What are "illegals"? I'm fairly certain 'illegal' is an adjective but you and the headline appear appear to be incorrectly using it as a countable noun.
illegal 2 of 2 noun sometimes disparaging + offensive : a person who enters or lives in a country without the documentation required for legal entry or residence
Easy it is a label to describe immigration status, like citizen, permanent resident, temporary nonimigrant workers (migrant),…
Immigrating into a country illegally means that person is guess what an illegal immigrant or illegal for short. Your negative views of the word illegal don’t change their status.
Illegals is just shortened illegal immigrant, just like temporary nonimigrant workers are called migrants.
They are migrants because they migrate. They aren't "illegals" because irrespective of the status of their presence according to those that claim dominion of the land they are on they are not themselves illegal.
I can’t change how you feel about a group nor can I change the definition of a word. It’s a shame you only see a person’s immigration status there’s more to an illegal than how they entered the country.
there’s more to an illegal than how they entered the country.
You're going to have to explain what the word means to me then, because the phrase by itself doesn't even seem to refer to immigration status at all and I don't know what you mean by it.
One that doesn’t fit with your later claim that it isn’t derogatory so both assertions cannot be true.
There is nothing in the definition that says illegal is a derogatory term. Remember when you forgot about the word sometimes.
The word you used doesn’t even mention people so what is it to which you are referring when you use it?
The first 3 words in the definition of illegal are “a person who”. When I say illegal I’m referring to a person who has entered or resides in the US illegally.
There is nothing in the definition that says illegal is a derogatory term.
There very much is, even if we limit our definitions to the one which you gave me. I pointed as much out to you 23 hours ago.
When I say illegal I’m referring to a person who has entered or resides in the US illegally.
That isn't what that word means except as a slur which your very precious dictionary even cops to.
You still have not answered my inquest regarding how using an adjective as a noun to refer to a person could be anything other than dehumanizing as you still claim that it can potentially be.
That isn’t what that word means except as a slur which your very precious dictionary even cops to.
The definition clearly says sometimes which means you have to use context to determine if it is used as a slur. The term illegal by itself is not a slur.
You still have not answered my inquest regarding how using an adjective as a noun to refer to a person could be anything other than dehumanizing as you still claim that it can potentially be.
Illegal is a noun too, per the definition. Your question is invalid. I know you think you have some big gotcha bit you don’t. Some words have more than one meaning there are so many of those words that a word was created to describe words that are prounounced and often spelled the same way but have different meanings, that word is homonym.
People is not discriptive enough, citizens, permanent residents, migrants, and illegals all fall into the people category. Illegal is used to convey the immigration status of a person.
Good for you finally letting go of the notion that illegal is only an adjective.
Once again go back to the definition. Sometimes disparaging + offensive. Notice there’s no mention of illegal being a slur. Sometimes is used to describe how often something happens it’s between never and always. There are instances where illegal is used in a derogatory fashion and instances where it’s not. You have to use context to figure it out. Context is part of a statement that surrounds a word and determines the word’s meaning.
And since you have yet to explain how it can not be your claim that it is is unsubstantiated.
I am working under the assumption no one here—who purportedly all agree to "be excellent to each other"—is being intentionally despairing to their fellow human beings hense my continued confusion as to what "illegal" used (seemingly erroneously) as a noun means.
That there can be a non-derogatory utilization of the adjective illegal to refer to a person with as though the word were a countable noun.
All that has been done is to post a dictionary entry which agrees that when it is used as a noun it is a slur—behavior I would not expect from one who has endeavored excellence toward their fellows.
If I said, "The sun sometimes rises in the east." that is a true statement, but not evidence that it ever does otherwise and if I wanted to claim "...and sometimes it rises in the west." I would still need to provide evidence other than stressing the "sometimes" in my first statement.
How can calling a person (and not actions) "illegal" be anything but derogatory?
Explain your west-rising sun, please.
What direction the sun rise is not binary, unlike if a statement is derogatory, the sun can rise in the east, north east, South east, North or south.
