Americans seeking immigration data jam Canadian website

[KrauserKrauser]

Good Riddance, more room for me. Sreiously these people need to get a hold of themselves. The world isn't over you can try again in 4 years.

[Darth Wong]

Hmmm, did that point make a cool "whoosh" sound as it flew over your head? Let's go over it again: saying that "B isn't as bad as you think" does not refute the point that A > B.

And saying that B < A does not refute the assertion that B is not so bad that running away because your party lost an election appears as anything other than overreacting.

Overreacting according to what objective standard? Please, by all means, enlighten us on what constitutes an acceptable reason to emigrate. Are you saying that no one should ever emigrate for any reason other than crushing persecution?

Yeah sure, your personal anecdotes effortlessly annihilate such things as an interracial marriage ban surviving in the Alabama law books until 2001 when it was narrowly defeated by a 60/40 margin.

And I'd also like you to show me how many people were prosecuted under that ban in the last few decades. Just because a law remains on the books means little.

Once again, the point whooshed over your head. The fact that the law still existed in 2001 was not the issue; the fact that 40% of voters felt it should STAY IN PLACE in 2001 was the issue.

[SirNitram]

Because I have enough common sense and sufficient powers of observation to note that things are not this fucking bad, despite your attempt to make it look like we are actively persecuting homosexuals (or maybe it's just liberals, since the article cited does not indicate in any way that these potential immigrants are gay, just anti-Bush, and therefore presumably liberal). Of course they can still leave if they wish to. Far be it from me to stop them. But there are reasonable fears and there are overstated ones. I have yet to see any solid evidence that this one is reasonable.

So you simply set yourself up as sole decider, deride anyone who says otherwise, and refuse the idea that, holy shit, maybe people can make judgements about their own lives more accurately than I can sitting here. Not surprising.

[Sir Sirius]

Forty percent are so out to lunch they beleive the planet Earth is ten thousand years old or less.

Where's your source for this claim? I'm rather skeptical of it, honestly.

I queted a Gallup poll on the matter here, scroll down a bit and you should see it. 44 to 47 percent agree with "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so. "

[SirNitram]

So how do you explain the fact that almost 200 years ago, Andrew Jackson also pretty much told SCOTUS Chief Justice John Marshall to go jump in a lake. It was one of the most flagrant violations of the checks and balances ever, and yet we didn't degenerate into a police state during the last couple of centuries.

So by your logic, somebody who thought the country was intolerant and left at that time would have been an idiot?

Hardly, because there was a lot more evidence of it at that time - you know, little things like slavery and like actively taking Indians land away from them, and having the army march them off to marginal land hundreds of miles away. That's a hell of a lot more solid evidence of intolerance than anything you or Nitram or anyone else can come up with today.

And it misses the point anyway. Nitram pointed to the possibility that Bush might flout supreme court decision as proof that things were getting worse. I pointed to this example of how a far more egregious violation actually took place, and yet it did not start us down the slippery slope.

Go back to whatever place gave you your education and request a refund. The slippery slope fallacy is based on the idea that once you take the first step down a path, you will be inexorably drawn down that path until you reach an inevitable and very bad end. In other words, the steps keep getting worse. Those with functional frontal lobes will realize I said precisely dick about things getting progressively worse. I merely pointed out that if he has done something, shows no signs of remorse, and it accomplishes his goals, it's quite possible he'll do it again.

I'm sure you'd love to strawman my comments into a slippery slope, but they weren't, and anyone staying conscious will stay that. Now, if you want to make the subjective call 'Bush violating the checks and balances system is not enough to make me feel uncomfortable/afraid/unhappy here', that's your choice. Unfortunately, you're apparently too stupid to realize that that call is subjective, and your opinion means dick to the rest of us.

[Axis Kast]

Oh I dunno, maybe they could have tried going the route of the Underground Railroad and moving to Canada. The Trail of Tears, after all, was symptomatic of larger issues that would eventually culminate in the Civil War. So Perinquus' attempt to use Mr. Jackson's imperial decree as an example of a situation which did not warrant leaving is almost laughable; someone who left during his reign would have avoided the Civil War for himself and his children. It would have been a brilliant move.

