so the california libtard extremists are trying to tell kids that the new law is bad?

[christo930]

The new law passed in Arizona is bad because of the way it's written. A trucker had to pull into a weigh station got arrested despite possessing a CDL because he didn't have his birth certificate with him. Who the hell carries their birth certificate? That was legal contact, as is being the victim of a crime etc. I am against illegals, but this is just a bad law.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 do you have a scourse for this story? all that i have to say to that is that officer is a bad cop, probably actually racist, or bored and wanted to issue a ticket to the trucker. idk, until i get the full story of it. but you do realize that the law mirrors our federal law? only diffrence is that officers of the state have the authority to procecute illegals under reasonable suspisions (terrible speller) not because of color of skin but conduct of one's character

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 It was a big story so if you google it there are many sources. But here is one

azfamily.com/news/91769419.htm­l

It's bad to have laws that enable (the) racist cops to do what they do. I know that most cops aren't bad, but bad laws empower the few bad cops. This is just a bad law.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 k i will when i get the chance to. and how is this a bad law? i support it all the way. it is actually strictly prohibited to arrest someone based on their race from what the law says, if we didnt have this law to begin with, the illegals would be all over us

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 I consider it a bad law because it uses the term, legal contact. It's too broad. It includes being the victim or witness of a crime, sobriety check points, weigh stations etc.. Police officers aren't trained to do immigration work and it's really not their job anyway. Don't get me wrong, I want immigration enforced and I want the people who employ these people to be severely fined. Realistically, taking away the carrot, the jobs, is the best way to stop the illegal flow.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 ok well that i can understand, yes they are short on their rescourses but what else can they do, illegals are invading AZ and other states, and the feds have failed to do their job for over 13 years i believe. you gota do whatcha gota do.

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 I don't think there is ANY problem that is SO pressing that we have to give up our civil rights. I try to put myself in the place of an Hispanic person and how I would feel if what happened to the truck driver happened to me. Think, that guy was just a hard working blue collar shmo who's boss had to incur a great deal of expense because the truck was impounded, deliveries weren't made, his wife had to miss a day of work getting his birth certificate to get him out of jail... SUCKS!

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 what do you mean give up our civil rights? what rights are we giving up? illegals have no rights other than common human rights. thats it. the officer had no authority to ask him of his birth certificate yes, but thats just a bad cop and he will get justice for it im sure.

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 The right to privacy, for one. If you are of Hispanic descent, you have to carry your birth certificate at all times to prove that you are an American. I certainly don't want to live in a "papers please" environment. That story I told you is just one that I accidentally came across, imagine how many more there are that haven't made the news. The real problem is the companies that hire these people. They need to be made to pay huge fines, fines big enough to make up for the money saved

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 how is that invasion of privacy?? they act on reasonable suspicion thats what the law says, the law doesnt require a birth certificate everywhere you go. dont let that cop respresent the others. this is not like Nazi Germany, if you broke the law police have to ask you for an I.d. he was susposed to have an id and registration for the truck, thats it. thats all the law stands for. your forgetting that it only mirrors the federal law. no rights are being violated here

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 It's the part about legal contact that I disagree with. If you are pulled over for speeding or something, that is another story and I am all with you. But he DIDN'T break the law, he pulled into a weigh station (which you have to do if you are driving a truck and the weigh station is open).

