Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday June 26 2017, @08:08PM   Printer-friendly

Associated Press reports:

While 41 percent of Republicans of all ages believe immigrants face a lot of discrimination in the United States, the percentage increases to 60 percent among Republicans between 18 and 29 years old, the survey found. That's a stark contrast to GOP voters 65 and older — only a third of that group says immigrants experience discrimination.

Researchers also found that 74 percent of young whites believe that immigrants are targeted for discrimination a lot, compared to 57 percent of white Americans of all ages. However, among Republicans, only for the youngest group, between 18 and 29, is that view in the majority. Even 30-to-39-year-old Republicans are evenly split, 48 percent to 48 percent, on whether immigrants undergo a lot of discrimination.

[...] "Closed-minded Republicans need to expand their perspective to see how immigrants are helping us all create a better America. I believe that this will change with the younger generation of Republicans," Kromsky said.

[...] According to the PRRI poll, 64 percent of all Americans, regardless of political affiliation and age, believe that immigrants in the U.S. illegally should have a path to citizenship if certain conditions are met; only 16 percent say they should be deported. Among Republicans of all ages, support for a path to citizenship is lower, at 55 percent. But when only Republicans between the ages of 18 to 29 are accounted for, that number rises to 62 percent.

[...] The age gap among Republicans also surfaces on gay rights: 54 percent of Republicans between 18 and 29 believe that gay and lesbian couples should marry, while half as many Republicans older than 65 agree. Younger GOP supporters are more closely aligned with the majority of Americans than their older counterparts: Overall, 58 percent of Americans support gay marriage. However, they are far from the average among young people of all political leanings: 74 percent of them support gay marriage.

From the same source, comes news on a class-action suit challenging a once-secret government program that delayed immigration and citizenship applications by Muslims; a suit that was okayed by a judge in Seattle:

U.S. District Judge Richard Jones in Seattle on Wednesday denied the Justice Department's request to dismiss the lawsuit, which was filed in February by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project.

The lawsuit claims the government since 2008 has used the Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program to blacklist thousands of applications for asylum, legal permanent residency or citizenship as national security concerns.

The program imposes criteria on the applications that go far beyond what Congress has authorized, including holding up some applications if the applicants donated to Muslim charities or traveled [sic] to Muslim-majority countries, the complaint alleges.

The program was not publicly discovered until 2012, when an immigration officer discussed it during testimony in a different lawsuit. Immigrant rights advocates then filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits to force U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to turn over more information about it, the lawsuit said.

In addition to challenging the program, the lawsuit seeks to block any other "extreme vetting" that President Donald Trump's administration might impose as an updated version of it.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by Lagg on Monday June 26 2017, @09:30PM (1 child)

    by Lagg (105) on Monday June 26 2017, @09:30PM (#531562) Homepage Journal

    I've come to the conclusion that people in this country are still too inherently scared and unexposed to the world to see the potential value of immigrants for exchange of culture and ideas. So I'm going to say that these "young republicans" are less liberal about immigration and more that they have the modern business knowhow and foresight to understand that it's a waste of time to care. Usually it's cunts that graduate into card carrying republicanism that early on. But it is going to be more often than not because they like business and money. Which is what it is. But yeah, I don't think they're going to lose money on people coming in. Even ignoring the labor aspect.

    By the way: Rings to my brain a symptom of a sick murika that "republican" is now associated with the overall tone of Donald Trump. They're not inclined to racism and hate by default. That's uncool and should be remembered that they are not necessarily the same any more than me liking weed legalization means I want to suck Sanders' flaccid old dingly dong (I can guess with 650% certainty weed was mentioned as a good thing by him because Young Ppls). There's been an upward trend of social acceptance of all peoples for a while now despite what the pieces of shit out of cali would like you to believe. That's like... Expected for the level of progress we're at. Don't get me wrong republicans are fuckin' scum but they are also the fathers to what you think of as the modern democrat. Don't get me wrong democrats are fuckin' scum too but at least I have coffee. That's a party that will never betray me.

    If you look closer though, the inherent problems in party loyalty and all that nonsense are still there. Because speaking of sucking ding dongs:

    “I think the rhetoric was used to churn up votes and does not represent President Trump’s actual views, but I truly hope that President Trump will respect immigration as the pillar of American society that it always has been,”

    -- Kromsky, 24, Naivety age, 5

    But yeah Trump's reactionary fruitcakes are just one segment of it. I have no love at all for republicans. But know thine enemy and all that.

    --
    http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Disagree=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Disagree' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by tftp on Tuesday June 27 2017, @03:25AM

    by tftp (806) on Tuesday June 27 2017, @03:25AM (#531735) Homepage

    I've come to the conclusion that people in this country are still too inherently scared and unexposed to the world to see the potential value of immigrants for exchange of culture and ideas.

    With immigration, like with everything else, you gain some and you lose some. The first question to ask is whether the gains are worth the losses. The second question to ask is whether there is a way to optimize the selection of immigrants. Others have already mentioned the points system that is employed by some countries; it selects for qualities that the destination country needs here and now. Have a Ph.D. in quantum physics? Here is a barrel of points, and go straight to the head of the line. Have a Bachelor in E.E.? Here is a bucket of points, gain hundred positions. Are you an inventor with inventions that work? Two buckets for you, and move ahead. Are you an illiterate peasant? Sorry, sir, no points for you - you will not survive in our country without someone else paying for your food.

    First, such a system will help the country select immigrants that are productive. It won't be fair to those who aren't, but this is not a fairy tale, this is real life, there are hundreds applicants per vacancy, and only one will be selected. Might just as well select the best.

    Second, this system will motivate potential applicants to study in their countries! Even if they are not accepted into this country, they will have far better prospects at home if they are educated, smart people - doctors, engineers, artists - instead of being goat herders. They wouldn't even need to emigrate if they are sought after locally or in neighboring countries. This can be seen in India and China.

    The immigration system of the USA is heavily biased toward relatives (who do not need to prove their abilities in any way) and refugees (who, from some politically expedient countries, are accepted automatically, upon hearing a tall tale that is impossible to verify.) This means that US immigration is not even theoretically supposed to add any "value of immigrants for exchange of culture and ideas." It only brings in: (1) more of the same, and (2) people who could not find a place for themselves in their home country. What odds, one might ask, they will face in the adopted homeland? What will they bring with them, on average, outside of lack of luck? Even if you are accepting from Syria only widows with babies, this will have no impact on the culture and ideas - the babies will grow up as natives of the country. To import culture and ideas you need to allow immigration of educated and creative people, but the US Immigration, outside of H1B, does not allow that unless they happen to be filthy rich - and this kind of culture is already well represented here.