The British were still practicing slavery during the Jacksonian era. Compared to the overwhelming majority for most people, the United States gave far more people a fair shake than not. Blacks and Native Americans were a special case facing undue hardship that could be alleviated by escape to Canada, just as homosexuals are today.

What the fuck is wrong with you, dipshit? I'm not the one passing judgement on these people; you are. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the completely made-up and arbitrary criteria upon which you make this judgement.

You’re passing judgment on what they’re supposedly running away from. I’m just pointing out the absurdity of the completely made-up and arbitrary criteria upon which you made that judgement. If you can’t see the extreme irony here, you’re less intelligent than I give you credit for.

[Perinquus]

Hmmm, did that point make a cool "whoosh" sound as it flew over your head? Let's go over it again: saying that "B isn't as bad as you think" does not refute the point that A > B.

And saying that B < A does not refute the assertion that B is not so bad that running away because your party lost an election appears as anything other than overreacting.

Overreacting according to what objective standard? Please, by all means, enlighten us on what constitutes an acceptable reason to emigrate. Are you saying that no one should ever emigrate for any reason other than crushing persecution?

Of course not! Leaving because you had a better job waiting for you would be a great reason. Leaving to marry someone in that country would be another reason. Leaving because you just visited the country before and fell in love with the place might be a god reason. Hell, I've toyed with the idea of moving to Ireland for that very reason. But what these people have made abundantly clear is that they hate George Bush, resent the fact that he got elected, and are now bleating about how terrible it is here in the States, and they want to emigrate to another country. I'm sorry, but things are going to have to get a lot worse here before that looks to me like anything but an overreaction by people who got their baloon popped during the election. When I said as much in an earlier post, you immediately sneered at me and opined that maybe they didn't want their kids raised in an atmosphere of intolerance. As I said: what intolerance? What there is isn't even remotely as awful as you are making it out to be. The recent defense of marriage acts notwithstanding.

Yeah sure, your personal anecdotes effortlessly annihilate such things as an interracial marriage ban surviving in the Alabama law books until 2001 when it was narrowly defeated by a 60/40 margin.

And I'd also like you to show me how many people were prosecuted under that ban in the last few decades. Just because a law remains on the books means little.

Once again, the point whooshed over your head. The fact that the law still existed in 2001 was not the issue; the fact that 40% of voters felt it should STAY IN PLACE in 2001 was the issue.

And 60% didn't. Democracy in action Mike. Fifty years ago, it probably would have been 90%. Maybe more. When things are getting better, you are going to have your work cut out for you convincing me that people need to get away.

[Perinquus]

Because I have enough common sense and sufficient powers of observation to note that things are not this fucking bad, despite your attempt to make it look like we are actively persecuting homosexuals (or maybe it's just liberals, since the article cited does not indicate in any way that these potential immigrants are gay, just anti-Bush, and therefore presumably liberal). Of course they can still leave if they wish to. Far be it from me to stop them. But there are reasonable fears and there are overstated ones. I have yet to see any solid evidence that this one is reasonable.

So you simply set yourself up as sole decider, deride anyone who says otherwise, and refuse the idea that, holy shit, maybe people can make judgements about their own lives more accurately than I can sitting here. Not surprising.

Of course they can make judgements about their own lives. As I've said over and over again. Let 'em go if that's what they want. They are absolutely free to do so if that's what they want. I, on the other hand, am perfectly free to view them as idiots who are making a mountain out of a molehill.

[Perinquus]

Forty percent are so out to lunch they beleive the planet Earth is ten thousand years old or less.

Where's your source for this claim? I'm rather skeptical of it, honestly.

