Political correctness, words we can't use

[LAPhil]

Originally Posted by Twoller

I agree 100%. In no way does the term "wetback" denote any kind of racial stereotyping. It refers precisely to an illegal activity and all of its implications. The children of wetbacks are not wetbacks, they are "anchor babies", another entirely appropriate pejorative.

The victims here are not the people who fit the terms, but the people who use the words to show their entirely justified contempt.

I hate to bring this argument up with you again, Twoller, but although we agree on the first point, the children of illegals are not responsible for their actions and don't deserve to be labelled with a pejorative term. However I don't really think "anchor babies" is all that bad.

[Ayatollahgondola]

Originally Posted by LAPhil

I hate to bring this argument up with you again, Twoller, but although we agree on the first point, the children of illegals are not responsible for their actions and don't deserve to be labelled with a pejorative term. However I don't really think "anchor babies" is all that bad.

In my opinion Phil, it would depend upon the politics of the individual. children of illegals that subscribe to the open borders/Aztlan crowd beliefs or openly declare allegiances to other countries might very well deserve a label. On the other hand, there could be a few examples where they reject that philosophy entirely, and want to be, or exhibit an America first attitude. But we hardly hear from, or see the latter, do we? Is that because there are none, or another example of our agenda driven mainstream media?

[LAPhil]

Originally Posted by Ayatollahgondola

In my opinion Phil, it would depend upon the politics of the individual. children of illegals that subscribe to the open borders/Aztlan crowd beliefs or openly declare allegiances to other countries might very well deserve a label. On the other hand, there could be a few examples where they reject that philosophy entirely, and want to be, or exhibit an America first attitude. But we hardly hear from, or see the latter, do we? Is that because there are none, or another example of our agenda driven mainstream media?

So what would be an appropriate nickname for those who don't want to be Americans first? Maybe there is one but I can't just think of what it would be.

[Twoller]

Originally Posted by Ayatollahgondola

... On the other hand, there could be a few examples where they ... want to be, or exhibit an America first attitude. ...

If anchor babies want to exhibit an America first attitude, then should we accept their birthright citizenship? I don't think so. Anchor babies know who they are and many of them are grown up already and have falsely assumed the role of US citizens. So what if they exhibit an "America first" attitude? It contradicts the corrupted institution that they have assumed membership in.

If anchor babies want to honestly embrace US citizenship and confront the corrupted system that has made them US citizens -- as any US citizen should -- then they should reject their US citizenship and reintroduce themselves as struggling to become naturalized. They should attempt to become US citizens as if they were foreign nationals.

[Ayatollahgondola]

Originally Posted by Twoller

If anchor babies want to exhibit an America first attitude, then should we accept their birthright citizenship? I don't think so. .

We were talking about the labels we give them, not the actual legalization of them

[ilbegone]

The term "anchor baby" is an overused and over broad in its usual application.

My Elena is firstborn in America from Mexican born parents, there would be people over eager to incorrectly apply the term "anchor baby" to her.

However, it is her son who is the Aztlanista in the family, and he was educated into it at school. He didn't learn to be a racist from any of his older relatives.

You have to place credit where credit is due.

[Twoller]

If you are not a US citizen, then your children born in the US are not US citizens. This is by law, of course, not practice. This is what we should be struggling against. If you are not a citizen and your children born in the US claim US citizenship, then they are "anchor babies".

[ilbegone]

We have to disagree.

An "anchor baby" is a child who's purpose is to legitimize illegality.

You might be making judgments within a vacuum of information concerning other people who were not of that "persuasion" and erroneously calling into question their Americanism.

It's not a "brown and white" slate, there are shades of gray everywhere.

By the way, refer to me which law and the background discussion of that law of which you speak which denies citizenship to American born children of non citizens.

Verifiable information only. US code, Congressional record, anything else which may legitimately apply. No "everyone has one" opinion.