| Welcome to Virtual America. We hope you enjoy your visit. If you're looking to join and sign up for the first time, register here! You'll want to familiarize yourself with the rules of Virtual America which you can find here. And you'll want to read up on how to sign in and create your character here. After all than you can sign in and get to playing! We're all friends here and we're certain you'll enjoy it here at Virtual America! |
| HR 63 Responsible Immigration and Secure Enforcement Act | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: 13 Jun 2013, 04:08 PM (345 Views) | |
| Heather Holson | 13 Jun 2013, 04:08 PM Post #1 |
![]()
|
48 hours for debate
Edited by Heather Holson, 13 Jun 2013, 06:49 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Replies: | |
|---|---|
| Landry | 14 Jun 2013, 08:06 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Winter is Coming to the Red States
|
Madam Speaker, Just because there is no legal official language--and arguably, the Constitution would bar that anyways--does not mean there is not a lingua franca, a language of business, governance, and commerce. Requiring them to learn the language of this country, English, is not asking them to do anything more than we already ask citizens of this country to do: be able to engage in the language of the majority and be able to function in our society. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| Heather Holson | 14 Jun 2013, 08:16 PM Post #22 |
![]()
|
Objection noted. Debate continues. |
![]() |
|
| Daniel Hernandez | 14 Jun 2013, 08:21 PM Post #23 |
![]()
Wielder of the Gavel
|
Rick Thomas Madame Speaker, I request permission to revise and extend my remarks. At some point, we have to recognize that the first act that someone who crosses over our border illegally did was to violate the law. Frankly, the idea that we should just look the other way while the law is being violated is ludicrous. Now, I break with some members of my party who see the most appropriate response as to remove these men and women from our country. Not only is that inhumane, it is highly unrealistic to the point of being ridiculous. However, there must be some recognition of that, and I believe this bill does that. Further, I would like to echo the comments of the gentlelady from Georgia. We are asking no more of those who come to our country than to be able to engage in the language of commerce. This is a requirement every nation has, so the idea that we should not have such a requirement here in ludicrous, to say the least. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| Ambrose Griffith | 14 Jun 2013, 08:22 PM Post #24 |
![]()
|
If there is a requirement to learn English among those who come to this country put in place by the government, will the government take on the responsibility of teaching English, Mr. Speaker? I yield. |
![]() |
|
| AK3 | 14 Jun 2013, 08:22 PM Post #25 |
![]()
|
Mr. Speaker, To point out a specific, we're requiring them to do something we ask our citizens to do. While, yes, it would be more beneficial for them to learn the language of our society, they shouldn't be required to, and especially to have that as a granting factor for citizenship. They go through enough just to get here as they already do. And they actively try to learn English. They want to learn the language of our ways, and they go do free classes and have people who can speak both languages work with them so that they can. They're here to have a better life, not work against us. I oppose this bill because it places too many burdens on immigrants and makes their lives harder. I yield |
![]() |
|
| Patrick Callaghan | 14 Jun 2013, 09:35 PM Post #26 |
|
New England Republican >:D
|
Madame Speaker, Unless the lady from Vermont would like to see this entire compromise unravel for the sake of an incredibly minor requirement then I would request she with draw her concerns. That is the part of this requirement she is concerned about? We have a government that requires we but health insurance yet requiring those here illegally to learn English as a condition of citizenship is concerning. Really? I ask the lady how that makes sense. I yield |
![]() |
|
| Vissering | 14 Jun 2013, 11:42 PM Post #27 |
|
I'm radioactive.
|
Madame Speaker, I request permission to revise and extend my remarks. Let me add that the Gentlewoman's thought that immigrants shouldn't be required to learn English is absurd. English is the de facto language of this great country. If they want to be citizens they must learn it. They came here, we did not go to their country. We should be required to learn their language to communicate with them. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| Ambrose Griffith | 14 Jun 2013, 11:47 PM Post #28 |
![]()
|
Mr. Speaker, If America is, indeed, the land of freedom then aren't immigrants to be free to speak whichever language they so please? I'm proud to be from the Portland area where we have a significant Asian-American population, many of whom continue to use their native languages at home, at work and everywhere else. If the proponents of this measure don't believe me, I'd be happy to invite them to Portland to take a tour of Chinatown. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| Vissering | 14 Jun 2013, 11:52 PM Post #29 |
|
I'm radioactive.