I queted a Gallup poll on the matter here, scroll down a bit and you should see it. 44 to 47 percent agree with "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so. "

Assuming this is accurate (and I'll freely admit this is a depressing number), it's still not necessarily that bad. How many of these people are people who go to church on Christmas and Easter, who've been out of school for decades, and don't read things that would keep them informed about issues like this, and were simply told that God created the earth and everything in it, and that's the extent of the thought they've put into the matter? They probably believe that with a sort of thoughtless casualness. They haven't learned much about evolution, and probably have little inclination to read up on it themselves. It is far from a foregone conclusion that these are all Bible thumping fundies who will shout that you are spreading "lies of satan" when you try to tell them about evolution. Some are, no doubt, but I rather suspect most of them are not.

[Perinquus]

Go back to whatever place gave you your education and request a refund. The slippery slope fallacy is based on the idea that once you take the first step down a path, you will be inexorably drawn down that path until you reach an inevitable and very bad end. In other words, the steps keep getting worse. Those with functional frontal lobes will realize I said precisely dick about things getting progressively worse. I merely pointed out that if he has done something, shows no signs of remorse, and it accomplishes his goals, it's quite possible he'll do it again.

And you portrayed that as a good reason to get out while the getting was good. What I pointed out is that previous presidents have committed far more egregious violations of this sort, yet it hasn't destroyed the republic. This still looks like mighty thin grounds on which to flee the country.

I'm sure you'd love to strawman my comments into a slippery slope, but they weren't, and anyone staying conscious will stay that. Now, if you want to make the subjective call 'Bush violating the checks and balances system is not enough to make me feel uncomfortable/afraid/unhappy here', that's your choice. Unfortunately, you're apparently too stupid to realize that that call is subjective, and your opinion means dick to the rest of us.

No! Really? The way you bitch and moan and then use words like "stupid", I'd never have guessed in a million years that I hadn't persuaded you.

[Darth Wong]

Overreacting according to what objective standard? Please, by all means, enlighten us on what constitutes an acceptable reason to emigrate. Are you saying that no one should ever emigrate for any reason other than crushing persecution?

Of course not! Leaving because you had a better job waiting for you would be a great reason. Leaving to marry someone in that country would be another reason. Leaving because you just visited the country before and fell in love with the place might be a god reason. Hell, I've toyed with the idea of moving to Ireland for that very reason. But what these people have made abundantly clear is that they hate George Bush, resent the fact that he got elected, and are now bleating about how terrible it is here in the States, and they want to emigrate to another country. I'm sorry, but things are going to have to get a lot worse here before that looks to me like anything but an overreaction by people who got their baloon popped during the election. When I said as much in an earlier post, you immediately sneered at me and opined that maybe they didn't want their kids raised in an atmosphere of intolerance. As I said: what intolerance? What there is isn't even remotely as awful as you are making it out to be. The recent defense of marriage acts notwithstanding.

That is intolerance, dumb-ass. Perhaps it is not enough intolerance for you to decide that it's time to leave, but for some people, maybe it is. I say again: upon what basis do you declare that their standard of intolerance is less valid than yours? What objective standard of intolerance do you believe to be in place here?

Once again, the point whooshed over your head. The fact that the law still existed in 2001 was not the issue; the fact that 40% of voters felt it should STAY IN PLACE in 2001 was the issue.

And 60% didn't. Democracy in action Mike. Fifty years ago, it probably would have been 90%. Maybe more. When things are getting better, you are going to have your work cut out for you convincing me that people need to get away.

Don't change the subject. You claimed that Alabama is not more racist than New York, based on a personal anecdote. I provided statistical evidence against your worthless assertion. The fact that maybe in another 50 years Alabama will progress as far as New York is irrelevant to the fact that it's a racist shithole now. If I were raising kids, it wouldn't do me any fucking good to say "well, it's really slowly moving in the right direction, so I guess I don't give a shit that my kids are being raised in a racist shithole right now". Who are you to say that people must be patient and wait another few fucking generations for the situation to improve?

[CJvR]

Ministry spokeswoman Maria Iadinardi confirmed the new record of 179,000 hits, of which 115,016 were from the U.S. On an average day the ministry's website receives 20,000 hits.

LOL!