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 if he didnt break the law then no they had no right unless he was showing suspicous activity, but then they have to ask him to be able to search the truck

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 Do you know what a weigh stop is? All trucks have to pull in and have the truck weighed and have an inspection of the truck, logs (sleeping, driving), manifests... No suspicious activity necessary. You see them on the highway, you'll see signs that say something like, when flashing all trucks must enter weigh station.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 i know what they are, my dad used to be a supervisor for a trucking company when i was a little kid

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 You and I have common goals ie.. Reduction of illegal immigration, we just disagree on how to get there. It's nice to have a respectful dialog with someone I disagree with. Most just call names... ie.. you must be a liberal or something like that.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 lol just be glad that you havent met me a year ago. i was a conservative extremist, and intolerate of the left. no matter how intelligent they were. That led into a lot of debates and eventually just pointless imaturaty with name calling and insults in a failing attempt to make the other person look bad when really it backfires.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 i just got tired of it and just live and let live as long as it doesnt effect me or my way of life. this is why i consider myself now, an independant conservative. what side of political idealogy do you consider yourself as? (terrible speller sorry)

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 It's hard to pinhole me, but I imagine I am a libertarian with a slight left lean. I believe in the free market, minimal government and low taxes, but I also believe in gov safety nets. I didn't used to, until I needed it and found out not everyone who needs a little help is a sponge. I also believe in individual freedom, and am totally against the war on drugs. I would call myself a conservative, but I have grown disgusted by the intrusion of religion on the conservative platform.

[christo930]

@christo930 I obviously am against illegal immigration and don't want any kind of blanket Amnesty, but on the other hand, it makes little sense to throw someone out of the country who is productive (like a small business owner), so maybe handle it on a case by case basis. I totally oppose gun control. So the right alienates me with institutionalized religion and the left alienates me with big government, which I loathe. While libertarians take it to the extreme, they are the closest to me beleif

[christo930]

@christo930 I guess you might also call me a classical liberal, which is very close to being a conservative or libertarian but without all the militarism of the current right. That's another thing I can't stand about the GOP is their war mongering and neoconservative thinking, which was especially prevalent in the Reagan and Bush jr eras. Bush sr. was probably the best president in my lifetime.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 I really wish i had lived when Reagan was in office, I hate war as much as any other person does but if our way of life and country is being threatend by a forgien or domestic force, that cannot be reasoned with, Im all for the peace through superior firepower. but only when peace talks is irrelevant to them. in which case Iraq and Afghanistan, (yes I approve of the war) and its not illegal

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 Reagan was one of the biggest spenders in our history and his administration sold drugs in the US and sold military hardware to Iran all to support the contras. The reason they had to do it that way was that congress forbid the president to do it and therefor Reagan didn't have the funding, so they raised it illegally. In his infamous "evil empire" speech, he told a story about how someone would rather their daughter dead than an atheist and he agreed. I find that disgusting.

[christo930]

@christo930 The one thing I would give Reagan a big thumbs up for is the fact that he stood behind Paul Volker when nearly everyone in the country was calling for his resignation or firing. Volker raised the fed target rate to over 20% to get inflation under control, but it caused a terrible recession. But it also caused a lot of people to save money and that saved money allowed businesses to borrow (after the rates dropped down) and expand their businesses and led to a great economic expansion.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 haha you know, I could have just summed up that whole paragraph into one statement. He brought us triganomics or as i would like to call it, Reaganomics

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 sorry bud, but thats a negative, Bush and Obama has spent more $ or technically more debt. Obama has spent more than any other president in this country's history combined. When he was in office, Iran was our allies, our military had no intel of what the Iranian leaders where doing behind closed doors. I have not heard of that quote before, but it sounds very unlikely of him.

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 I am no fan of Obama, but he hasn't spent more than all the other presidents combined. Even if he did, it wouldn't matter because we are dealing with 2009-2010 dollars.Adjusted for inflation, other presidents have spent a lot as well. FDR probably spent more, though I would have to look it up.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 It apprears that you have forgotten the failed stimulus package. it has tripled the debt and adding on social health care. it has broken the record of national debt. the numbers speak for itself

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 they are productive yes, but my prioirty of sympathy to me, is first our legal citizens, trust me, with the rate of unemployment we have right now, you can find a citizen to do the job no matter how dirty it is. but they act like roaches living off of our tax dollars. the case by case basis wouldnt work until we get the source of illegals cut and actually seal up the borders to where they cant get back in with out getting through legally. once that happens and the #s deacrease

