Reverand Orta Is Crossing The Line

[Conan71]

Okay, I don't know how many of you have seen the photo on page 1 of the World this morning or have read his quotes.  If I were black, I'd be mad as hell he's gloming on to MLK Day.

MLK was about equality for all American citizens.

I don't think this man is ever going to get HB-1804 is not a racial issue, it is a legal issue.  Where in the hell was he before all this to try and push for workable immigration solutions instead of being a miserable PITA now?

I guarantee we would not hear a peep out of this guy if our immigration problem were coming from the north.

[sgrizzle]

I watched the photo on page 1 being taken.

"Crowds" is defined as those you see in the picture, and their drivers.

[tim huntzinger]

I am no MLKJR scholar, but there is no doubt if he were alive today he would be on the side of the globalists for his brown-skinned brothers.  He was for international justice and his understanding of the Christian social gospel before his American identity before all else.  He was so radical he did not advocate violence against Castro, Russia, or North Vietnam, but found it difficult to preach nonviolence to the black power crowds.  His call for justice would have encompassed all mankind, not just citizens IMHO.

[Hometown]

HB1804 is the latest chapter in Oklahoma's sad, racist history.  Ortega opposes this legislation and is a selfless advocate for human beings that find themselves without many friends.  He is aligned with other Tulsans with a conscience like the head of Oklahoma's Catholic Church and leaders of Tulsa's Jewish Community.  

Before this is all said and done I believe we will see Ortega honored and institutions named after him and Terrill, the author of HB1804, will be reviled in historic texts.

We do have a Martin Luther King Freeway.  We don't have a George Wallace High, or a Strom Thurman Library.

[RecycleMichael]

"So I think we are in good company when we break unjust laws, and I think those who are wiling to do it and accept the penalty are those who are part of the saving of the nation."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown


Before this is all said and done I believe we will see Ortega honored and institutions named after him and Terrill, the author of HB1804, will be reviled in historic texts.

He's already had taco kits and salsas named after him...what more do you want?

[tim huntzinger]

Wait, what? An MLK Expressway? Yeh yeh, I know, but I have not once ever heard 244 called by that designation.  Shame.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

"So I think we are in good company when we break unjust laws, and I think those who are wiling to do it and accept the penalty are those who are part of the saving of the nation."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

I totally agree. If Americans never broke laws, the tea would have stayed on the ship on December 16, 1773, no treason laws would have been broken on July the 4th 1776 and a black lady would have quietly moved to the back of a bus on December the 1st 1955.

Its not a legal/ illegal issue, it's about questioning if a law is just and should be in place in the first place.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

"So I think we are in good company when we break unjust laws, and I think those who are wiling to do it and accept the penalty are those who are part of the saving of the nation."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

I totally agree. If Americans never broke laws, the tea would have stayed on the ship on December 16, 1773, no treason laws would have been broken on July the 4th 1776 and a black lady would have quietly moved to the back of a bus on December the 1st 1955.

Its not a legal/ illegal issue, it's about questioning if a law is just and should be in place in the first place.

You gotta be ****ting me Si.  Does the UK not have some of the most stringent immigration laws on the planet?  What is un-just about protecting a country's borders and assets?  Most other nations do precisely that.

Americans aren't breaking the law, illegal aliens are.  

Here have an orange, I'm going to eat my apple.

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

"So I think we are in good company when we break unjust laws, and I think those who are wiling to do it and accept the penalty are those who are part of the saving of the nation."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

I totally agree. If Americans never broke laws, the tea would have stayed on the ship on December 16, 1773, no treason laws would have been broken on July the 4th 1776 and a black lady would have quietly moved to the back of a bus on December the 1st 1955.

Its not a legal/ illegal issue, it's about questioning if a law is just and should be in place in the first place.

You gotta be ****ting me Si.  Does the UK not have some of the most stringent immigration laws on the planet?  What is un-just about protecting a country's borders and assets?  Most other nations do precisely that.

Americans aren't breaking the law, illegal aliens are.  

Here have an orange, I'm going to eat my apple.

One, the UK actually has fairly free immigration laws. If you live in one of the 25 EU countries you are allowed to move to and work in the UK. I can't see NAFTA doing that anytime soon. I know of lots of firms that hire people, then ask them if they need to sort them out with work visas and such, it is also possible to stay in the UK if you are in a common law relationship, cohabiting and in a civil partnership with a citizen. So I think its fairly relaxed, but could be more so.

