This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Importing a slave class

Importing a slave class - Comments

MIND_REBEL's Avatar Comment 1 by MIND_REBEL

She has a point. I'm Mexican-American, and many Mexicans are forced to work in slave like conditions for little or no pay with beyond shady bosses. It's like the old days before the labor movement. Big money doesn't like dealing with things like "rights" with it's employees.

Fri, 25 May 2007 04:42:00 UTC | #41819

Mat's Avatar Comment 2 by Mat

Just don't know where to begin with this stuff, I really don't...

Fri, 25 May 2007 04:45:00 UTC | #41823

JohnF's Avatar Comment 3 by JohnF

What is the relevance of this article to atheism/religion?

Fri, 25 May 2007 05:05:00 UTC | #41836

waxwings's Avatar Comment 4 by waxwings

No one here is forcing Mexicans to cross the border illegally and take jobs, which, however poor paying, are better than they can get in Mexico. They're crossing all by themselves.

This is not to say I support anyone's right to exploit human beings because they're not legal citizens, mind you. The point is that the situation, as usual, is a bit more complicated than Ann Coulter's brutish, idiotic comparison of poor people who want to improve their lot in life by moving, to murderers and rapists.

Odd how horseface seems to think that only Democrats employ illegal immigrants as a source of cheap labor, btw.

Fri, 25 May 2007 05:07:00 UTC | #41839

USA_Limey's Avatar Comment 5 by USA_Limey

Comment #44638 by JohnF wrote:

"What is the relevance of this article to atheism/religion?"

... Probably got posted because it's Coulter, who wrote in one of her books she would laugh at the idea of Richard Dawkins burning in hell.

And lots of stuff make it on this site that are not necessarily about religion or atheism. I like that the site has a broader focus myself.

__________________________________________________
Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!

~ Logan

Fri, 25 May 2007 05:52:00 UTC | #41863

logical's Avatar Comment 6 by logical

Well, girlie,

We can't catch all rapists, so why not grant amnesty to rapists? Surely no one wants thousands of rapists living in the shadows!


your beloved churches just do that: they hide a big number, some of them in the Vatican. (a place that should be Italy, and is considered a state of its own declining to work together with other countries┬┤ law enforcement)
And inside your holy families - the life form YOU try to compel everyone to live in - begin guessing at 30% of families where domestic violence occurs! And they
will take jobs other Americans won't.

Unnecessary. Your friends, the Religious Right, have enforced the existence of more than enough Englishspeaking uneducated slaves who must work for so little money, because of welfare cuts (ever heard the word "workfare"?) and "school vouchers" will make sure that they cannot escape poverty.
Of course you are not willing even to admit to the overpopulation problem your not-to-be-criticized religions and their lobbies created!

Fri, 25 May 2007 05:58:00 UTC | #41869

CJ22's Avatar Comment 7 by CJ22

"We fought a civil war to force Democrats to give up on slavery 150 years ago."

wtf??

Fri, 25 May 2007 06:34:00 UTC | #41896

briancoughlanworldcitizen's Avatar Comment 8 by briancoughlanworldcitizen

7. Comment #44698 by CJ22 on May 25, 2007 at 7:34 am

"We fought a civil war to force Democrats to give up on slavery 150 years ago."

wtf??


Actually ... technically correct. Lincoln was a republican, and Jefferson Davis was a Democrat.

That said, a lot has changed in the intervening 150 years and it's classic coulter. Technically true, but bullshit in principle. What a disingenous opportunist that woman is.

*shudder*

Fri, 25 May 2007 07:30:00 UTC | #41927

Robert's Avatar Comment 9 by Robert

What she fails to mention is that the Republicans were originally the party of the left and the Democrats the party of the right. Conservatives who support wage slavery today by opposing unions and welfare are the descendents of those who defended chattel slavery a hundred and fifty years back. Then as now vulnerable Americans are seen as either white trash or lazy blacks.

After LBJ's party renounced racism and passed the Civil Rights Act the race bigots saw the light and became good Republicans.

Fri, 25 May 2007 08:43:00 UTC | #41989

mintcheerios's Avatar Comment 10 by mintcheerios

Robert nailed it on the head. The disengenuity of saying the "Democrats" held onto slavery is astounding. She knows many people don't know that the democrats of the time were right-wingers, and she is exploiting this to the max by banking on the ignorance of her readers.

Fri, 25 May 2007 10:54:00 UTC | #42039

DavidJGrossman's Avatar Comment 11 by DavidJGrossman

Aren't her 15 minutes up yet?!?!

