There’s a huge difference between hating an individual, and wanting the rule of law respected, I think. What’s going on now is hatred and destruction, which abuses the name of the law. But saying, “this person is self-evidently in this place illegally, they should be tried and ejected”, is not hateful. You can respect a person while saying they shouldn’t be in a place.
Any law that criminalizes behavior that does not cause anyone harm is unjust, and we therefore have a moral duty to disobey it. Your insistence that “respecting the rule of law” is not hateful is no different from using “just following orders” as an excuse for immoral actions. You cannot be seriously suggesting that it is respectful to tell a person they don’t belong in this country because they don’t have the proper paperwork. Fuck borders, fuck ICE, CBP, DHS, and fuck the rule of law. I refuse to accept inhumane treatment simply because the law demands it.
The problem is that even then it’s such a tiny “infraction,” so victimless, that going out of the way to enforce it is fucking insane. It’s like if we shot all jaywalkers dead on sight. It’s like if we arrested everyone who ever went over the speed limit and kept them in jail for 90 days waiting for a hearing.
If someone is visibly committing a dangerous crime, and it turns out they should be deported, that’s one thing. Breaking into people’s fucking houses, fucking taking people while they are in the process of going to the courthouse to go through the legal immigration process, dragging people out of fucking cars, none of this is necessary, and moreover, it’s fucking reprehensible.
“But dey broke da lawwww” a kid who smoked a joint doesn’t deserve the electric chair bro. And they are fucking executing white, born-here American citizens in the streets in broad daylight for NOTHING.
What would happen if there was suddenly no border policy whatsoever in the US? That anyone could come in at any time they like and stay as long as they like.
“You can respect a person while saying they shouldn’t be in a place.”
“This person is self-evidently in this place illegally, they should be tried and ejected”
On behalf of the queer community this sounds really bad. I’ve seen similar rhetorical lines a lot, typically to defend the removal of queer media and other forms of expression.
I have never seen these be used to argue anything good.
There is a difference between the more liberal “enlightened” enforcement and the more brutal (and much worse) fascist enforcement. But the liberal apparatus (while comparatively considerably better) was still never just
There’s a huge difference between hating an individual, and wanting the rule of law respected, I think. What’s going on now is hatred and destruction, which abuses the name of the law. But saying, “this person is self-evidently in this place illegally, they should be tried and ejected”, is not hateful. You can respect a person while saying they shouldn’t be in a place.
Too bad I have this moral obligation to disobey stupid laws.
What does “false consensus” mean?
That’s certainly a choice, and one I’ve made in the past too. But I stand by the point that the law does not demand disrespect.
Unjust laws do.
I don’t believe in borders man
Any law that criminalizes behavior that does not cause anyone harm is unjust, and we therefore have a moral duty to disobey it. Your insistence that “respecting the rule of law” is not hateful is no different from using “just following orders” as an excuse for immoral actions. You cannot be seriously suggesting that it is respectful to tell a person they don’t belong in this country because they don’t have the proper paperwork. Fuck borders, fuck ICE, CBP, DHS, and fuck the rule of law. I refuse to accept inhumane treatment simply because the law demands it.
As an American, I would be mortified to use the phrase “rule of law” outside of a joke.
The problem is that even then it’s such a tiny “infraction,” so victimless, that going out of the way to enforce it is fucking insane. It’s like if we shot all jaywalkers dead on sight. It’s like if we arrested everyone who ever went over the speed limit and kept them in jail for 90 days waiting for a hearing.
If someone is visibly committing a dangerous crime, and it turns out they should be deported, that’s one thing. Breaking into people’s fucking houses, fucking taking people while they are in the process of going to the courthouse to go through the legal immigration process, dragging people out of fucking cars, none of this is necessary, and moreover, it’s fucking reprehensible.
“But dey broke da lawwww” a kid who smoked a joint doesn’t deserve the electric chair bro. And they are fucking executing white, born-here American citizens in the streets in broad daylight for NOTHING.
So in closing, fuck that, fuck all of that.
Good points. I just wanted to add even Pre-Trump the fact people need to go to court to argue their right to live in a country is stupid.
The immigration process should be nothing but a security check and be given ID in a civilized society
What would happen if there was suddenly no border policy whatsoever in the US? That anyone could come in at any time they like and stay as long as they like.
I would try to find another place to live, because that would lead to chaos.
Good riddance.
yea, the problem is that it’s a shitty, hateful law that is enforced for shitty, hateful reasons
“You can respect a person while saying they shouldn’t be in a place.”
“This person is self-evidently in this place illegally, they should be tried and ejected”
On behalf of the queer community this sounds really bad. I’ve seen similar rhetorical lines a lot, typically to defend the removal of queer media and other forms of expression.
I have never seen these be used to argue anything good.
There is a difference between the more liberal “enlightened” enforcement and the more brutal (and much worse) fascist enforcement. But the liberal apparatus (while comparatively considerably better) was still never just