The Republican master plan is working perfectly! Soon the Liberals will have gone into exile and nothing will stand in the way of GOD's empire on earth...

[Axis Kast]

Why move to Canada? It's not like the United States has a monopoly on rednecks, fundamentalists, or others particularly hated by SD.net. Move to the "wrong" area in Canada, and you'll run into everything you did before. Hell, it may even be worse, since under a parliamentary system, smaller interest groups get more representation (just look at the BQ).

[Darth Wong]

Why move to Canada? It's not like the United States has a monopoly on rednecks, fundamentalists, or others particularly hated by SD.net. Move to the "wrong" area in Canada, and you'll run into everything you did before. Hell, it may even be worse, since under a parliamentary system, smaller interest groups get more representation (just look at the BQ).

True, moving from San Francisco to Alberta would not be a step in the right direction. But if you're a gay person who wants to get married and you move to Ontario or Vancouver, it definitely would. Only a blithering idiot could seriously deny that for certain people, this election just slammed a door in their faces.

[Axis Kast]

True, moving from San Francisco to Alberta would not be a step in the right direction. But if you're a gay person who wants to get married and you move to Ontario or Vancouver, it definitely would. Only a blithering idiot could seriously deny that for certain people, this election just slammed a door in their faces.

And we're not denying that. What we are saying, however, is that in the United States, most of the things Bush advocated were part of long-term trends that not even Kerry would have been able to roll back. And that means that everyone (excepting homosexuals) who waited for the last election to make up their minds was doing so because it was "T3E 3VIL DUBYA!"

[Darth Wong]

True, moving from San Francisco to Alberta would not be a step in the right direction. But if you're a gay person who wants to get married and you move to Ontario or Vancouver, it definitely would. Only a blithering idiot could seriously deny that for certain people, this election just slammed a door in their faces.

And we're not denying that. What we are saying, however, is that in the United States, most of the things Bush advocated were part of long-term trends that not even Kerry would have been able to roll back. And that means that everyone (excepting homosexuals) who waited for the last election to make up their minds was doing so because it was "T3E 3VIL DUBYA!"

Still trying to change the subject, distort your opponent's argument, etc. eh? If they're serious about leaving (and I suspect that most are not), then they're leaving not because of Dubya, but because of what his election represents: the fact that America is still not ready for them, and they're tired of waiting.

[SirNitram]

Go back to whatever place gave you your education and request a refund. The slippery slope fallacy is based on the idea that once you take the first step down a path, you will be inexorably drawn down that path until you reach an inevitable and very bad end. In other words, the steps keep getting worse. Those with functional frontal lobes will realize I said precisely dick about things getting progressively worse. I merely pointed out that if he has done something, shows no signs of remorse, and it accomplishes his goals, it's quite possible he'll do it again.

And you portrayed that as a good reason to get out while the getting was good. What I pointed out is that previous presidents have committed far more egregious violations of this sort, yet it hasn't destroyed the republic. This still looks like mighty thin grounds on which to flee the country.

'B-b-b-b-but it's happened before, so ignore all context and just nod your head like a puppet!' I portrayed the blatant violation of the checks and balances to preserve a violation of the rights innumerated in the Constitution as a bad sign, retard. Whether it's a good enough reason to leave is a subjective call; unfortunately, you seem too stupid to realize what 'Subjective' is.

I'm sure you'd love to strawman my comments into a slippery slope, but they weren't, and anyone staying conscious will stay that. Now, if you want to make the subjective call 'Bush violating the checks and balances system is not enough to make me feel uncomfortable/afraid/unhappy here', that's your choice. Unfortunately, you're apparently too stupid to realize that that call is subjective, and your opinion means dick to the rest of us.

No! Really? The way you bitch and moan and then use words like "stupid", I'd never have guessed in a million years that I hadn't persuaded you.

Wow, the point sails up and over that pointed head of yours. Surprise is reading zero.

[Edi]

What right? To marriage? As I have pointed out elsewhere, this is nowhere defined as a right.