Fri, 25 May 2007 10:57:00 UTC | #42043

Harlon57's Avatar Comment 12 by Harlon57

Robert.

That is completely revisionist history. The Republicans were the conservative party even back in the time of Lincoln.

Even the Democrat leaders of today don't try to argue that point. They just say that the tides have turned and that they are now the supporters of the downtrodden.

Fri, 25 May 2007 13:55:00 UTC | #42104

Dreamer's Dilemma's Avatar Comment 13 by Dreamer's Dilemma

I love Ann Coulter. She has bigger cojones (felt compelled to throw a little Spanglish in there since it was a border crossing article) than 90% of the Al Gore butt-kissing crowd that frequents this site. That said, what does it have to do with atheism? That is perhaps one of the few points with which I would choose to disagree with Ann. She is rabidly Christian and an unapologetic defender of the likes of the recently deceased Mr. Falwell. Oh well, nobody is perfect.

Fri, 25 May 2007 18:24:00 UTC | #42197

BT Murtagh's Avatar Comment 14 by BT Murtagh

'The people who make arguments about "jobs Americans won't do" are never in a line of work where unskilled immigrants can compete with them. Liberals love to strike generous, humanitarian poses with other people's lives.'

From what I've seen it's mostly 'conservatives' who make this argument, and who hire the illegal immigrants - excuse me, 'undocumented workers' - at slave wages. 'Liberals' tend to argue for a livable minimum wage (which would make those jobs into ones Americans would want) and for harsher penalties on those who exploit the green-cardless.

It's kind of the flip side of supply side / demand side economics.

Sat, 26 May 2007 04:08:00 UTC | #42252

Mikado's Avatar Comment 15 by Mikado

Immigrants is the greatest gift any country can have. The argument that immigrants steal jobs has no economic foundation, they have all the basic needs and generate additional demands and more jobs for the rest on the population. The anti immigrant arguments Ann Coulter is promoting is usually coming from the other side. In Norway it was the Labour party that made immigration illegal in 1976 (or close) after being pressured by the unions. (We do allow quotas of refugees and the EU rules) Have Ann become a socialist?

Sat, 26 May 2007 08:56:00 UTC | #42264

Fishpeddler's Avatar Comment 16 by Fishpeddler

Comment #45011 by Dreamer's Dilemma
"I love Ann Coulter."

Wow.

I really can't think of anything more to say. Just 'wow'. I think I may be having one of those 'spiritual' moments that some atheists talk about, when they stand in awe of the marvels of the universe.

Sat, 26 May 2007 15:41:00 UTC | #42343

OkiMike's Avatar Comment 17 by OkiMike

As an atheist, I can't believe that I'm about to agree with Ann Coulter, but I actually can't believe my ears when I hear people stand up and defend ILLEGAL immigration. Hello?!?

We're not talking about legal immigration, we're talking about it's opposite: people who come here by breaking the rules we have established for them to properly enter.

They need to have their hands lopped off or something. I'm all for America being land of the free and home of the brave; It's a part of our history. But we must have certain controls. And when those few, controls are breached by people without the decency to follow a few simple rules that would keep them on the legal side of things, I must withhold my blessings.

Did I really just agree with Ann Coulter? Ugh...*shudder*

Mon, 28 May 2007 21:35:00 UTC | #42835

sanjiv's Avatar Comment 18 by sanjiv

Aren't all those who call themselves American illegal immigrants too? Ask the Native Americans! Just wondering....

Tue, 29 May 2007 00:37:00 UTC | #42852

pewkatchoo's Avatar Comment 19 by pewkatchoo

Mikado, Coulter is talking about 'illegal' immigration. Strictly controlled immigration and asylum are good things. Unfettered immigration just leads to social breakdown and undue pressures on the indigenous population. Sorry but there is a lot of evidence to show that is the case.

Tue, 29 May 2007 01:03:00 UTC | #42857

1chistery's Avatar Comment 20 by 1chistery

she is really something else. her tedious agenda seems to be preserving the tired notion that there are only two diametrically opposed world views. cute how she limits their contributions to golf courses and manicured hedges of rich liberals, while the foundation of california's economy is agriculture, not hollywood. deportation sweeps recently led to untold crop acreage spoiling in CO, while convicts harvested the rest. also many changing crop types grown as some too labor-intensive to harvest. must be liberals in CA central valley employing those life-wrecking buggers. and most americans do seem to be committed to low food costs. just watch daily news.
love comments about when illegal immigration really began, and how some people cry like stuck pigs whenever there is discussion of minimum wages that bear some relation to the actual cost of living.

