Illegal alien arrivals now greater than American births?

[barnhart]

Josh, I think it would be appropriate to change the title of the thread; I can do that for you. Could you suggest a great replacement?

I think this is a good idea.

[Bootstrap]

I think this really matters. If you use the same terms that white supremacists use to promote their causes, terms that are widely used in neo-Nazi circles, terms that mass murderers have used in their manifestos ... that gets attention in the wrong way. It can lead people to associate you with the people who created the term and promote the term.

Yes, it can give people a ledge to grab onto to make that association. I don't think that's a good excuse though for whoever decides to make that association absent clear and compelling evidence.
I would wish that Christians could be cautious and careful enough not to jump to conclusions about people's associations just because they use a word or phrase that bears some resemblance to what might have been used by extremists. Not all of us have the time to read the literature of white supremacists or read the manifestos of mass killers, and therefore we might not be aware of what terms they have latched onto or tried to co-opt for their use.

I don’t think Josh is a neo-Nazi or identifies as a white supremacist. However, there has been an effort in some conservative media to mainstream fringe theories like the Great Replacement and I think it’s completely appropriate to call it out when it appears in places like this forum.

Regardless of what Josh believes, the Great Replacement is a white supremacist argument and concept.

People make mistakes. I think the appropriate response when someone inadvertently makes direct reference to a neo-Nazi conspiracy theory is to apologize and reframe the topic when it gets pointed out. To me it’s odd when someone doubles down over something like this.

Exactly.

If he chooses to double down on the term and defend it, though, even after this is pointed out, I think that says something. It doesn't say he is a Nazi or a white supremacist, but it does say something.

And this is the kind of thing that leads some people to believe that Christians or conservatives are associated with white supremacists and Nazis. That we promote what they promote. We should avoid giving that impression.

[Josh]

Exactly.

If he chooses to double down on the term and defend it, though, even after this is pointed out, I think that says something. It doesn't say he is a Nazi or a white supremacist, but it does say something.

And this is the kind of thing that leads some people to believe that Christians or conservatives are associated with white supremacists and Nazis. That we promote what they promote. We should avoid giving that impression.

There's exactly two people in this thread creating and promoting the idea of some kind of association there.

Simply stop associating various mainstream political ideas with extreme fringe ideologies. And part of what you're doing here is, things that are actually dangeorus... is anyone going to listen to you?

You might want to look earlier in the thread where a few other people objected to the word "infested" (a word I have used my whole life, and in the past it was not particularly offensive). But some other people objected to it. I took them seriously, because they don't resort to pulling out trump cards of claiming anything to the right of them is "neo nazi" or "white supremacy". So I listened to them. I guess that's an offensive word to use these days. Unfortunately I have to sort of tune you out, because you pull out all this stuff that I barely even understand... basically, everyone to the right of your opinions is Hitler. There's nothing I can do to work with that.

[Ernie]

I am pro-immigration. Legal. But I harbor no ill will towards illegal immigrants whatsoever. I do encourage and assist them individually to go back to their country or else apply try to become legal here. Generally they don't really care what my opinion is, any more than a legal immigrant cares what my opinion is.

Economically speaking, I believe that immigrants are a net good for America.

Seeking asylum is legal. Doing it at a place other than a border check point is illegal.
Are the ones who are crossing at non-border check points the ones you are encouraging and assisting to go back to their country? Or also ones who applied for asylum at border check points?

Are there any conditions in a migrant's home country, for which you would make an exception, and not encourage them to return?

Are there any conditions in a migrant's home country, that you would think is appropriate for them to enter the US illegally at a non-approved check point?

[Ernie]

It’s happening all over the world, but here in America there has been a strong, concerted push to replace the Americans who are born and raised here with migrants. Now, illegals aliens entering the country have exceeded American births.

Do you feel the same way about the people who came to America in the 17-19th centuries, whose immigration numbers exceeded the number of births of those who were born and raised here (the first nation's people)? The first nations folks talked the same way about many your ancestors moving here. Was it fine for them to feel that way about your ancestors?

And how is it a "replacement" instead of simply adding more people. Are the people who were born and raised here being systematically killed by asylum seekers? Are they forcing the people born and raised here to leave the country?

[Ernie]

2- As long as it is done legally, I don't care.
3- My family migrated, too.

Did your ancestors migrate to the US legally? If so, according to who?

[ken_sylvania]

I am pro-immigration. Legal. But I harbor no ill will towards illegal immigrants whatsoever. I do encourage and assist them individually to go back to their country or else apply try to become legal here. Generally they don't really care what my opinion is, any more than a legal immigrant cares what my opinion is.

Economically speaking, I believe that immigrants are a net good for America.

Seeking asylum is legal. Doing it at a place other than a border check point is illegal.
Are the ones who are crossing at non-border check points the ones you are encouraging and assisting to go back to their country? Or also ones who applied for asylum at border check points?

If someone applies for asylum at a border check point and is granted authorization to remain in the US, have they actually immigrated illegally (provided they stated their asylum claim accurately and have met all their required court dates, etc?

[ken_sylvania]

2- As long as it is done legally, I don't care.
3- My family migrated, too.

Did your ancestors migrate to the US legally? If so, according to who?

I think mine migrated legally in accordance with British law and (if the stories about William Penn's dealings with the American Indians are generally accurate) in accordance with the applicable treaties with the American Indians at the time.

Well, that's some of them anyway. There are rumors that some may have come in accordance with British law but in direct opposition to the colonists who were rebelling against British rule.

[Szdfan]

2- As long as it is done legally, I don't care.
3- My family migrated, too.

Did your ancestors migrate to the US legally? If so, according to who?

When my ancestors immigrated to the United States, there was neither immigration law nor a United States.

[ken_sylvania]

Did your ancestors migrate to the US legally? If so, according to who?

When my ancestors immigrated to the United States, there was neither immigration law nor a United States.

When was that?