General Convention moving...

[Animate]

Alpha Board is moving the General Convention from Phoenix to Las Vegas. More info coming.


I guess Skip is serious about this Arizona boycott.

[Little32]

Where is the like button?

It's the right thing to do.

[mccoyred]

Definitely! It worked before, so lets pray that it works again.

[ladygreek]

While I applaud the intent behind Alpha Phi Alpha's decision, I have to say I also applaud the intent behind Arizona's law. I am glad they are making reforms to it to clarify it. *minority opinion*

[mccoyred]

Originally Posted by ladygreek

While I applaud the intent behind Alpha Phi Alpha's decision, I have to say I also applaud the intent behind Arizona's law. I am glad they are making reforms to it to clarify it. *minority opinion*

While I don't think anyone agrees with illegal immigration, this law is wrong on so many levels. My understanding of the most recent 'clarification' is that the police can only question immigration status through lawful contact, ie suspected criminal or civil infraction. I thought that was the status quo, but maybe I am wrong. If so, then what was the intent of the law but to muddy the waters and stick the taxpayers of Arizona with the expense of a federal function....?

ETA: Well thought out argument here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randal..._b_559663.html

[ladygreek]

Originally Posted by mccoyred

While I don't think anyone agrees with illegal immigration, this law is wrong on so many levels. My understanding of the most recent 'clarification' is that the police can only question immigration status through lawful contact, ie suspected criminal or civil infraction. I thought that was the status quo, but maybe I am wrong. If so, then what was the intent of the law but to muddy the waters and stick the taxpayers of Arizona with the expense of a federal function....?

ETA: Well thought out argument here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randal..._b_559663.html

Yes it is a well thought our argument and one sided. To be fair I would like to read one from the other side. Seriously, as I have gotten older I have become less likely to jump on a bandwagon especially when I am not directly impacted.

I do not know much about Arizona, and as neither a Dem, nor a Repub I really don't want to make a judgement based on politically, partisan arguments.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by ladygreek

I do not know much about Arizona, and as neither a Dem, nor a Repub I really don't want to make a judgement based on politically, partisan arguments.

I am also neither a Dem nor a Repub and know that all of the naysayers are not making political, partisian arguments.

For instance, discrimination based on outcome and racial profiiling are consequences that I deducted before even reading opinion articles and without even caring about which crazy side of the aisle proposed this new law. My conclusion was based on history and trends and patterns regarding what similar laws and practices have resulted in. That has nothing to do with politics and partisanism, which are both bullcrap as far as I'm concerned. Anyone who can get their head out of the asses of politics can see how a law that makes sense in theory (because, as Soror said, despite the supposed benefits of immigration, most people don't agree with illegal immigration or even an ill-prepared influx of legal immigrants) can be the dumbest thing ever in practice.

ETA: If AZ was just trying to bring attention to the issue and the gov't to act, OKAY. There's a reason why they're making changes to this law. Another example of how intent and outcome are usually completely different.

[mccoyred]

Originally Posted by ladygreek

Yes it is a well thought our argument and one sided. To be fair I would like to read one from the other side. Seriously, as I have gotten older I have become less likely to jump on a bandwagon especially when I am not directly impacted.

I do not know much about Arizona, and as neither a Dem, nor a Repub I really don't want to make a judgement based on politically, partisan arguments.

Point taken. I am neither a Repub or a Dem myself. IF I find a well thought out argument from the other side, I will post it. In fact, ANYONE who finds one from the other side, please post! I really would like to see an intellectually defensible argument of support for this law.

[Professor]

I agree that something must be done to address illegal immigration but I'm not sure this law is the solution. It was not long ago when freed AA slaves had to carry a pass card. I see this law as an opportunity to profile.

Originally Posted by ladygreek

While I applaud the intent behind Alpha Phi Alpha's decision, I have to say I also applaud the intent behind Arizona's law. I am glad they are making reforms to it to clarify it. *minority opinion*

[ladygreek]

Originally Posted by Professor

I agree that something must be done to address illegal immigration but I'm not sure this law is the solution. It was not long ago when freed AA slaves had to carry a pass card. I see this law as an opportunity to profile.

It was VERY long ago that freed slaves had to carry pass cards. That is a poor and exaggerated analogy. I don't see it as profiling when someone is stopped for a violation and then can't produce a driver's license or any other proper identification.

[mccoyred]

Originally Posted by ladygreek

It was VERY long ago that freed slaves had to carry pass cards. That is a poor and exaggerated analogy. I don't see it as profiling when someone is stopped for a violation and then can't produce a driver's license or any other proper identification.

Soror LG, I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I find this analogy very apropos.

In both cases, the suspicion is not based on what someone has done, but what they look like they might be ( a slave as opposed to a FPOC or an illegal immigrant as opposed to a citizen). In the case of the recent law, they are issuing 'clarifications' so that if someone is stopped for a possible violation THEN they can be questioned. Frankly, that is what the current federal law is so why was the state law required! Where Arizona went off track is that there was originally no restriction in this law that the stop must be for a suspected violation.

Correct me if I am wrong but how do you stop someone who might look like they are an illegal immigrant? Even the law's proponents don't even know what an illegal immigrant looks like. In Arizona, they are presumed to look Mexican.

Illegal immigrants come from all countries around the globe. Natural born citizens are from all ethnic backgrounds. You have people like Ken Salazar, current SecInt, who is of Mexican descent but whose family has been in this country since before many Western states were states!

This law sets a dangerous precedent. I pray the current boycott works as well as the boycott over the MLK Holiday worked...only more quickly.