TacticalEvilDan

Actually, the thrust of my opinion on this issue is based on two things:

1) The USA is a nation of many cultures, for sure, but in addition

2) The USA is (or at least it used to be) a nation of law

Since the USA is a nation of law and not of men, everything a citizen is required to either do or not do must be codified in the law. Everything else is more like, "Gee, it would nice if you . . . "

English is not our official language, hence fluency in it is not a requirement.

To start with, your "social houses" sound like what we call "housing projects." Gotta love euphemisms.

Additionally, I think it's perfectly reasonable for the people of Flanders to want the residents of said social houses to learn Dutch. In fact, if landlords in Flanders decided they wanted to rent only to Dutch-speaking people, I think that would also be fine (although I have no idea if that would be legal).

At the same time, if the people of Flanders want Dutch to be a requirement for those who live in socials, then they should amend the code of law to reflect this.

Does that make sense?

__________________
DURKA DURKA JIHAD

"No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent."
-- Abraham Lincoln

jfuh

Prove it, prove that Colorado is experiencing a shortage of water because of the use by NV, AZ, CA

__________________
The facts and science of the theory of anthropogenic Global warming

bub

Ah OK, I had not seen that it was also because of that too. I can only agree with you: if there is no official language, then it can't be forbidden to do the pledge of allegiance in Hebrew or in Klingon.

lol how would you call it? "jobless shelters"?

Yes, they have decided to create a "Wooncode" (law about housing) saying that those who want to live in these houses should promise to learn Dutch.

But the United Nations and the European Parliament say its linguistic discrimination.

EuroNews : Belgium's PM, Yves Leterme, defends housing code
euro|topics - Linguistic discrimination in Belgium

If English was the only legal language in the USA, would you agree that immigrants have to learn it if they want to have access to the right of vote/social housing/... ?

__________________
===|:-)

aegyptos

I never respond to these sorts of demands. If you wish to pursue the matter you look it up. I don't have to. I already know. Get crackin'.

TacticalEvilDan

I didn't actually say it in this thread, so you didn't miss anything.

Sometimes, when thinking about something, I'll have half the conversation in my head, and then finish the other half out loud, which often confuses people nearby.

That's what happened here.

Exactly.

Frankly, I like it that way. The United States, to me, isn't represented by its language; it houses enough diverse peoples that it's not about one culture, either.

I think that this nation would be far stronger if we defined what we're about as a country by what we all have in common rather than based on differences.

Heh. If memory serves, we used to have a similar arrangement that we called "poor-houses."

Well, that's cool, in my book.

That's ridiculous. Requiring someone to promise to learn a language is different than requiring someone to speak it as a prerequisite.

I'd take it a step further and make it a requirement for immigrating legally to begin with.

We already require them to, among other things, learn more about our history than is taught in public schools (as far as I know), and certainly more about our history than the average American can recall by rote.

Nothing wrong with requiring them to receive language instruction and English-literacy education as a part of the process.

jfuh

You made the claim, it is YOUR job to support it - if you can't support it, your premise is moot - as you were.

aegyptos

In your dreams. If you wish to refute what I said, go for it.

Bodhisattva

That is completely ridiculous...

Hitler and Stalin met once before the war and had sex... Disprove it.

I mean... seriously, you could just say anything and never back it up and how the hell are we supposed to disprove the negative? Sure... with a lot of reserch it could sometimes be done, but why. It is a lot easier to just look at what you say and dismiss it not only for sounding whacky in the first place, but for the secondary reason that you won't back up your whacky statement either.

__________________

jfuh

now show that you can prove a negative.

Bodhisattva

Official languages: None at federal level (English is an official language in 28 states)

United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

English is not our country's language. Sorry.
English is one of many many languages spoken here in the USA.
The USA was founded by MANY different linguistic groups, as I have stated and this FACT is irrefutable.

So... you want everybody to always speak it in English only. Fine.
You can want that and not make up facts along the way you know.

Learn a little about US History and travel around a bit and you will find out some amazing stuff.