General discussion


Breaking into Your House - Putting Immigration into Perspective X-(

By sleepin'dawg ·
Let's say I break into your house.

A lady wrote the best letter in the editorials in ages!!! It
explains things better than all the baloney you hear on TV.

Her point:

Recently, large demonstrations have taken place across the country
protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of
illegal immigration.

Certain people are angry that the U.S. might protect its own
borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once
here, to stay indefinitely.

Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these

Let's say I break into your house.

Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I

But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the
laundry and swept the floors. I've done all the things you don't
like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke
into your house)."

According to the protesters:

You are Required to let me stay in your house
You are Required to add me to your family's insurance plan
You are Required to Educate my kids
You are Required to Provide other benefits to me and to my family
(my husband will do all of your yard work because he is also
hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part).

If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my
friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my
RIGHT to be there.

It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do,
and I'm just trying to better myself.

I'm a hard-working and honest, person, except for well, you know, I
did break into your house.

And what a deal it is for me!!!

I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my
keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused
of cold, uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior.

Oh yeah, I DEMAND that you learn MY LANGUAGE!!! so you can
communicate with me.

Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?! Only in America ...if
you agree, pass it on (in English). Share it if you see the value of

If not, **** it off......... along with your future Social Security
funds, and a lot of other things.

From time to time you read something like this and your in total agreement with the idea when looked at in a general sense but and this is a big but, we tend to let the focus slip when we view the matter in individual cases. We make exceptions, unaware that in making the exception we have opened the way for hundreds, if not thousands of other "exceptions".

The law is the law and it must be applied across the board without exception and those endeavouring to circumvent the law should be penalized to the fullest extent under those laws, without any exceptions.


This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

UK Squatters

by MyLittleMansAnIdiot In reply to Well, what about the UK.. ...

I remember watching a documentary on the squatter co-op in London. They eventually became an "accepted" part of the area. They exclusivley squatted in emtpy office buildings, such as banks and other old financial institute buildings. They proved to be a very positive thing for the area.

Collapse -

Flawed analogy..

by MyLittleMansAnIdiot In reply to [i] Breaking into Your Ho ...

Comparing a single household to a country doesn't cut it in my opinion. It's more akin to her illegally moving into the house across the street and then mowing your lawns and doing your housework for $1.50 an hour.

I don't disagree with it's overall sentiment, I just find it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Edit: Actually, the squatting analogy isn't really fitting either, unless both houses are part of some compound which the legal tenant belongs to and pays some sort of levy to, and the illegal tenant doesn't.

Collapse -

I take it you are a liberal socialist, a concept which should have died out

by sleepin'dawg In reply to Flawed analogy..

You must enjoy paying increased taxes for decreasing services. Being in Australia, sort of puts you off the beaten path for illegal immigrants, not that you don't have any.

Civilized society is based on rules; rules of law and rules of custom. Everytime, or anytime, an exception is made for any of these rules society steps onto the proverbial slippery slope, a slope which only leads downward into the chaos of a disfunctional repressive society lumbered with the taxes and tariffs which are required to support the overload on society's services.

Those in the top tax brackets get tired of being bled to support this and take steps to avoid the worst effects of the increased taxation, and furthermore our incentive for productivity become drastically lowered. Why bust a gut to support and provide services for those who are not paying their fair share into the system?

Being in Australia, you get a few hundred illegals every year and if you want to support them fine and dandy. However, in the northern hemisphere whether it's North America or Europe the illegal immigants number in the tens of thousands. The real danger in this, is that there is every indication of a reactionary backlash forming and if it takes hold and gets establihed, the current abuses of terrorism will be as nothing to the horrors that may be unleashed. Genocide and ethnic cleansing are just the outriders of what may well be in store for civilized society.

Dawg ]:)

Collapse -

liberal socialist

by john.a.wills In reply to I take it you are a liber ...

Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

Collapse -


by MyLittleMansAnIdiot In reply to I take it you are a liber ...

Wow, you can tell all that from my post?

All I said was the analogy was flawed. As far as me being a "liberal socialist", I'm not even sure what that is. Sounds like an oxymoron. Anyway, as I said, I don't disagree with the sentiment of the analogy, I just feel it was oversimplified and contained, what I perceived to be, a racist undercurrent (hence the bad taste).

I don't consider myself to fall into any of the current sociopolitical factions people often use to label others who have a different point of view. I'm just a guy who's trying to get by, enjoy life, and die thinking I've lived the best I can. I firmly believe that if someone breaks the law, they should be punished accordingly. I'm also a bit of a cynic, but I certainly don't share your somewhat bleak outlook on the future of society.

Collapse -

If only it was that simple.

by StephenCairns In reply to [i] Breaking into Your Ho ...

I agree laws are laws. But you kind of loose the moral high ground when the person that broke in says "I did not break in just walked in the back door. I passed you on the stairs last week and you said nothing then. The rest of your family knew I was here, they've been giving me jobs to do and paying me. Didn't they tell you?" and the rest of your family look at their shoes and say nothing.

Collapse -

You have a point but.................

by sleepin'dawg In reply to If only it was that simpl ...

once you are aware and put a stop to the situation, the law breakers should not be rewarded for their crime, regardless of who aided and abetted them. In fact those who have done so should be penalized as well.

Immigration isn't the problem, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION under the guise of being refugees is and the sooner we get a handle on it by enforcing the statutes already on the books and putting an end to the abuses of the appeals process, the better off we will be. Yes there are some legitimate refugees but for every real refugee their are ten or more "economic" refugees who are abusing our system. There are far too many que jumpers with hard luck stories.

Dawg ]:)

Collapse -

Not quite ..

by highlander718 In reply to If only it was that simpl ...

"I did not break in just walked in the back door. I passed you on the stairs last week and you said nothing then.

Since when is walking in somebody else's house OK ? And it's not "passed you on the stairs" but sneaked by you eventualy...

That being said, I agree that you cannot treat the illegal immigration problem (involving millions of people) same as a break in of one person. You cannot just throw out or jail millions of people. I think a mixed approach is appropriate, you have to discourage future illegal immigrants but you also have to do something with the existing ones.

Collapse -

That's been tried before.

by sleepin'dawg In reply to Not quite ..

It hasn't worked yet. We grant an amnesty to the ones that are here, giving them legal status. No sooner than the deadline passes for that and a new batch arrives. We are too permissive and lax with these people. They are illegals but we grant them rights - almost the same rights as citizens.

If we are serious about discouraging them we should be curtailing their "rights" - not extending them. Once caught they should be on the next outbound means of transport - none of the appeals process nonsense. These people are social parasites and should be treated as such.

Their are thousands of real indigent people obeying the rules, obeying our laws and waiting patiently for admitance. These people are being denied their rightful place by these illegal immigrants.

We also have our own poor who are in need but are being denied services due to the overload of these illegals on our society. What's the solution??? Damned if I know but I do know it cannot be allowed to continue.

Dawg ]:)

Related Discussions

Related Forums