Just so you know, I posted this at patriotfiles.com in forums under Political debate.
The names were removed to protect the innocent. Not you and me but  
 This is a cut and paste from this Massachusetts...
----- Original Message -----
Sent: 10/22/2008 751 AM
Subject: Re: Two cents from
***,,,, I'll take the reference to Billy Milano (Don't know who he is? Look him up. You have internet access. Joy) as a compliment! Although if he had written it, it would have been summarized with "Speak English or Die", as opposed to "Speak English or Get Out".
Now , I feel overwhelmingly compelled (as I always do when I'm right!! LOL) to point out that a significant portion of your hypothetical situations, analogies, and logic are flawed. Plus, it's not vey often I get to be right and *** is f!!!in' WRONG! (for once!! LOL)
Having said that, allow us to proceed: (Please read parsed response to your original e-mail down below)
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: Two cents from
Hey man,
Its like Billy Milano wrote that! Even though I would love to say I agree because I don't speak a word or spanish, I also have to look at citizens of the country, and the collective mentality of the tax system. Essentially the taxes paid are to aid in the general well being of the collective whole, but essentially helps those less fortunate accomplish the goals the country promises they can accomplish if they try. With that said, I can't view other languages as any different than a wheelchair getting into a building. Do I as a private business have to equip my public facility with wheelchair access in order to be compliant...yes (however I don't agree.) My thoughts are that I should be able to restrict access to my private property in any way I want, and can sell to whoever I want. This is different though, voting is the right of anyone who takes the time to become a citizen of the country, and we should make it able to happen even though they are "less fortunate" and cannot speak english. We cannot define a nationa language legally because language changes too much, and is too different place to place. If they were to define the national language as Shakespearean, I would be able to function because I taught Shakespere, and have had enough exposure to understand it. Jen, however, would not be able to understand her voting ballot and could not effectively exercise her legal right. I have to look at it from their points of view, and be sympathetic to their cause. Where is the dividing line?....I am not sure and I will let my elected officials decide that in the courts. Anyway, bet you didn't expect that answer from me....and I think I spelled Shakespere wrong...Sat. is ***'s birthday!
***
Hey man,
Its like Billy Milano wrote that! Even though I would love to say I agree because I don't speak a word of spanish, I also have to look at citizens of the country, and the collective mentality of the tax system. Essentially the taxes paid are to aid in the general well being of the collective whole, but essentially helps those less fortunate accomplish the goals the country promises they can accomplish if they try.
I'm not even going to touch that one as the reason we pays taxes is open for debate, extremely subjective, and a matter of opinion. My personal opinion is that the ONLY time when taxes are appropriate is when they go to build infrastructure like roads, bridges, etc; and,,,, the EXTREMELY anamolic and unusual time when a police officer is ACTUALLY necessary. Normally our Second Amendment rights, when allowed to be exercised, do a wonderful job of allowing us to communicate effectively, rendering the police unnecessary.
With that said, I can't view other languages as any different than a wheelchair getting into a building. Do I as a private business have to equip my public facility with wheelchair access in order to be compliant?...yes (however I don't agree.) My thoughts are that I should be able to restrict access to my private property in any way I want, and can sell to whoever I want. This is different though, voting is the right of anyone who takes the time to become a citizen of the country, and we should make it able to happen even though they are "less fortunate" and cannot speak english.
Incompatible logic and analogy here. You can't "learn" your way out of a wheelchair. Comparing a physical handicap to an inability to speak English is like comparing a whale to an ameoba. Sure, they both live in the water, but that's about as far as that comparison will go. Having a severed spine, cerebral palsy, or muscular dystrophy are conditions beyond your control. Refusing to learn to speak the native language is indeed a matter of choice, and it just means you're too lazy (and possibly arrogant) to think that you should learn to be accomodating to and function in the society you live in, rather than the other way around. And,,,, last time I checked, don't you have to have a rudimentary understanding of English to become a citizen in the first place? Please don't tell me they're administering the citizenship tests in Spanish now!!
If they were to define the national language as Shakespearean, I would be able to function because I taught Shakespere, and have had enough exposure to understand it.
A. Sorry, but I'm afraid you're wrong again. Languages do indeed evolve over time, but certainly not enough as to make the original language morph so badly as to make it "foreign" or unintelligible within one or two generations. If that were the case, we'd be unable to undertand a thing our grandparents or great-grandparents said. When has that ever happened?
We cannot define a nationa language legally because language changes too much, and is too different from place to place.
B. We can indeed "legally" define a national language. To address the "legality" of the issue, where in our constitution is that prohibited? To address the logistics of it (dialects, etc.) that's what/why Cambridge/Oxford/Webster all come out with new amended versions of what constitutes the English language each particular year. As it evolves, new editions get printed annually. As an American citizen, you should be expected to be adaptable enough to learn it, and evolve with it. If there's any dispute about which actual dictionary to use, then we contract the task to ANSI (American National Standards Institute http://www.ansi.org/) and have them issue annually a standardized publication of what's considered our basic, nationally recognized lexicon. (at taxpayer's expense, of course!)
Jen, however, would not be able to understand her voting ballot and could not effectively exercise her legal right. I have to look at it from their points of view, and be sympathetic to their cause. Where is the dividing line?....I am not sure and I will let my elected officials decide that in the courts.
C. Your wife does indeed have a constitutionally protected right to vote. However, it is not the rest of our society's job to ENSURE that she can effectively exercise that right. She is only constitutionally protected to be free from excessively prohibitive, inhibitive, or oppressive actions or intentional circumstances PREVENTING her from excercising that right. If she didn't know the native language well enough to vote, she simply needs to learn the language to understand the issues and cast an educated ballot. There's nothing in the scenario whereby society can bdeemed as being "oppressive" if it refused to print bi-lingual ballots or refused to have translators at every polling station. This is a slippery slope. By that logic, every no-working voter on welfare without a car should be able to expect to be picked up in a limo, taxi, bus (whatever), at the working classes' expense, and chapparoned to the polling stations in order to ensure they can "effectively excercise their legally right to vote."
BULLSHIT! If they can't get off their fat lazy a$$ and walk, hitchhike, take public transportation to the polling station, it is no more my responsibility to make sure they get there than it is to make sure they can read the damn ballot. And if they're just flat-ass illiterate, I wouldn't want those dumb-asses making decisions that influence my/our society anyway. Learn to read, and learn to speak, ENGLISH!
I'm all for maintaining pride in your heritage and culture. I often wish my ancestors/relatives had the where-with-all to make sure the Slavic/Croatian heritage in our family didn't get lost. It'd be kinda cool to be able to still speak Croatian, eh? My ancestors, however, unlike these bleeding heart liberals today, understood and respected the need to assimilate and accomodate to society, instead of the other way around, and learned to speak English. They made sure their children learned it, and their children's children learned it, and that's why I'm not speaking Croation/Slavic today, or expect the ballot to also be printed in Yugoslav as well as English.
If I go to Norway, I don't expect the entire go!!am country to have a translator present everywhere I go, and/or for all the billboards, posters, signs at Home Depot and Target to be in English as well as Norwegian just to accommodate me because I'm either too lazy, too stupid, or both, to learn the native language. I expect to either have to learn to communicate in Norwegian, or flounder and be unable to function in Norwegian society.
So again I say: Speak English, be earnestly in the process of learning to speak English, or GET THE F*** OUT!!! (or should I say "SPEAK ENGLISH OF DIE!!!!!" LOL)
Regards,,,,
****
__________________
|
10-21-2008, 04:52 PM
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