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 The productive ones aren't acting like roaches and sponging our tax dollars.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 they are, think about it, who pays for their medical bills when they have to go to the ER, they cant get health care insurance because they have to provide proof of citizenship in which they dont have. so who pays for it? the tax payers.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 then we would be able to have a case by case basis, but until then it would be way too chaotic. I support gun control to an extent. I agree with the system that we have now, that only way you can have a gun legally is with in your own house, it being unconsealable, or you have a permit for it which takes saftey lessons. if there wasnt any gun control then crime rate would be through the roof. but any more than that, then we are tying our hands back when the bad guy has the gun

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 so why do you say that the right is so institutionalized with religion? if your talking about religous wackos, then those intolerant people are no better than those in the midevil times. a true conservative is a constitutionalist, whats what basic conservatation is, to conservae the values of the constitution. so therefore true conservatives would support freedom of religion. but to me in my view call me extreme or not idc, islam should not be a valid religion to the constitution

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 I'm talking about things like gay marriage, abortion, sodomy laws etc. Most of the religious right completely misunderstand the constitution and think we live in a Christian nation. Religion and the state should be separated by a very high and very thick wall, when they get together, they ruin each other and everything they touch.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 this country and constitution was founded by our founding fathers who put it together with judial and christian values. it is illegal to murder, abortion is murder, sodomy ( if your talking about rape) then it is illegal. gay sex is not illegal, gay marriage is illegal because marriage comes from religion not from the government.

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 Marriage LONG predates religion. You are simply wrong about that, marriage doesn't come from religion. The founding fathers went out of their way to make a secular, not religious, government. There is no such thing as judao christiann values. That is just something made up. Do you HONESTLY believe that nobody knew these things were wrong before the bible? Do you find it odd that god couldn't find room for rape in the 10 commandments, but had 4 about himself and 1 thought crime.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 religion has been around sence God condemned Adam and Eve, so how could you say that marriage has been around before that? if you got evidnce to back that up please send me the intel and ill stand corrected. Our founding fathers wanted us to have our freedom of religion. but not to tear religion itself down. wow and do you not realize that rape is a kind of adultry? Look around you, this country''s laws were based on christian values and freeom from tyranny from the government

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 gov saftey nets? could you give me an example? if your talking about walfare, then, as long as the person is disabled mentally and or physically, trying their best to find a job to support his/herself and or family. or is a disabled vet that sacrificed his or her body while fighting for my freedom, and non military citizens are just using it to survive with basic needs, I have no problem with it. especailly if it is a wounded vet, they busted their ass for me

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 Short term assistance, especially for kids. As far as welfare, you can't get on welfare unless you are a child or have a temporary disability.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 people have been living off the government for almost a year now because congress keeps on extending the unemployment benifets, i dont have a problem with that as long as they are busting their asses trying to find a job. but most of them are just doing what they want

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 That isn't true, they actually call places that you say you applied for.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 applied for what? please refresh my memeory lol

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 Jobs. The unemployment office randomly calls businesses that you claimed to have applied for a job there.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 employers are required to check for citizenship, yes but some dont follow that law, my ex actually lives near a plantation that breaks this law

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 then I am more than happy to bust my ass for them. now on the other hand, ones that are lazy bums who just sit around and do nothin but drink, smoke and fiddle their thumbs all day while living on tax payer money, ESPECIALLY if they are spending uncle sam's $ on things that are stupid and not needed, I have a huge problem with it.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 but I have one question, the sterio type for leftists, is that they are tolerate, but yet they are intolerate to people tho do not see eye to eye ( well in my experience) but they are tolerate to people who are the most intolerate of them all. and yes I am talking about muslims. and if you know your facts, moderate muslims are not following the koran. just one of the examples, "behead the infidel". thats one violation of the constitution that the "religion" goes by

