Comment by freshfunk | Hacker News Reader

Comment by freshfunk | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Well 1) that is the rule of law. It's not just the case for the US but many other modern nations in this world.

2) Being a citizen doesn't just have benefits but also responsibilities. This is why we pledge allegiance.

At age 21 I had to register for the civil service. That means that if my country goes to war and I'm drafted then I must fight and possibly die for my country.

An illegal immigrant will not be drafted.

It also means other things I'm bound under federal law like paying taxes. There are also other civil duties like being on a jury to judge my fellow citizens. As a citizen, I'm bound by the laws on our constitution and those created by our legislature.

3) The privileges of a citizen allow them to contribute to the way our democracy functions including the right to vote.

An illegal immigrant cannot vote.

The rest of my argument was already stated above to you. If we completely open the borders to everyone, then our government wouldn't even be able to serve the current legal citizens.

You may dislike the system but in other countries such as Japan and Germany it is even more difficult and exclusionary. They are based on parentage and while that make more sense to you, it actually ends up leaving large classes of immigrants unnaturalized.

1) So basically your explanation goes like that: "Discrimination against immigrants is justified, because it's a law and other countries discriminate even worse than the US".

I hoped for somewhat better reasoning than that. If you take "it's a law and it must stay unchanged" principle to the heart, then you would be dead by now killed as invader by one of American-Indian tribes.

2) "Opening borders to everyone" has very little to do with "Stopping discrimination against immigrants".

It's two-fold. On one hand, it's the law. On the other hand, I consider it a fair law. Pointing to other countries was simply to show that the US isn't alone in this thinking.

It has everything to do with opening the borders because if illegal immigrants have all the same rights as citizens then you're essentially inviting every immigrant to come to the US.

Of anyone, I would think you understand that our physical borders does not do a great job of preventing illegal immigrants from entering the country.

You seem to pick and choose your literal arguments from your theoretical ones.

> That means that if my country goes to war and I'm drafted then I must fight and possibly die for my country.

Societies that raise slave armies aren't free.

Or, did I miss where you'd be able to abstain if, for instance, you knew the whole thing was a farce?

> Being a citizen doesn't just have benefits but also responsibilities.

And consequences. If you're a US taxpayer (one of about 200M) you've recently paid for the killing of about 1/100th of someone, likely a non-combatant.

Not to count (of course) those your country's policies have merely displaced, such as many of the poor in Mexico, victims of "Free Trade" and the like.

Darned illegals.

> If we completely open the borders to everyone, then our government wouldn't even be able to serve the current legal citizens.

Cite needed.

The USA can manufacture and deliver a bomb for every man, woman, and child in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc, and you don't think it could provide basic food and medical instead?

The USA is not responsible for the citizens of Mexico and to imply that they are is actually insulting to Mexico. It says that they can't take care of their own citizens.

Everything else you said is simply biased slander on your part.

We've screwed them over in war, taken land, and forced them to accept unfair treaties. While that's not all that's happened to them, it is enough.

Like Iraq. It may crawl back to where it was before the attack but only at ten times the effort. Likely it'll bear the scars of the war for a century and, if the USA gets its way, suffer "treaties" long after that. Is it insulting to the Iraqis to say that this will set them back, or is it realistic?

> Everything else you said is simply biased slander on your part.

I could say you're a pro-USA fanboy who'll blindly support them regardless because he's afraid his loyalty will be questioned and his citizenship revoked. But, even if I feel you act that way, I won't. Srs. So don't do it to me either, k?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com