If the claim that the sun sometimes rises in east is true than the claim that the sun always rises in the east is false and so is that the claim the sun never rises in the east.
If the claim that illegal is sometimes derogatory is true then the the claim illegal is always derogatory or never derogatory is false.
The definition does not indicate it can be not derogatory—which makes sense because it's derogatory.
You despite claiming sans evidence that it is possible to refer to a human being with a pejorative adjective and it be anything other than derogatory, won't even back up your claim with a single non-derogatory example of its use.
I get why you won't—'cause you can't—but if you were right you'd think You could give an example rather than litigating the implied corollaries to "sometimes".
"Sometimes" is different than "Sometimes although not always"
That I why I had to use different words to type the two different concepts.
Your definition only listed the first, which does not inherently indicate the second.
“Sometimes” is different than “Sometimes although not always”
That’s a common mistake to think that but sometimes and not always have the same meaning. Your mistake is so common that there are many articles highlighting this redundancy.
Expressions like “not always,” “don’t always,” and “aren’t always” overlap in meaning with “sometimes,” but don’t belong in the same phrase with this word—they’re redundant.
“Sometimes I don’t always feel like jogging” doesn’t make any sense. Say either “sometimes I don’t feel like jogging” or “I don’t always feel like jogging.”
The link you offered does not seem authoritative.
The example it proffered of:
“Sometimes I don’t always feel like jogging” doesn’t make any sense.
Makes perfect sense.
Are you going to keep litigating "Sometimes inherently means sometimes not" or are you going to provide an example of a non-pejorative use of referring to a human being as though they themself were illegal?
Expressions like “not always,” “don’t always,” and “aren’t always” overlap in meaning with “sometimes,” but don’t belong in the same phrase with this word—they’re redundant. “Sometimes I don’t always feel like jogging” doesn’t make any sense. Say either “sometimes I don’t feel like jogging” or “I don’t always feel like jogging.”
Here’s another link to help you understand the difference between sometimes and always.
That's alot of words which notably are not an example of the adjective "illegal" being used as though it were a noun to describe a human being and it not being derogatory.
Come on, bill Clinton. You just gonna yap about what "is" is or you gonna prove your point? Make with the example.
Don’t get upset, lots of people have issues understanding how sometimes is used. I have a lot of trouble understanding the nuances of a 2nd language.
Looks like you’ve ran out of excuses, and moved to name calling. I’ve provided definitions of illegal and sometimes. Showing that illegal can be used as a noun and sometimes that the use of illegal as a noun is not derogatory.
No I get it, you can't prove your point. You don't have to keep running around with dictionaries that don't prove your point to impress me. It doesn't change my view of you at all to know you're wrong.
I’m sorry you have trouble understanding simple words like sometimes. A dictionary is the only way to educate you on its meaning. Your willfully ignorant view that sometimes can mean always is the crux of the problem.
It’s so strange you’ve insisted through this whole thread that sometimes can mean always but you haven’t provided any evidence that it can. I wonder why?
Undocumented people may immigrate in a way some people do not consider to be "legal" but they themselves are not illegal therefore "illegals" is a nonsense term.
Criminals deserve basic human rights too or all anything a tyrannical government has to do is define you as “illegal” and they can carry you off never to be seen again. With those rights ought to come at least the minimal respect a human life deserves.
Not according to the left. Remember when Trump caught Covid and the left wished him death? Or when his brother died and the left cheered?
What relation does your mental conception of what some nebulous "the left" did-or-did-not do have to the discussion we are having here in c/conservative about whether the use of dehumanizing terms to refer to human beings is laudable?
Further, is wishing that someone you perceive as having an immense power and direct negative impact on you and your community would lose that power—even via dying—really comparable to dehumanizing an entire class of people?
Further, is wishing that someone you perceive as having an immense power and direct negative impact on you and your community would lose that power—even via dying—really comparable to dehumanizing an entire class of people?
