Rosa Parks didn't break the law (was Re: Reply from Congressman Emanuel Cleaver...)

[Leo Mauler]

--- On Thu, 8/14/08, Christofer C. Bell <christofer.c.bell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Leo Mauler
> <webgiant at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> > There's just no getting around the fact that until
> > a law is repealed, the activity prohibited by that 
> > law is an illegal activity.  Trying to pretend that 
> > the law doesn't exist, prior to its repeal, just 
> > makes you look stupid, and puts you in the same 
> > category as Paris Hilton, who several months ago 
> > drove with a suspended driver's license, at 75MPH 
> > in a 30MPH zone, and in the dark with her
> > headlights off, all at the same time.  She, too, 
> > stupidly tried to pretend that unrepealed laws did 
> > not exist.
> 
> So Rosa Parks is in the same category as Paris Hilton? 
> "'Dem uppity negros shoulda stayed at da back o' da 
> bus?"  Some laws are just bad laws.

Actually, funny story: turns out Rosa Parks was *obeying the law* when she refused to give up her seat, and the bus driver had *no legal authority* to kick her out of her seat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks

"Montgomery had passed a city ordinance for the purpose of segregating passengers by race. Conductors were given the power to assign seats to accomplish that purpose; however, no passengers would be required to move or give up their seat and stand if the bus was crowded and no other seats were available."

Turns out the bus driver was following an accepted Montgomery AL bus driver practice, of making black people stand if a white person needed their seat, which had *no basis in law*.  

Which puts your comparison squarely into the category of "apples and oranges."  Unless, of course, you can find a law which allows Paris Hilton (let alone anyone else) to drive with a suspended driver's license, at 75MPH in a 30MPH zone, and in the dark with her headlights off, all at the same time.  ;-)

I realize that the anti-illegal-immigration folks would like to paint illegal immigrants as Rosa Parks, but its just not the same.  Rosa Parks paid her bus fare and sat down in the black section, and the bus driver did not have the authority to kick her out of the black section seating.  Illegal immigrants aren't abiding by U.S. Law when they bypass legal immigration channels, and the immigration officers have the legal authority to deport illegal immigrants.

"Jim Crow" laws had no actual basis in fact other than to suppress black people.  Immigration laws have some basis in fact and good reasons for their existence.  Immigrants need to be checked for communicable diseases and get all their shots.  They need to have their criminal histories researched as well as possible.  While we still have a social safety net they need to have some means to support themselves here, at least for some time before making use of that social safety net.

I agree that immigration laws could use some reform, but immigration laws are there to protect everyone already in the U.S.A., not just the sensibilities of racist white people.  If Mexicans want to be like Rosa Parks, they need to legally immigrate before they protest immigration laws on this side of the border, or protest U.S. immigration laws on the Mexican side of the border.
 
> I totally agree with you, however, on the voodoo economics.
> 
> -- 
> Chris