Comment: ???

(See in situ)


There is no natural right to immigration and it is not in the Constitution.

Although Locke was profoundly religious he was known as THE empiricist of his day. An empiricist is one who relies on observation and the human mind to determine reality. Again, Locke was not just AN empiricist he is known as THE empiricist of his day (google it).

Locke said that natural rights could not just merely be determined from divine revelation/scripture but had to OBSERVABLE IN NATURE by the human mind.

Natural rights must be determined by observing man in society and noticing those freedoms and conditions that lead to man's happiness in society. Man seems happier if he can speak freely and own property and defend himself, etc..

Man does NOT seem happier if his community and society is suddenly overwhelmed by outsiders from a foreign culture and therefore immigration is NOT a natural right!

The Chinese for example have no natural right to land 747's full of 400 passengers each in 100 US cities daily in the United States for a total of 14,000,000 Chinese immigrants per year (140 million in 10 years). It is absurd to say that Chinese people have any kind of right to do that.

~wobbles but doesn't fall down~