Reply to Honest question for liberals about diversity/multiculturalism

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Honest question for liberals about diversity/multiculturalism"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Y'all are barking up the wrong tree. The reason people wanted to (and still want to) immigrate here is because of our Constitutions and our individual freedoms, that allow people to make something of themselves.  Progressives are in the process of dismantling those freedoms and our Constitution, and think that immigration will have the same effect. It won't. There will be more takers than givers due to the vast welfare state that exists today, and you will see our country deteriorate, as all other countries deteriorated with the same policies. [/quote]

This is not about politics. The topic was about why diversity and multiculturalism is good for America. What has politics got to do with it. Don't make it about politics. Now that you did, let me respond in a civil and respectful manner without blaming any group.

When you make a case, back it up with facts and logical reasoning alone, not emotions and biases. What constitutional rights and freedoms have been dismantled? So what happens when constitution has become outdated and majority want changes to it? That's why there is an amendment process that abolished slavery, gave civil rights to oppressed people and minorities. Constitution is not set in stone and a final document for eternity. It has to adapt as times change and values change. The constitution is there to serve the people, all people not just some, and give all people the same equal rights and the same equal shot to get better. If it stops doing that then it's time for a change, an amendment. So now tell me what constitution and freedoms have been trampled? Let me just give one example, if the majority of Americans support LGBTQ rights and freedoms, how can one small segment oppose that in the name of constitution? They can't after sometime and that's a lost cause. So constitutionalists adapt and interpret the constitution to changed values. That's how and why western institutions remain strong. Same goes for any number of issues.

As for the takers and makers point, do you suppose the so called makers don't get any tax benefits or deductions or tax breaks or subsidies at all, ever? Obviously that's not the case. So are the makers not takers? Entire industries have been created and supported by government incentives. Is that bad? If it is totally free market, theoretically, then that should never happen. But there is no such market. So what happens when the private market and industries get into trouble when they make a bad bet or get too greedy and are in the verge of collapse? Do you let them collapse coz that's what free market should do? At what point does the connection between market and mass visible? When you let them collapse it affects the entire global population. So market and mass are not separate. They are intertwined. So is it good if the 1% makers get 99% of all benefits? What is the right distribution? Besides, makers don't operate in an exclusive zone. They use public facilities like road, schools, universities, health care, social stability etc? How do the makers pay for all this in a fair way? Or they get to enjoy all the benefits and not spy at all?

The big point here is these are all not black or white issue, it's just varying shades of grey. So they require complex solutions and that's why they are tough. simplistic solution tells so much about the proponents. Think and come back with constructive message. The world is complex and solutions can't be simplistic and work for one group only anymore.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics