Flying to Mexico... For a girl. Is it legal to bring her back?

Also, that would get us into political territory, @Cooter is lucky his one foray so far didn't get erased.
I stopped that line of discussion! Look, we are now repeatedly making our points and no longer interracting. I have demonstrated that generalizations can be safely made, and we do accept them. We accept them in sports, we accept them in the medical field, and we accept them in the workplace. That has to be acknowledged. You continue to point to a potential abuse of the generalization as your argument. I don't deny that generalization can be wrong and misused. Those are two separate arguments. You say generalizations should not be made because of the potential abuse. I say that they can be and are made despite their potential abuse.
 
I think this exposes what you're missing.

It IS still quite vague.

What you do to "promote diversity" makes a large difference. And what, exactly, do you mean by "diversity?" The answer to the second question affects the first.

You seem to want me to make assumptions and then react to them. No.

No, you are intentionally injecting "vagueness" because you sense the checkmate coming if you answer the question. Your position likely refutes itself so now you can't answer. Fill in the vagueness with any answer you wish, it doesn't change the argument.
 
No, you are intentionally injecting "vagueness" because you sense the checkmate coming if you answer the question. Your position likely refutes itself so now you can't answer. Fill in the vagueness with any answer you wish, it doesn't change the argument.
There is no checkmate in a discussion.

I did assume you had an honest interest. My bad.

Get a clue, and we can talk. Otherwise, go play your stupid politics games with someone else.
 
There is no checkmate in a discussion.

I did assume you had an honest interest. My bad.

Get a clue, and we can talk. Otherwise, go play your stupid politics games with someone else.
I'll ask it a different way. Can women bring a unique perspective to a workplace, or a committee, or a meeting of some sort? You wish to jump into the discussion but not actually interact.
 
Last edited:
When has it been suggested that those that don't agree with the ideas you mention be silenced or punished? I disagree with your definition of political correctness. It is not believing your ideas are correct. It is suggesting that people with ideas different than yours should be punished.
The uniformity of each side's political orthodoxies suggests that there is no material difference in the levels of punishment for those who stray from their respective party lines.
 
Political correctness seeks to alter behavior and language. Your list is simply political positions or beliefs. Global warming advocates are seeking to change the behavior of the masses as are the PC police that seem to have taken complete control of many campuses. I'll leave it at that because I know I'm under the watchful eye of Everskyward. But I do accept your generalization of the Republican Party's platform.:)
Both sides of the political spectrum seek to alter behavior and language.
 
There is nothing wrong with flying to Mexico and bringing back a seventeen year old girl.

As a matter of fact, as a 44 year old dude, I'd be happy to help. I don't think my wife would min...


...wait, what? You DO mind? I what now? ...but honey, it's innocent, I'm just... and then we'll... you see she's...


Hey guys, I'm sorry, can I please call you back? She's not understanding the whole dynamic here.
Did you forget to invite your wife to come along? ;)
 
Both sides of the political spectrum seek to alter behavior and language.
That's fine and to a certain point we could probably agree. Maybe over a beer we could better hash out the differences but it seems I'm not quite able to avoid the common direction these discussions often take. It's better that I bow out at this point.
 
Implementation of Mexican Regulations Regarding Minor Travel

The Mexican National Immigration Institute (INM) requires special documentation with regard to minor (under 18 years of age) travel if:

  • The minor is departing Mexico (i.e. not entering);
  • The minor is traveling by air or sea;
  • The minor is traveling alone or with someone other than a parent or legal guardian who is of legal age (grandparent, uncle/aunt, school group leader, etc.); and
  • The minor is using Mexican documents to travel (birth certificate, passport, temporary or permanent Mexican residency).

    The minor will be required to present a document showing the consent to travel from at least one parent (or legal guardian) in order to leave Mexico.
 
No, you are intentionally injecting "vagueness" because you sense the checkmate coming if you answer the question. Your position likely refutes itself so now you can't answer. Fill in the vagueness with any answer you wish, it doesn't change the argument.
It's usually a mistake to make assumptions about others' motives.
 
...And there are checkmates and argumentation, it occurs when one party cannot move without conceding the point....
What you describe is more akin to check than checkmate.
 