Two, what's unjust about strict immigration controls. Well, there's lots of takes on it really, you could argue from a libertarian point of view and say it's my business who I hire and the state shouldn't be telling me how to run my business. You could venture down the whole Rawls veil of ignorance route, which would strongly argue that immigration was unjust. You could also do it from an economic point of view too, but that's less about just and unjust.

What I was saying was that Americans have broken the law in the past, in fact some of America's proudest moments where when people decided a law was unjust and they broke it. Saying its illegal and people therefore shouldn't do it isn't an argument, you have to say why you should do something. If I was in the 1950's in the deep south I would have disobeyed every Jim Crow law, I wouldn't care if I was breaking the law, because in my eyes that law should have never been there and it was morally wrong. I would have also gone to Elmore City and done a little boogie.

[Conan71]

There's a major difference between black American citizens who were born in the south disobeying Jim Crow laws and those who were born south of the border claiming citizenship rights to a country they were not born in and they entered illegally.

I would have pretty poor luck myself crossing into Canada or Mexico and expecting citizenship rights of either of those governments.

Tipping crates of tea off ships back in the 1700's is a poor justification for an illegal invasion of our borders.

Should you eventually immigrate to Tulsa, I will more than welcome you so long as it's done through legal channels.  However if you do it illegally or over-stay a visa, don't expect a warm reception.  I'd tell you the same thing if you were living in Mexico City.

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by Hometown


Before this is all said and done I believe we will see Ortega honored and institutions named after him and Terrill, the author of HB1804, will be reviled in historic texts.

He's already had taco kits and salsas named after him...what more do you want?

lol

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok

One, the UK actually has fairly free immigration laws. If you live in one of the 25 EU countries you are allowed to move to and work in the UK. I can't see NAFTA doing that anytime soon. I know of lots of firms that hire people, then ask them if they need to sort them out with work visas and such, it is also possible to stay in the UK if you are in a common law relationship, cohabiting and in a civil partnership with a citizen. So I think its fairly relaxed, but could be more so.

Yeah...almost sounds like another country I know which has these thingies called states...

What is the UK's policies towards immigration from north africa or Iran?  I bet it's a bit more stringent.

BTW, isn't the UK considering banning muslim head dress?  How progressive is that...

quote:
Two, what's unjust about strict immigration controls. Well, there's lots of takes on it really, you could argue from a libertarian point of view and say it's my business who I hire and the state shouldn't be telling me how to run my business.

Should business be preempted from violating federal law?  By extension, is it the prerogative of a business owner to decide which taxes he feels are just?

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok

One, the UK actually has fairly free immigration laws. If you live in one of the 25 EU countries you are allowed to move to and work in the UK. I can't see NAFTA doing that anytime soon. I know of lots of firms that hire people, then ask them if they need to sort them out with work visas and such, it is also possible to stay in the UK if you are in a common law relationship, cohabiting and in a civil partnership with a citizen. So I think its fairly relaxed, but could be more so.

Yeah...almost sounds like another country I know which has these thingies called states...

What is the UK's policies towards immigration from north africa or Iran?  I bet it's a bit more stringent.

BTW, isn't the UK considering banning muslim head dress?  How progressive is that...

quote:
Two, what's unjust about strict immigration controls. Well, there's lots of takes on it really, you could argue from a libertarian point of view and say it's my business who I hire and the state shouldn't be telling me how to run my business.

Should business be preempted from violating federal law?  By extension, is it the prerogative of a business owner to decide which taxes he feels are just?

I've been down this road about two years ago with either you or inteller. It went on for pages and pages and got so bad it was locked and then deleted. I'm simply not doing a repeat on it, I'll just accept that people have differing points of view, I don't think anyone approaches this debate without pre-conceived ideas and it just becomes a mud slinging match.

As a point of clarification unrelated to the topic, I do not believe the UK has ever seriously considered banned the head scarf.
Secondly outside of the EU all immigrants are treated equally unless they have a British grandparent so a North African and North American would be treated the same.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by si_uk_lon_ok
As a point of clarification unrelated to the topic, I do not believe the UK has ever seriously considered banned the head scarf.
Secondly outside of the EU all immigrants are treated equally unless they have a British grandparent so a North African and North American would be treated the same.

The UK currently bans the muslim headscarf in all schools and the practice has been upheld by UK courts.

Also, there are many restrictions placed on arab immigrants, for example, an arab student wishing to immigrate to the UK may only apply if there are no qualified EU physicians.

In fact, there have been more than 40 individuals who have killed themselves over the UK's stringent immigration policies.  One Nepalese man actually set himself on fire in front of a UK customs office.

http://www.ncadc.org.uk/resources/selfharm.html

Apparently it's not as easy you make it seem...