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 Just like moderate Jews and Christians aren't really following the bible. The bible, especially the old testament, is loaded with the same violence and appalling morality as the Koran. I agree that there is too much "tolerance" of radical Muslims. This ideology is destroying free speech in Europe. Any criticism of Islam can now lead to blasphemy charges, even if the criticism is true.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 your talking about the old testement. the new testiment is diffrent. no where does it say in the bible, to kill the non believer, technically it specifically states to not do so. it is judging a soul, and God specifically told us that judgement is his job to do. and killing infidels is judging. so no its not the same violence, only similarity is that they used the same weapons and tactics.

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 The fact that it doesn't specifically say to kill the apostate, doesn't mean it's not violent. Not to mention, the non-believer or apostate is threatened, not with death, but with an ETERNAL torture.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 it does mean its non violent, we do not spread the violence, who knows what kind of suffering awaits for those who have been judged as an unforgiven sinner. it just says suffering. the koron instructs the muslims to commit the violence to infidels, the bible does not instruct violence, but not to be a door mat.

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 That is simply not true. You are ordered to stone homosexuals, for example.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 again you forget that stoning was in the old testement

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 heres a better example. koran teaches to convert infidels or kill them, the bible teaches to try our best to convert non christians, and if the infidel retaliates. the evangualist (cant spell) tried his or her best, but thats all that the christian can do

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 and if your going to mention about the crusades, thats a complete diff story. those were in the middle ages, back then only priests and high officials were able to be literate. everyone else could only rely on them for guidence through the bible. so basically they were sheeple, led to do what they were told was "God's will" when really it was corrupted officials that just wanted more power. now today almost anyone can read. decreased the number of sheep dramatically

[christo930]

@jzumbro19 The craziest religious people out there are the ones that can quote the bible the most.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 then look up what they are refering to. most of them just interpret it wrong and hype it up just to get attention.

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 and if an American citizen happens to be hispanic, the law doesnt violates the citizens rights because he is legal. if he or she voilates the law then he or she is a criminal and the police are required to request ID of the criminal. 

[jzumbro19]

@christo930 oh and the law also is enabling officers in AZ to do what the federal government has been failing to do for over a decade

[JudeYokan]

You're articulate.

[jzumbro19]

@davisconstruction1 i didnt know that i had to mention that lol i just assumed that people even with hardly any common scense would agree with that

[Uberaoshi]

I voted Yes on Prop 8 and support Arizona's new law and fuck those liberal judges who repeal prop 8 and Arizona's law. FUCK NAFTA(been against since I was in elementary school back in the 90s)

BTW I am a "minority"(Asian born in the USA).

[jzumbro19]

@blueghist agreed 100%

[jzumbro19]

@TheNp42 yes it is

[GammaSigmaBeta]

Incidentally, suit has already been filed against LA for the intent of using tax payer's money to intentionally indoctrinate students politically and racially. Fueled repeatedly by The Great Charlatan's race-baiting on the subject, along with his Cabinet, none of whom had even read the law, BHO has certainly done a great job at dividing our country and setting race relations back another 50 years.

[jzumbro19]

@GammaSigmaBeta im glad to hear that some action has taken place

[GammaSigmaBeta]

I am here in Southern California, and have already seen the news of the LAUSD's Board's vote.

They have voted to teach LA students that AZ is anti-American because of their illegal immigration law, and they plan to equate it with the whole black/slavery/civil rights, blah, blah, blah, bullcrap. Rhetorically speaking, since the AZ law is LESS harsh on illegals, and ties the police's hands more fully, than does the Federal law, will they teach that American law is anti-American, too?

[Orthodoxcrusader]

My point is indoctrination is a two-bladed sword.It can be harmful as useful.

If the system itself give you a pattern it doesn't mean the pattern itself is correct and that it isn't rather malicious; the same goes when an individual(A professor for example) tries to impose his own.Open dialogue is what's the best; Back in high school my History prof was always open for different opinions and a debate; He had a custom to talk the stories from few angles and engage a dynamic conversation with us.

