I'm tired of hearing these dishonest euphemisms

Because as a society we decided some time ago that referring to other humans as "illegal" is not only wrong, but damaging. People can't be illegal. It's not a thing. Your desire to refer to them as such makes it clear you view them as lesser than yourself and shows everyone reading this that.

It's also a simplistic and inaccurate title since most people who become undocumented workers or immigrants come into this country with legal visas. The vast majority enter legally and overstay. This sometimes results in deportation, but most often they reregister or leave on their own. This is also why the wall is a nonsensical idea. It's not going to stop the majority of the immigrants who come in legally and overstay their visa.

 

so... what is a criminal if not an illegal human?...

 

Someone who committed a crime, it's not illegal for them to exist. That line of thinking leads to some pretty clear problems. I've never heard of anyone calling criminals illegal humans anyway. This is not something that happens, only undocumented immigrants, and in my opinion it's clearly a "better than" situation.

 

Political correctness at its finest.

They are the definition of illegal immigrants. Thus, that's what they are called. My dog has four legs and barks a lot. His name is Nicky but he's still a dog. So if Alejandro jumps the fence and enters the us, he's Alejandro, but he's still an illegal immigrant.

 

Despite deportations and fewer Mexicans coming here, there is a significant net increase in illegal aliens entering the country over the past few years, because of the unaccompanied children and the Central Americans.

http://www.npr.org/2014/06/20/32365...lood-migrant-kids-overwhelm-u-s-border-agents

http://www.npr.org/2016/05/31/48007...esurgence-of-central-americans-seeking-asylum

 

I'm not sure what the hell you are talking about. Let me know when you can construct an argument or sentence that makes sense.

 

Yes, the idiocy of political correctness is confusing to many people.

If someone enters here illegally, they are an illegal alien. If they enter here legally, they are a legal migrant/resident/whatever.

 

Those people are refugees not undocumented workers or immigrants. Your willingness to call them the same thing is either willful and based out of some sort of belief/ideology or simply ignorant.

 

Well we have a court of law that determines whether or not someone committed a crime. You don't get to decide that. There is a famous quote you have probably heard, "Innocent until proven guilty".

Also, like I said before people are not illegal. Calling them that is offensive to them and to most people. That's why we don't use that term. In spite of you projecting what seems to be a desire to be offensive, most people try to get along and be respectful of others due to their ability to recognize that we are all just people. If you don't see that then this is a waste of time.

 

I don't care if they're Santa's elves. They're entering illegally. They're alien. That makes them illegal aliens.

 

No. You don't go to court for entering illegally. It's why if one is caught entering illegally, they are not required to go to court. lol. They are bagged and tagged, then sometimes turned around where they stand. Some may go to court depending on the situation (family ties in the US).

Sec 8 135

 

That's not even an argument. Sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "I'm not listening, blah blah blah" is a bit immature don't you think.

 

The problem is silver pony-tailed professors from ivory towers create these superficial standards for terminology we're supposed to use to be more sensitive. Their motive is not to be more sensitive, it's to desensitize and sanitize the language so that people will agree with their philosophy, not their vernacular. It's a sham.

 

That may be true, but we are talking about the majority of undocumented immigrants who entered the country legally and who are not caught crossing the border aren't we?

 

You refuse to even acknowledge and objectively factual difference between an immigrant and an illegal immigrant. Regardless of thier previous or future status, one is legal, the other is illegal. There us significant difference between the two.

You live in a fantasy world. You are emoting, and very illogical lol.

 

And then there is the right wing version of PC which most right wingers claim never existed:

http://reason.com/archives/2006/05/08/right-wing-pc

"We even have conservative tokens. Consider Ben Domenech, co-founder of RedState.com, who served briefly as the house Republican in The Washington Post's lineup of blogs. Domenech fit the classic stereotype of an affirmative-action hire, picked not for his talent—he turned out to be a serial plagiarist—but because the professional Red Staters had mau maued the Post into enlisting him. He played his role to the hilt, telling his employers they just don't get his culture ("For the MSM, Dan Rather is just another TV anchor, France is just another country and Red Dawn is just another cheesy throwaway Sunday afternoon movie") and playing the victim card after his transgressions were exposed ("no conservative could write for the Post without being subject to the gauntlet of the liberal attack machine"). If Domenech ever writes a memoir of the experience, he can borrow his title from Jayson Blair's barely repentant book: Burning Down My Master's House. More thoughtful conservatives rolled their eyes, embarrassed that this man was supposed to represent them.

