Posted on 02/11/2005 4:41:43 PM PST by SandRat
This will save AZ millions of dollars in the long run because all state records, lawbooks, etc. will not be required by law to be in other languages. The state that I'm from passed similar legislation years ago. Way to go AZ!
When the state pays for me to learn another language, then we will consider your idea.
Agreed.
Thanks for the ping!
Truer words were never typed.
bayourud, someone should pay you for these knee slappers.
Come to think of they must be doing that already.
Works for me. Multi-language societies have proven to be the downfall of many civilizations thoughtout history. Without the bind of a common communication system, linquistic subgroups have a negative impact on a society's well-being.
We are an English based culture. Those who prefer not to embrace that culture are a detriment. Immigrants should be proud of their native language, but realize that America is an English speaking country/culture, and should aspire to accept and learn that language, also.
Multi-culturalism can be good; separatism is destructive to the cohesiveness of a nation.
Bump!
"Other Americans believe that linguistic diversity is a key aspect of our heritage and that English-only laws are motivated by fear and by false stereotypes about non-native speakers, a view supported in this ACLU Briefing Paper."
I found this "gem" at ask yahoo
Heh. Yeah... the irony is that Bush is trying to outflank Democrats to the left on language issues.
Did Arizona's official English bill almost end up making GORE PRESIDENT?
Will Arizona's NEW official English help end ABORTION??
I kid you not: the judicial politics (should be an oxymoron, but it's not) of this case are staggering.
In 1989, Arizona passed A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT making English the official language. It was very popular, winning by a 2/3rds vote. The Reconquistadores sued claiming that the constitutional amendment was unconstitutional. I kid you not.
They argued that any Arizona could not pass a law which was contary to the U.S Constitution.
More incredibly, neither the state of Arizona, nor the organization which promoted the bill challenged this bizarre ruling.
A dissident former member of the organization, Bob Park, formed his own organization to challenge it. (His organization is now called ProEnglish - www.proenglish.org.)
So the case eventually went to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it was ruled to be constitutional.
Preposterously, the state of Arizona then moved to attack it's own constitution! A state court ruled that REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ruled, the state court had jurisdiction to determine whether or not a state law violated the United States Constitution!!!
The case went back to the Supreme Court, which ruled that a state court can determine its own interpretation of the U.S. Constitution for its own purposes. That ruling, Yniguez, was the basis for AL GORE'S CHALLENGE TO HIS FLORIDA LOSS!
Since that loss, several other states have passed laws which were as tough as Arizona, and they have not been found by their own states to violate the US Constitution. This creates a strange legal case:
The basis for Roe-v.-Wade was that the varying state ANTI-ABORTION LAWS created different rights for residents of different states, which amounted to unequal protection. Therefore the United States had the authority to overrule state law and impose a uniform definition of 4th, 10th, and 14th amendment rights. Roe v. Wade is now throughly contradicted by Yniguez.
(Don't expect the Supreme Court to actually address this inconsistency; As the liberals have actually stated, they just shop around for the excuses and precedents to find the laws say what they want them to say.)
By the way, the Republicans, careful not to challenge Yniguez, instead argued that the Floridian Supreme Court was in effect creating law for the other 49 states, since it was changing the rules for a national election after the election took place.
If the Constitution requires English, than it would be consistent with the spirit of the law for the LEGISLATURE to provide the appropriate legislation to fulfill the law. But it is preposterous to include appropriations measures in Constitutional law, as a few Western states have already found out the hard way.
Mark my words.
Let it no matter how the case turns out the message has got to get out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.