that a state is a private little cabal that (in the case of the beliefs of somebody like Bob) actually changes the moral character of people who have their membership in order somehow.

But even beyond that, obsession with TIGHTENING OUR BORDERS is a very, very modern phenomenon, or at least the current spate of it is. There have been other periods when various countries had that fixation, but it's far from an historical constant. Even in situations (such as...well, most of them) where there are hoops to jump through to actually permanently move someplace, in many, many times and places the simple process of crossing a border has been astonishingly easy, and properly so. In the run-up to World War I the only countries in the world that required standardised passports were the Russia and Ottoman Empires and keeping the wartime passport systems in place after it was intensely controversial.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Hmm, this is a special and complicated case. I´m split on this:

On the one hand he's an illegal who escaped a deportation order and now comitted a crime.

That should be enough reason to deport him.

On the other hand he's in the US for about 80% of his lifetime, so deporting him to Kenya would A) be a big cultural shock B) a financial and social shock, because he has most of his belongings and relatives in the US and C) it shows that the US immigration system is a failure and must be reformed.

What it shows is that laws with regard to illegal aliens are not enforced.

Oh, and a couple of things NOT mentioned in the Globe editorial is how he obtained a Social Security number and drivers license.

Did he engage in fraud to obtain those documents or did the respective governments just ignore the law there as well?

Do you actually care about the moral character of laws or do you encourage that people follow them just because they are laws?

Excuse me but,

(a) he ignored an order of deportation,
(b) he somehow obtained a social security number, which should never have been issued to him,
(c) he somehow obtained a drivers license which should never have been issued to him.

So, do we get to ignore any laws we don't like?

Okay, I can play this game too.

So, do you never believe that civil disobedience is justified?

You may like playing games, but apparently are unable to answer a simple question.

Oh, and BTW, is this the result you are trying to obtain:

http://www.milforddailynews.com/news/state/x911396896/Family-of-motorcyclist-who-died-are-broken-hearted

Okay, fine, the answer to the question is 'only if they're flagrantly immoral'. I should think the answer to that was implied in my own question, but I'm not used to talking to people with your level of single-issue myopia, sorry.

What in the name of God ing almighty does that have to do with the man's immigration status?

Please define "immoral"?

Is it immoral to obtain a drivers license by deceit?

Is it immoral to obtain a social security card by deceit?

Is it immoral to ignore both an initial and appealate decision by competent legal authorioty for deportation?

[Brittain33]

"appealate" is the Spanish second person imperative form of the verb "appealar" (to appeal.) CARL, you have been outed.

[CARLHAYDEN]

"appealate" is the Spanish second person imperative form of the verb "appealar" (to appeal.) CARL, you have been outed.

Very funny.

[Link]

Hmm, this is a special and complicated case. I´m split on this:

On the one hand he's an illegal who escaped a deportation order and now comitted a crime.

That should be enough reason to deport him.

On the other hand he's in the US for about 80% of his lifetime, so deporting him to Kenya would A) be a big cultural shock B) a financial and social shock, because he has most of his belongings and relatives in the US and C) it shows that the US immigration system is a failure and must be reformed.

What it shows is that laws with regard to illegal aliens are not enforced.

Oh, and a couple of things NOT mentioned in the Globe editorial is how he obtained a Social Security number and drivers license.

Did he engage in fraud to obtain those documents or did the respective governments just ignore the law there as well?

Do you actually care about the moral character of laws or do you encourage that people follow them just because they are laws?

Excuse me but,

(a) he ignored an order of deportation,
(b) he somehow obtained a social security number, which should never have been issued to him,
(c) he somehow obtained a drivers license which should never have been issued to him.

So, do we get to ignore any laws we don't like?

Okay, I can play this game too.

So, do you never believe that civil disobedience is justified?

You may like playing games, but apparently are unable to answer a simple question.

Oh, and BTW, is this the result you are trying to obtain:

http://www.milforddailynews.com/news/state/x911396896/Family-of-motorcyclist-who-died-are-broken-hearted

Okay, fine, the answer to the question is 'only if they're flagrantly immoral'. I should think the answer to that was implied in my own question, but I'm not used to talking to people with your level of single-issue myopia, sorry.

What in the name of God ing almighty does that have to do with the man's immigration status?

Please define "immoral"?

Is it immoral to obtain a drivers license by deceit?

Is it immoral to obtain a social security card by deceit?

Is it immoral to ignore both an initial and appealate decision by competent legal authorioty for deportation?

The guy got a driver's license and paid for auto insurance.

The guy got a social security card and paid taxes.

Would you have preferred he was a tax dodging illegal immigrant that was driving around uninsured all this time?  For heaven's sake turn off the right wing hate machine for a few minutes and think about your on self interest. Sheesh!

[CARLHAYDEN]

Hmm, this is a special and complicated case. I´m split on this:

On the one hand he's an illegal who escaped a deportation order and now comitted a crime.

That should be enough reason to deport him.

On the other hand he's in the US for about 80% of his lifetime, so deporting him to Kenya would A) be a big cultural shock B) a financial and social shock, because he has most of his belongings and relatives in the US and C) it shows that the US immigration system is a failure and must be reformed.

What it shows is that laws with regard to illegal aliens are not enforced.

Oh, and a couple of things NOT mentioned in the Globe editorial is how he obtained a Social Security number and drivers license.

Did he engage in fraud to obtain those documents or did the respective governments just ignore the law there as well?

Do you actually care about the moral character of laws or do you encourage that people follow them just because they are laws?

Excuse me but,

(a) he ignored an order of deportation,
(b) he somehow obtained a social security number, which should never have been issued to him,
(c) he somehow obtained a drivers license which should never have been issued to him.

So, do we get to ignore any laws we don't like?

Okay, I can play this game too.

So, do you never believe that civil disobedience is justified?

You may like playing games, but apparently are unable to answer a simple question.

Oh, and BTW, is this the result you are trying to obtain:

http://www.milforddailynews.com/news/state/x911396896/Family-of-motorcyclist-who-died-are-broken-hearted

Okay, fine, the answer to the question is 'only if they're flagrantly immoral'. I should think the answer to that was implied in my own question, but I'm not used to talking to people with your level of single-issue myopia, sorry.

What in the name of God ing almighty does that have to do with the man's immigration status?

Please define "immoral"?

Is it immoral to obtain a drivers license by deceit?

Is it immoral to obtain a social security card by deceit?

Is it immoral to ignore both an initial and appealate decision by competent legal authorioty for deportation?

The guy got a driver's license and paid for auto insurance.

The guy got a social security card and paid taxes.

Would you have preferred he was a tax dodging illegal immigrant that was driving around uninsured all this time?  For heaven's sake turn off the right wing hate machine for a few minutes and think about your on self interest. Sheesh!

You continue to doge the questions.

How did he get his driver's license and social security card?

You really should take a little time and study the law.

There are certain crimes which are 'mala in se.'