Orthodoxy and outrage. The prototypical P.C. leftist will pat himself on the back for being "subversive" while reciting opinions carefully calculated not to upset his career track. The prototypical P.C. conservative will pat herself on the back for being "politically incorrect" while reciting opinions that are just as safe and predictable. When Fox blowhard Bill O'Reilly declares that "it is politically incorrect to mention that immigration laws must be enforced and the borders effectively monitored," he obviously isn't describing what's risky to say on the channel that employs him, where calls to enforce our immigration laws are about as rare as ads for Hannity & Colmes.

Virtually every political tribe has an orthodoxy. To be P.C., you have to search actively for deviations from it, no matter how dubious, petty, or obscure. The ritual of outrage and punishment is more important than the offense itself; indeed, it's OK to change the rules, or invent new rules on the spot, if that keeps the faithful in a state of high dudgeon. One of the most infamous campus conflicts of the early '90s involved Eden Jacobowitz, a student at the University of Pennsylvania who was accused of harassment after he called some noisy sorority sisters "water buffalo." The women in question were black, so the college argued that "water buffalo" was a racial slur, assigning connotations to the phrase that it had never held before and would never hold again."

 

Don't you understand the idea behind removing the word illegal is strictly and strategically to change the way people think about migrants, thereby loosening the restrictions to their migration, and loosening the Treasury for them once they're here? That doesn't make sense to you?

 

If you enter here legally, then your visa, green card, whatever else- expires, then you are now an illegal alien. That couldn't be more simple to grasp.

 

You can say whatever you want. It's a free country and the 1st amendment guarantees that. I am just trying to explain to you why people choose not to use the term "Illegal Alien". It's simplistic, incorrect, and offensive. If you don't accept that fine that's a choice you can make. It's not some mass conspiracy to coverup the DNC importing millions of immigrants and then making them citizens.

 

If you fail to register your car, it doesn't make your car illegal, it makes it unregistered. Driving that car on public roads is a crime and comes with a fine. The same is true for someone with a visa, they aren't illegal and calling them illegal doesn't make any sense.

 

maybe that is why they are not typically called illegal humans, but illegal immigrants, because the illegal part refers to their migration, not them being humans. kind of how you would maybe say illegal taxi-driver. to say this somehow means their existance is illegal... that is just stupid. Should we apply the same logic to 'undocumented'? how dare you suggest that their existance is undocumented?? see how silly it becomes

 

You disagree there's an ulterior motive for changing the term, even though you individually have the best intentions?

 

Actually, illegal immigrant was the first euphemism--they used to be called illegal aliens.

 

Except that we have had and still have governments declare that specific types of people are illegal.

Look, call people what ever you want, but if you want to understand why people use the terminology I am trying to explain it as best I can. It's more meaningful and less offensive to call someone undocumented than to claim they are illegal.

Here is a link to someone who can probably explain it better than me: http://www.nohumanbeingisillegal.com/Home.html

If you choose not to accept that logic then so be it, that's your opinion. It still makes rational sense and is not part of some mass conspiracy as some others in this topic have implied.

 

You know, for a group of people who are out to desensitize and sanitize language for some sham, I see them doing way less then the members on this forum to control language.

Many people railing against terms admit that the words the "Ivory Tower People" are saying mean the exact same thing as their preferred vernacular, but only one group seems to be skulking around the forums trying to convince people of a Vague Left-Wing Conspiracy!

I know when someone says "Illegal alien" they could have said "undocumented immigrant" and vice versa. Tomato tamato.

Next.