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 06:22:00 UTC | #230676

Roger Stanyard's Avatar Comment 21 by Roger Stanyard

"Unfettered immigration just leads to social breakdown and undue pressures on the indigenous population."

News to me. In the European Union we have unfettered immigration between nearly all member states. Nobody has noticed that any of them have experienced social breakdown as a result. Nor do I see the slightest evidence of "undue" pressures on the indigenous population(s). The internal migration has contributed immensely to economic wealth and welfare.

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 06:37:00 UTC | #230677

Laurie Fraser's Avatar Comment 22 by Laurie Fraser

Ann Coulter is, if I may use an irateism, the thinking person's complete fucktard.

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 06:41:00 UTC | #230678

ThoughtsonCommonToad's Avatar Comment 23 by ThoughtsonCommonToad

Nor do I see the slightest evidence of "undue" pressures on the indigenous population(s). The internal migration has contributed immensely to economic wealth and welfare.

There are definite pressures on manual labour, with immigration stifling wages. Millions of people suffer from this fact.
The uneducated are usually xenophobic. The uneducated make up the majority of manual labourers. The greatest pressure from immigration is on the manual work force. A vicious circle that leads to the high tensions, evidenced by the most poor areas displaying these tensions, burnley, bradford, stoke the list goes on, look at the success of the BNP in an area and look at the biggest industries in the area and see the correlation. To say immigration does not cause problems is so, for lack of a better term, middle-class.

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 07:27:00 UTC | #230688

ThoughtsonCommonToad's Avatar Comment 24 by ThoughtsonCommonToad

test

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:16:00 UTC | #230754

Roger Stanyard's Avatar Comment 25 by Roger Stanyard

"There are definite pressures on manual labour, with immigration stifling wages. Millions of people suffer from this fact.
The uneducated are usually xenophobic. The uneducated make up the majority of manual labourers. The greatest pressure from immigration is on the manual work force. A vicious circle that leads to the high tensions, evidenced by the most poor areas displaying these tensions, burnley, bradford, stoke the list goes on, look at the success of the BNP in an area and look at the biggest industries in the area and see the correlation. To say immigration does not cause problems is so, for lack of a better term, middle-class."

Nothing to do with Middle Class attitudes. What you are presenting is just serious incompetenet economics. You view is called the fixed pool of labour fallacy.

Fallacy it is, big time. It is tired and stupid.

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:41:00 UTC | #230757

ThoughtsonCommonToad's Avatar Comment 26 by ThoughtsonCommonToad

I think you'll find its more commonly called Lump of Labour fallacy.

Even if I accept your point, which I don't, the influx of workers is affecting peoples lifes, by forcing changes of careers etc, when it would otherwise not be the case.

Now I happen to have nothing against migration, we live in a cosmopolitan world, I just wanted to point out that your assertion that there are no pressures was flat incorrect. Your criticism supports my view. Immigration is forcing change, keeping wages down.

Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:33:00 UTC | #230765

evolvedape's Avatar Comment 27 by evolvedape

"We fought a civil war to force Democrats to give up on slavery 150 years ago....".

The joke here is that the Bible sanctions slavery:

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)".

So those Americans who imported slaves were obeying the word of God! This is a prime example of the Religious Right showing their ignorance of the scriptures.

Sun, 29 Mar 2009 23:34:00 UTC | #341331

AllanW's Avatar Comment 28 by AllanW

It just struck me that Coulter must be the model that our own, dear Robertson wishes to emulate. The same style of wilfull mendacity, warped and cynical 'lying for Jeebus' and chin-jutting arrogance in the face of overwhelming censure.

She knows exactly how far she is mangling truth and reality in the service of;

1) Her own career in the public eye as the rent-a-quote hate-monger who's acceptable on the tv when Fred Phelps isn't

2) Her warped and vile religious delusion.

She isn't ignorant and that is why her output is so much more disgusting than illiterate or stupid fundamentalists; she knows what the truth is and deliberately chooses to distort and lie.

Obnoxious.

Mon, 30 Mar 2009 00:06:00 UTC | #341338

hawt4dawk's Avatar Comment 29 by hawt4dawk

28. Comment #357538 by AllanW

Brilliant! You encapsulated her. I says this as someone who has actually read one of her books in my post-U.S. election attempt to "understand the right." I suspended all judgment of anything I'd heard about her and opened my mind. In the beginning of the book, she even made me laugh a couple of times, but soon her words were a torrent of mind-boggling mendacity and hate. She even went so far as to say that biologists are not real scientists.

Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:13:00 UTC | #341580