|
MADAME Speaker, Sure they're free to speak what language they wish. But how in the world can they communicate with those who speak English and not Spanish, Chinese, etc., if they don't learn the language the vast majority of Americans speak? Require those born and raised here to learn a billion languages? No I don't think so. I yield the floor. |
![]() |
|
| Landry | 14 Jun 2013, 11:54 PM Post #30 |
![]()
Winter is Coming to the Red States
|
Madam Speaker, And individuals are free to keep using their native language wherever they choose. But requiring individuals to at least comprehend the language of the United States is, by far, not an onerous requirement. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| Brenninger | 14 Jun 2013, 11:56 PM Post #31 |
![]()
#Swaggy
|
Madame Speaker, I fully agree with the sentiment put forth by the majority of this body, it is not that big of a deal to require them to learn English. While English is by no means the de jure language of The United States it is the de facto one. It is certainly not a big requirement for one to learn English -- especially someone who broke the law getting here. I yield |
![]() |
|
| Landry | 15 Jun 2013, 12:00 AM Post #32 |
![]()
Winter is Coming to the Red States
|
Madam Speaker, I move to the previous question, and I yield. |
![]() |
|
| Ambrose Griffith | 15 Jun 2013, 12:03 AM Post #33 |
![]()
|
I move to strike Sec. 4, Subsec C, Mr. Speaker, and yield. |
![]() |
|
| Vissering | 15 Jun 2013, 12:04 AM Post #34 |
|
I'm radioactive.
|
Madame Speaker, I second the motion to call and yield. |
![]() |
|
| Ambrose Griffith | 15 Jun 2013, 12:06 AM Post #35 |
![]()
|
Mr. Speaker, English is, objectively, one of the most challenging languages in the world to learn if it is not your primary language. That is a statement which is verified by so many studies and by common sense: unlike most langauges in the world, English has no central authority, there are no established and set rules which are overseen and governed by a body designed to do so. For an example: wail, whale, and wale. Three words that all sound exactly the same, are spelled completely differently and mean totally different things. Through and trough: two words with very similar spellings but completely different phonetics. To withhold citizenship from otherwise law-abiding, good people who are seeking a future for their families much like each and every one of our families once did would be highly unfair. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| Brenninger | 15 Jun 2013, 12:09 AM Post #36 |
![]()
#Swaggy
|
Madame Speaker, I support the call to move the previous question. I yield |
![]() |
|
| Ambrose Griffith | 15 Jun 2013, 12:11 AM Post #37 |
![]()
|
In other words, Mr. Speaker, a number of my colleagues support the call to ignore opposition and attempts to amend the legislation because they have the force of numbers behind them. When the founding fathers imagined how this body would operate, I wonder if this is what they had in mind. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| AK3 | 15 Jun 2013, 12:14 AM Post #38 |
![]()
|
Madam Speaker, I second the amendment from my colleague from Oregon. I yield |
![]() |
|
| Patrick Callaghan | 15 Jun 2013, 12:20 AM Post #39 |
|
New England Republican >:D
|
Madame Speaker, When the amendments could in an essence threaten the legislation and are based in extremely untrue assumptions I see no issue with the calls. Disrupting debate for minor and ump petani purposes is not appropriate. This bill simply requires an understanding of English to help those here illegally to better assimilate to our country. It does not ban other languages and more than my grandparents stopped speaking Gaelic when they learned English. I yield |
![]() |
|
| Ambrose Griffith | 15 Jun 2013, 12:30 AM Post #40 |
![]()
|
And the death of the Irish language outside of Gaeltachts is a sad issue that is affecting several languages. Linguistic diversity is something to be praised, not squashed down by forcing the majority language on the minority. Surely, the honourable gentleman's grandparents would agree with that when they saw the state of Gaeilige today. I yield. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · House Debate Archives · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:13 PM Jul 11
|
Theme by Sith of the ZBTZ











4:13 PM Jul 11