Re: WRONG
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can see why my view might appear controversial to some but it is clear that I am not advocating violence against these persons.
[/ QUOTE ]
Because you would have these peoples freedom of speech taken away, under threat of deportation? Your reasoning for this is that they may have had a different nationality at one time, how do you reconcile this with the fact you claim your suggested actions are not borne (sp) out of racist views?
[/ QUOTE ]
Because I would hold the same view completely irrespective of their race or religion: they could be Eskimo, Chinese, Polish, Ethiopian, Moroccan, atheist, Muslim, Christian, green, blue, brown, yellow or whatever.
If they came here and swore oaths of citizenship and allegiance to the United States in order to be granted citizenship, and then they turn around and advocate destructive violence or insurrection against us, in my opinion they have violated the oath and pledge they initially took. They wouldn't have been grtanted citizenship had they made their views known at the time they applied.
The United States has a fairly open immigration policy but it is not intended to be subverted for the purposes of admitting radical insurrectionists or those intent on destroying the country. They are granted naturalized citizenship based in part of certain presumptions (to which they swear) and if they egregiously violate that deal I think the United States should have the option to revoke her end of the bargain too.
|