[jzumbro19]

@Orthodoxcrusader yes but it is and should still be intoleratable, because your molding the minds of innocent young ignorant people. they need to present the facts and curriculum that they were assigned to teach, and then if the teacher desires, tell them what his or her views are, and moderatly at most

[Orthodoxcrusader]

"and then if the teacher desires, tell them what his or her views are"

I think you're relatively right on this one

As I've said indoctrination is equally bad...

And I'm not sure what you were talking at the begging; What liberals did which was inappropriate? They've said what is wrong?

GREETS

P.S I mean really; It's a matter of time when they start teaching children Americans(relatively young nation) are 'God chosen people' and there you go... IV Reich becoming more than just a metaphor...

[Orthodoxcrusader]

No one's fault they don't have developed abstract and metaphoric thinking and aren't able to get some stuff(Like the fact the Bible's mostly METAPHORIC and the stories are meant to carry a moral message and another fact; It was written by Men; Tweaked-up by Men; Fixed around the policy of numerous secular rulers) but they can't do such kind of forced reprogramming, jailbreak hacking, to a first grader kid.

[jzumbro19]

@Orthodoxcrusader again your sounding like an atheist. but think about this, how on earth could a man in those times write about issues that we still face today, things that were written about that later on science later discovers. im sorry but no other book in this world can top that off. the book may have physically been written by man but spiritually by God

[Orthodoxcrusader]

@jzumbro19

I sound like a rational man... And I'm a Christian, but that doesn't mean I'll literally believe in anything some guy who didn't know what gravity is and that the Earth isn't a planar rectangle...

"how on earth could a man in those times write about issues that we still face today" Some issues are UNIVERSAL and so space less and timeless... Such issues face you in one of the wealthiest countries, but also someone in Ethiopia; Such issues faced people centuries ago as we face today...

[Orthodoxcrusader]

@jzumbro19

Books were physically written by simple men who couldn't understand the point in many cases...

Furthermore I focus more on the New Testimony cause that is something REALLY special... Jesus talked about value of every single human being and a value of peace and love; unity and coexistence... His immortal philosophy was humanistic in very nature way before we, the common mortals, reached the point of recognizing it a millennium and many centuries passed... That makes Him eternal...

[Orthodoxcrusader]

I mean on a BIOLOGY class they speak them about how God created man(FIRST MAN; Indirectly suggesting a women is a 'lower' and submitted entity) out of dirt... I mean I'm a Christian, but those Evangelicals are fucking nuts;

[jzumbro19]

@Orthodoxcrusader how is that suggest that the woman is "lower and submitted entity"?? just because man came first doesnt say that we are better than woman, but i guess other people interpret it diffrently. im just glad that im not a muslim woman. theres no compairson to any well known religion out there that abuses women mentally and phycially

[Orthodoxcrusader]

@jzumbro19

Yes, I agree Muslim extremists are much worse than the Christian ones(Except that just maybe the second ones will push the world to Armageddon, just because A Book says it). No, it's not only the man came first... Believe me the Old Testimony is HIGHLY suggestive on that matter... And the explanation why is cause it was written in very primitive stadium of human societies...

[Orthodoxcrusader]

I'm not sure what you're talking about(what's the topic exactly), and I'm quite interested...

What do you mean by indoctrination?

I mean IF teacher of history or sociology for example embedded his own political stand while presenting it to the students all those students who had no clue about it prior would soak it up...

But, indoctrination; XD there's no better example than in the 'Glorious Heartland'...

Yeah...

[jzumbro19]

@Orthodoxcrusader it is indoctrination because the teachers are influencing the kids to have that same political view has the teacher does. which is agaist the law last time i checked. im fine with a teacher admitting his or her views on the government jsut as long as they dont provoke it.