A bunch of pilots trying to figure out women is a movie waiting to happen. Possible titles:

"ready for pushback"
"caution wake turbulence"
"position and hold"
"requesting progressive"
 
Implementation of Mexican Regulations Regarding Minor Travel

The Mexican National Immigration Institute (INM) requires special documentation with regard to minor (under 18 years of age) travel if:

  • The minor is departing Mexico (i.e. not entering);
  • The minor is traveling by air or sea;
  • The minor is traveling alone or with someone other than a parent or legal guardian who is of legal age (grandparent, uncle/aunt, school group leader, etc.); and
  • The minor is using Mexican documents to travel (birth certificate, passport, temporary or permanent Mexican residency).

    The minor will be required to present a document showing the consent to travel from at least one parent (or legal guardian) in order to leave Mexico.
I'd like to take this opportunity to applaud those who have provided actual information related to the OP's question!
 
There is nothing wrong with flying to Mexico and bringing back a seventeen year old girl.

As a matter of fact, as a 44 year old dude, I'd be happy to help. I don't think my wife would min...


...wait, what? You DO mind? I what now? ...but honey, it's innocent, I'm just... and then we'll... you see she's...


Hey guys, I'm sorry, can I please call you back? She's not understanding the whole dynamic here.

Typical woman.

Not that I'm stereotyping or generalizing.
 
To all, I edited some of my post in this discussion. I'm not as capable at communicating as I wish to be and I let myself get off track. I do believe it is a discussion worth having but it is best not to have it here.
 
To all, I edited some of my post in this discussion. I'm not as capable at communicating as I wish to be and I let myself get off track. I do believe it is a discussion worth having but it is best not to have it here.
Its difficult to have a neutral discussion about certain topics when your comments are linked to a profile.
 
Its difficult to have a neutral discussion about certain topics when your comments are linked to a profile.

Maybe I should change my Avatar. It isn't intended to be be a political statement, although Cooter was a Democrat member of Congress.
 
Maybe I should change my Avatar. It isn't intended to be be a political statement, although Cooter was a Democrat member of Congress.

There's another example of the right's version of political correctness: One must NEVER say the name of the opposing party as appears in its governing documents! It must ALWAYS be "Democrat," NEVER "Democratic"! :rofl:
 
Which no doubt those folks googled which the OP could easily have done.

My comments were based on my experience of having unaccompanied minors from abroad visit my family.
 
Which no doubt those folks googled which the OP could easily have done.
In my experience, Google works well in some cases, and not so well in others.
 
We have stereotypes and generalization built into our mental process, evolutionarily speaking.

Our ancestors didn't have a whole lot of time to decide if the particular lion they spotted was going to give them a hug or eat their face. So they had to make snap generalizations. And the ones that were good at it were around to give their genes to those of us arguing about it today.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
 
I like the way you think. Your last statement is part of the reason why I press the point. Denying reality in an effort to avoid generalizations will often lead to absurdity.

It also leads to tragic failure to help the very people supposedly being protected by political correctness. For example, despite every effort to eliminate cultural bias from IQ tests, African Americans consistently score lower. But it has become so politically incorrect to mention this, that the fact is completely repressed and denied. We go to all kinds of trouble trying to prove the result is bogus, rather than accepting that on average, blacks have lower IQ and then researching the underlying cause. If we accepted the truth of it, then we could work on fixing the causes, such as possible nutritional deficiencies because of being raised in poverty. You can't fix a problem if you deny its existence. The end result? You are hurting the very group you're trying not to offend.
 
It also leads to tragic failure to help the very people supposedly being protected by political correctness. For example, despite every effort to eliminate cultural bias from IQ tests, African Americans consistently score lower. But it has become so politically incorrect to mention this, that the fact is completely repressed and denied. We go to all kinds of trouble trying to prove the result is bogus, rather than accepting that on average, blacks have lower IQ and then researching the underlying cause. If we accepted the truth of it, then we could work on fixing the causes, such as possible nutritional deficiencies because of being raised in poverty. You can't fix a problem if you deny its existence. The end result? You are hurting the very group you're trying not to offend.

"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions"
GK Chesterton

Reality has a way of stubbornly resisting our attempts to deny it.
 
