Arizona Emigration Law Boycotted
By: Reach for the Sky
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/06/arizona.boycott.impact/index.html
People are unhappy. Some are unhappy about the threat of racial segregation they believe is posed by the new emigration law in Arizona. Some are unhappy about what they believe is a gross over-reaction to what is essentially just a declaration of enforcement of established law. I'm unhappy that Half-Life 2: Episode 3 is projected to come out shortly after the death of my youngest grandchild. In regards to the boycott, let's just take a moment to examen this whole story.
First of all, the main complaint is quite apparent: The new law will lead to racial profiling. Is there actually any reasoning behind this though? Some kind of evidence that no matter what the provisions added to the bill, racism will prevail? I have yet to see any, which is sort of a problem in the arguments of those opposed. I don't necessarily doubt the possibility of prejudice manifesting itself in the enforcement of the law, but without any evidence to support that idea it seems unreasonable to suddenly jump to a nation-wide boycott of Arizona because of it. Especially after changes have been made to make profiling less likely.
One senator, possibly not wanting Congress to be absolutely embarrassed by the efficiency of Arizona's state government*, has asked Brewer to hold off on the bill while Congress comes up with their own plan to solve the illegal immigration problem. There are a few problems with this request, one being that Congress couldn't throw a ball across a room in the span of one year. And while one year may not seem like a long time in ivory-tower D.C. time, that's another year of crime rates rising and jobs lost due to illegal immigration**. Brewer, thankfully, rejected the request.
One thing that really bothers me is how the boycotts are being likened to the civil-rights boycotts. Even if there was undeniable proof of profiling, that would still not even come close to the magnitude of the transgressions against minorities before the Civil Rights Movement. Using the same tactics as Martin Luther King Jr. does not put one on the same moral ground as him. In fact, this whole debate reeks of guilt by association. On three separate occasions now the Nazi-analogy has been made, due to the fact that legal immigrants will now have to carry proof of citizenship with them. This bill has been compared with Nazism so much, Darwinism feels sorry for it.
I once again encourage those against the bill to treat it fairly by not blowing a blood vessel before its effects can become apparent. Still waiting patiently for evidence that the law will permit profiling. If you find some, post it in the comments or email it to me and I'll try to respond.
*That's their job! ZING!
**Quick clarification: I'm not opposed to jobs being lost to legal immigrants. It's jobs that are given to those who can afford a lower paycheck for lack of taxes that bother me.
