Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Free Immigration

Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2012 11:02:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Does anybody have any rebuttals to these two very condensed planks against free immigration?

Plank 1: Whether immigration should be free is inherently a moral statement, with morality being subjective and decided on based on culture and/or society. Unless the opponent can prove that objective morality against free migration exists, then it is a subjective statement, and thus society decides the morality of this statement.

P2 Since society ultimately decides what is right, it is imperative to note that most of society does not want free immigration.

C1 Therefore, free immigration is morally wrong in current society.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/25/2012 11:44:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It can be argued that it is not a moral question, but a rights question. Uber free marketists will say that preventing immigration to any degree is a restriction on the free trade of labor, and thus a restriction on the free market.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 12:57:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Usually when the only argument you can make in favor of an policy is a moral argument, the effects of that policy is disasterous.
When entering into a state of society we surrender some of our freedoms in order to protect our freedom. If the freedom surrendered is more than the freedom protected, than the surrender is void.
The right to freely immigrate between nations is not practical because it threatens national security. It is also a horrible economic policy; we already have a labor surplus.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 1:30:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/25/2012 11:44:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
It can be argued that it is not a moral question, but a rights question. Uber free marketists will say that preventing immigration to any degree is a restriction on the free trade of labor, and thus a restriction on the free market.

Isn't rights also a moral question?
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
SeniorIntelligentDebator
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 10:03:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/25/2012 11:02:43 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Does anybody have any rebuttals to these two very condensed planks against free immigration?

Plank 1: Whether immigration should be free is inherently a moral statement, with morality being subjective and decided on based on culture and/or society. Unless the opponent can prove that objective morality against free migration exists, then it is a subjective statement, and thus society decides the morality of this statement.

P2 Since society ultimately decides what is right, it is imperative to note that most of society does not want free immigration.

C1 Therefore, free immigration is morally wrong in current society.

It is not a matter of "morality," it is a matter of "rights," and ultimately a statement of our disdain or content for others. We should allow immigrants to come from Mexico, Canada, or wherever they wish to arrive from. It is freedom, it is liberty, it is governmental sanity. It is restrictions that are unfairly placed on foreigners.

Besides, Native Americans were all cool with allowing us in their territory once they knew we were peaceful, safe, tranquil, and hostile, so why shouldn't we? What gives US, the true foreigners, the right to decide who migrates -- or otherwise immigrates -- into our "country?"

Is the United States of America really OUR country?

Think about it.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 1:43:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/26/2012 10:03:26 AM, SeniorIntelligentDebator wrote:
At 11/25/2012 11:02:43 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Does anybody have any rebuttals to these two very condensed planks against free immigration?

Plank 1: Whether immigration should be free is inherently a moral statement, with morality being subjective and decided on based on culture and/or society. Unless the opponent can prove that objective morality against free migration exists, then it is a subjective statement, and thus society decides the morality of this statement.

P2 Since society ultimately decides what is right, it is imperative to note that most of society does not want free immigration.

C1 Therefore, free immigration is morally wrong in current society.

It is not a matter of "morality," it is a matter of "rights," and ultimately a statement of our disdain or content for others. We should allow immigrants to come from Mexico, Canada, or wherever they wish to arrive from. It is freedom, it is liberty, it is governmental sanity. It is restrictions that are unfairly placed on foreigners.

"Rights" are based on morality and society is therefore the ultimate arbitrer of rights. This actually plays into my point because people don't want to give these so-called "rights."

Besides, Native Americans were all cool with allowing us in their territory once they knew we were peaceful, safe, tranquil, and hostile, so why shouldn't we? What gives US, the true foreigners, the right to decide who migrates -- or otherwise immigrates -- into our "country?"

LOL! The Native Americans "were all cool" with the Europeans coming in? You're funny.

Anyways, property rights are transferred based on who owns that peice of land.
Is the United States of America really OUR country?
Irrelevant.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 3:07:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/26/2012 10:03:26 AM, SeniorIntelligentDebator wrote:
At 11/25/2012 11:02:43 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Does anybody have any rebuttals to these two very condensed planks against free immigration?

Plank 1: Whether immigration should be free is inherently a moral statement, with morality being subjective and decided on based on culture and/or society. Unless the opponent can prove that objective morality against free migration exists, then it is a subjective statement, and thus society decides the morality of this statement.

P2 Since society ultimately decides what is right, it is imperative to note that most of society does not want free immigration.

C1 Therefore, free immigration is morally wrong in current society.

It is not a matter of "morality," it is a matter of "rights," and ultimately a statement of our disdain or content for others. We should allow immigrants to come from Mexico, Canada, or wherever they wish to arrive from. It is freedom, it is liberty, it is governmental sanity. It is restrictions that are unfairly placed on foreigners.

Besides, Native Americans were all cool with allowing us in their territory once they knew we were peaceful, safe, tranquil, and hostile, so why shouldn't we? What gives US, the true foreigners, the right to decide who migrates -- or otherwise immigrates -- into our "country?"

Is the United States of America really OUR country?

Think about it.

What the f*ck did I just read
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 4:13:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/26/2012 3:07:13 PM, imabench wrote:
At 11/26/2012 10:03:26 AM, SeniorIntelligentDebator wrote:
At 11/25/2012 11:02:43 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Does anybody have any rebuttals to these two very condensed planks against free immigration?

Plank 1: Whether immigration should be free is inherently a moral statement, with morality being subjective and decided on based on culture and/or society. Unless the opponent can prove that objective morality against free migration exists, then it is a subjective statement, and thus society decides the morality of this statement.

P2 Since society ultimately decides what is right, it is imperative to note that most of society does not want free immigration.

C1 Therefore, free immigration is morally wrong in current society.

It is not a matter of "morality," it is a matter of "rights," and ultimately a statement of our disdain or content for others. We should allow immigrants to come from Mexico, Canada, or wherever they wish to arrive from. It is freedom, it is liberty, it is governmental sanity. It is restrictions that are unfairly placed on foreigners.

Besides, Native Americans were all cool with allowing us in their territory once they knew we were peaceful, safe, tranquil, and hostile, so why shouldn't we? What gives US, the true foreigners, the right to decide who migrates -- or otherwise immigrates -- into our "country?"

Is the United States of America really OUR country?

Think about it.

What the f*ck did I just read

THATS the part that threw you off? Try reading the underlined...
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 4:33:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'll go you all one better, what really aggravates me are people who come here and don't even try to acculturate. I think the right to residency should be based on a fluencey exam that tests an individual's ability to speak our native language.

In short, if you don't speak Cherokee you can just get the hell out of my country and go back to wherever you came from. :)
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 4:52:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/26/2012 4:33:06 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
I'll go you all one better, what really aggravates me are people who come here and don't even try to acculturate. I think the right to residency should be based on a fluencey exam that tests an individual's ability to speak our native language.

In short, if you don't speak Cherokee you can just get the hell out of my country and go back to wherever you came from. :)

http://25.media.tumblr.com...
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
1Percenter
Posts: 782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/26/2012 4:52:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/25/2012 11:44:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
It can be argued that it is not a moral question, but a rights question. Uber free marketists will say that preventing immigration to any degree is a restriction on the free trade of labor, and thus a restriction on the free market.

But a free market ultimately depends on the rule of law being upheld by government. Permitting all immigration wih no restrictions is a failure of governments duty to protect our sovereignty, and comes at the expense of the free markets.