It also leads to tragic failure to help the very people supposedly being protected by political correctness. For example, despite every effort to eliminate cultural bias from IQ tests, African Americans consistently score lower. But it has become so politically incorrect to mention this, that the fact is completely repressed and denied. We go to all kinds of trouble trying to prove the result is bogus, rather than accepting that on average, blacks have lower IQ and then researching the underlying cause. If we accepted the truth of it, then we could work on fixing the causes, such as possible nutritional deficiencies because of being raised in poverty. You can't fix a problem if you deny its existence. The end result? You are hurting the very group you're trying not to offend.

I watched an interesting segment on Bill Nye Saves the World last night. The topic was AI. One of the people was talking about automation, AI, and algorithms, and said that after computing sentences and likelihood of recidivism taking into account multiple factors, the algorithm suggested harsher sentences and increased likelihood of recidivism among people of color... therefore the algorithm was racist. WHAT? The algorithm literally does not care about race. So instead of looking at WHY... we dismiss the results as racist. What's the adage? In order to fix a problem, first you have to admit that you have one? I guess it's easier to ignore and dismiss socioeconomic solutions to problems by just saying everything is racist.
 
Last edited:
While this thread remains open I'll give a perspective on this stuff worth every penny you're paying for it.

Stereotypes exist for a reason, otherwise they wouldn't be stereotypes would they? The problem with that is our human brains are pretty much stereotype machines and we tend to sort people into stereotypes without even thinking about it. We'd be foolish to ignore our instincts- to ignore the stereotypes completely because, as I said, they do exist for a reason. You can use these ideas to anticipate what someone might do and think about strategies to deal with it(or capitalize on it I suppose) ahead of time. That said, it's equally foolish not to mention terribly unfair to assume someone will fit into your stereotype before getting to know them. It pretty much makes you the first 3 letters in the word assume...

In the past couple of years it sure seems like the number of people from both sides of the political spectrum ASSuming things is at an all time high, especially on the internet. Everyone is so mad and blaming everyone else for every problem under the sun. I know we've got problems but we live in a nice country. We're pretty safe, we oppose discrimination, we're relatively wealth compared to the world. No it's not perfect, yes we should work to improve it, and yes we have different ideas of where to go from here. But we're in a good place. Smile, go outside. Have some drinks, fly, whatever and stop worrying about everyone else and their opinions and biases.
 
While this thread remains open I'll give a perspective on this stuff worth every penny you're paying for it.

Stereotypes exist for a reason, otherwise they wouldn't be stereotypes would they? The problem with that is our human brains are pretty much stereotype machines and we tend to sort people into stereotypes without even thinking about it. We'd be foolish to ignore our instincts- to ignore the stereotypes completely because, as I said, they do exist for a reason. You can use these ideas to anticipate what someone might do and think about strategies to deal with it(or capitalize on it I suppose) ahead of time. That said, it's equally foolish not to mention terribly unfair to assume someone will fit into your stereotype before getting to know them. It pretty much makes you the first 3 letters in the word assume...

In the past couple of years it sure seems like the number of people from both sides of the political spectrum ASSuming things is at an all time high, especially on the internet. Everyone is so mad and blaming everyone else for every problem under the sun. I know we've got problems but we live in a nice country. We're pretty safe, we oppose discrimination, we're relatively wealth compared to the world. No it's not perfect, yes we should work to improve it, and yes we have different ideas of where to go from here. But we're in a good place. Smile, go outside. Have some drinks, fly, whatever and stop worrying about everyone else and their opinions and biases.

Too reasonable. Ban this guy.
 
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions"
GK Chesterton

Reality has a way of stubbornly resisting our attempts to deny it.
For someone who was going to "bow out" five posts ago, you sure have a lot to say! :rofl:
 
So in an attempt to reverse Godwin's law, getting back to the original topic, have we established whether our OP was able to figure out how to sneak the girl in to the United States so she can celebrate her Quinceañera in Las Vegas?
 
I'll ask it a different way. Can women bring a unique perspective to a workplace, or a committee, or a meeting of some sort? You wish to jump into the discussion but not actually interact.
There is some chance of that, but of course it is not guaranteed.

For that reason, limiting participation due to gender -- or any other arbitrary characteristic -- is not a good idea. Even if it's based on "common knowledge," as a whole lot of silly myths get perpetuated that way.

"Diversity" can mean a whole hell of a lot of other things as well. It's a buzzword, devoid of actual meaning.
 
Back
Top