Yes. Trump didn’t impact your life in a negative way, especially when compared to illegals.
Either everyone has value or they don’t. Don’t claim higher ground and then say everyone but Trump as it makes you look like a chump.
Yes. Trump didn’t impact your life in a negative way, especially when compared to illegals.
Since you don't know the immigration policies where I am I can't comprehend how you are able to claim that assertion.
Either everyone has value or they don’t. Don’t claim higher ground and then say everyone but Trump as it makes you look like a chump.
Again, kindly point to where I have used dehumanizing language to refer to trump here.
I don't believe I even personally wished his death when I pointed out hypothetical third parties you brought up potentially doing so was not comparable to striping a class of people of personhood through the language used to refer to them.
I can. If you’re not a US citizen then Trump policies on immigration didn’t impact you in a negative way.
You don't think things US presidents do can effect other nations? Further you didn't state "immigration policies" when you said
Trump didn’t impact your life in a negative way
I would argue trump has done me more personal harm by ruining my enjoyment of Home Alone 2 than any undocumented immigrant has done me by being undocumented.
I never said you. Keep up. I said the left.
Ah, but you VERY MUCH did say "you". 👇
Either everyone has value or they don’t. Don’t claim higher ground and then say everyone but Trump as it makes you look like a chump.
Emphasis mine.
That doesn't even address what "the left" ostensibly doing something has to do with what standards someone who seemingly does not hold themself to be a member of that group should hold themself.
You don’t think things US presidents do can effect other nations? Further you didn’t state “immigration policies” when you said
Sure. That’s why we are a super power. That doesn’t make wishing death acceptable.
I would argue trump has done me more personal harm by ruining my enjoyment of Home Alone 2 than any undocumented immigrant has done me by being undocumented.
You just figured out he was in it recently ?
Ah, but you VERY MUCH did say “you”
Are you a conservative? Or are you on the left ?
That doesn’t even address what “the left” ostensibly doing something has to do with what standards someone who seemingly does not hold themself to be a member of that group should hold themself.
Some would argue it makes it more acceptable, prayers to Santa Muerte being the only way they have of effecting a person they can't vote out who has power over their life.
You just figured out he was in it recently ?
What makes you think the harm is recent?
Are you a conservative? Or are you on the left ?
Are you asking me to engage in identity politics? 🤨
Words like no humans are illegal and all people matter except the ones like Trump.
I don't think I said those words. I asked someone if they disagreed all people were worthy of dignity and respect (they seemed to) and explained why some might find wishing for the death of someone who has power over them acceptable.
"No person is illegal." is a quote from ChokingHazard63, not from me.
I would question on what you base the antithesis you are seemingly arguing that people (and not actions) can be illegal.
I’m fine with the term illegal and I belief all people have value. I’m not a lefty who only thinks some people have value.
I didn't ask you that. I asked you (since you seem to agree to speak English) how you squared an adjective being used as a noun.
I further ask why you keep bringing up "lefties" (are they in the room with you right now?) and if you really believe the dehumanizing language you're defending embodies "Being excellent to eachother" as the sidebar of this place purports its ethos to be.
That it's a slur? If you want to admit you're slurring human we can be done here, but all of you fine people here have stringently maintained that is not what you are doing and I so wish to believe you.
He finds the term dehumanizing. I do not. It defines they are illegals here. They have no right to be here to be abused and used as pawn by the democrats.
I have no issue with illegals. I have an issue with the democrats wanting a new group of slave labor.
The democrats are still mad we took their slaves away
Did Buren not make a bill with the strong AF border reform that got shot down by mike cos it was packaged with Ukraine aid and he didn’t want that to be voted on.
Yeah, that’s how a lot of bills get killed. They get packaged with other stuff in the hopes that something that wouldn’t normal get passed, gets passed anyway.
I would like to see legislation that makes it illegal to package unrelated legislation. So much fuckery happens because of it. But the legislation to block packaged legislation would probably be packaged with other undesirable legislation.
Add comment