Wrong. The legal definition of marriage is a civil contract between two people that the state recognizes and which grants them certain benefits because the state has decided that it is advantageous to confer these benefits on people who do make that contract. The contract also prohibits those people from establishing that contract with others while the first one is valid. The freedoms to associate with whoever you please and make contracts with whoever you please are considered rather fundamental rights within your society.

I would also direct you to the 9th and 14th amendments to the US constitution which state that those rights enumerated in the constitution and its amendments are NOT the only and sole rights its citizens enjoy, and that no laws may be passed that infringe on the rights granted by the constitution. When you further consider the numerous clauses that add voting rights to women, ethnic minorities etc, it is clear that people are all supposed to be equal before the law irrespective of gender, religion or other such things, and denying the right to enter into a contract on the basis of the gender of one participant is therefore clearly not allowed. Your assertion about getting married not being a right is pure, unadulterated bullshit of the highest order.

Edi

[Lord Poe]

There were people threatening to move to Canada if Bush won in 2000; Alec Baldwin included. So what? LET them go. If Kerry won, would we be burning down churches, whiting out "God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, having mass gay marriage parties, free drugs, free health care, pulling them ig-nant rednecks out of their ramshackle lean-tos and make them do some "book-learnin'"?

For motherfuck's sake, people.

[Axis Kast]

Still trying to change the subject, distort your opponent's argument, etc. eh? If they're serious about leaving (and I suspect that most are not), then they're leaving not because of Dubya, but because of what his election represents: the fact that America is still not ready for them, and they're tired of waiting.

It's been abundantly clear for quite some time that even Kerry's social progressivism had no chance of rolling back conservative reforms - especially on the local level. The only conclusion is that the people leaving are doing so because of Dubya, independant of a competant analysis of the situation.

[salm]

Assuming this is accurate (and I'll freely admit this is a depressing number), it's still not necessarily that bad. How many of these people are people who go to church on Christmas and Easter, who've been out of school for decades, and don't read things that would keep them informed about issues like this, and were simply told that God created the earth and everything in it, and that's the extent of the thought they've put into the matter? They probably believe that with a sort of thoughtless casualness. They haven't learned much about evolution, and probably have little inclination to read up on it themselves. It is far from a foregone conclusion that these are all Bible thumping fundies who will shout that you are spreading "lies of satan" when you try to tell them about evolution. Some are, no doubt, but I rather suspect most of them are not.

for some reason european countries don´t have that many people who believe that evolution is bunk even though there are also many who don´t give the whole subject any thought. 13 percent in west germany, 8 percent in holland, that´s a huge difference to the usa. there are probably even LESS people here who give the subject further thought because we don´t have this whole evolution vs creation thing here.

source

[darthdavid]

It's been abundantly clear for quite some time that even Kerry's social progressivism had no chance of rolling back conservative reforms - especially on the local level. The only conclusion is that the people leaving are doing so because of Dubya, independant of a competant analysis of the situation.

Let's beat this into your thick fucking skull, Dubya being re-elected is indicitive of a larger problem. It shows that not only are there larger social trends going towards conservatism, but that the majority of americas don't give two fucks and actually want it that way. Besides, what makes you think alot of these people wouldn't still be leaving if Kerry won because of the move twoards anti-intellectualism and religiously motivated bigotry in this country?

[darthdavid]

*snippity*

If you don't know about shit then keep your fucking trap closed dingle berry.

[Axis Kast]

Let's beat this into your thick fucking skull, Dubya being re-elected is indicitive of a larger problem. It shows that not only are there larger social trends going towards conservatism, but that the majority of americas don't give two fucks and actually want it that way. Besides, what makes you think alot of these people wouldn't still be leaving if Kerry won because of the move twoards anti-intellectualism and religiously motivated bigotry in this country?

I don't think that. Nor did I ever suggest that I did. It would be stupid. A lot like moving away is for some people right now.

[Slartibartfast]

Yes, that's exactly what you're doing. Glad you finally noticed. We should have more discussions like this, Wong.

I know you are! But what am I?
I know you are! But what am I?