Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h82HHH704988; Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:17:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:17:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <001e01c37175$91e4a920$4c4cdc42@trudy> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Ken Taber" <kentaber@inetgenesis.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9363] RE: Accept English Only donation? X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 4713 Lines: 102 Theresa & Andres, I agree with you. There is an underlying message in the English-Only movement that is pure hatred toward the immigrant. In the South, this is even more true. This movement is gaining in strength and is just as dangerous as the propaganda in Germany before Hitler. So far, there have been no Supreme Court rulings in their favor but there are a lot of individual states that have English-Only Laws. This is where the battle will be won or lost. Does anyone know if there are currently any lower federal courts that are dealing with English-Only Laws? The right for educators to use Bilingual Education is firmly set in the federal courts but some states are attacking the Bilingual Education in their states. Make no mistake: "English-Only Laws anywhere in this country is a threat to Bilingual Education everywhere!!" -Ken Taber kentaber@inetgenesis.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "pruett said" <said@ameritech.net> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 11:57 AM Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9359] RE: Accept English Only donation? > If only learning another language was as simple as wanting to. If someone > offered us a magic pill that would allow us to know another language, all of > us would take that pill. But learning another language takes time and > energy--something many immigrants don't have. I had students who worked > double shifts in meat packing plants and then came to my morning ESL class. > They could only keep this up for a couple of weeks before they quit coming > to class. Why did they work double shifts? For one thing they needed the > money. If you only get paid $6.00 an hour you have to work a lot of hours to > make ends meet and send some money back home to help the rest of your > extended family make ends meet. Also most of my students were afraid if they > refused to do anything that was asked of them they would be fired which in > many cases would have meant they were also out of status since a number of > them were here on work permits. I also had students who had health problems > caused by Chernobyl and found themselves frequently sick due to impaired > immunity. A few of my students were healthy and worked only one shift at a > different place--these students came all the time but it still took them > time to learn English. > > A couple of years ago I wrote an editorial against English-Only laws. Here > are a few things I said: > > Why do we need a law to convince people to speak English? We don't. New > immigrants would love to be able to speak English well. But learning another > language is not something that one can do quickly. This is all the more true > for adults who are working one or two jobs and have family responsibilities. > > It seems odd to me that Republicans (a Republican candidate was sponsoring > the bill) who believe there is too much government control want to control > what language we speak or maybe even how we speak it > > English-only laws are also unfunded or underfunded mandates. There are > already programs in place at the state level but these programs have been > consistently under-funded. If legislators are truly worried about people > speaking English, then they should adequately fund those programs already in > place. (BTW, I wrote this while living in Iowa. In Michigan, where I live > now the adult education funding was cut by 80% this last year. We turned > away almost a hundred people in our fall ESL program mainly because of lack > of funding.Yet most of us teachers have around 35 students in each class.) > > While some people said they agreed with me, I also received hate mail at my > home after this letter was printed in the local paper. One of the nicer > things said to me in these letters was that I should go back where I came > from. I found that interesting as I had grown up about three hours from > where I wrote this letter. But this hate mail only reinforced my belief that > English-only laws are a smokescreen for anti-immigrant sentiment. It seems > to me that nation states have a need and a right to discuss immigration > issues but why use language as the smokescreen. I also wrote and believe: > > English-only laws feed into fears that those different from ourselves may be > changing our way of life. But people don't immigate here to change our way > of life but to participate in our way of life. (Perhaps, in Miami this isn't > so clear because people keep believing they will be able to go back to Cuba > soon. BTW, most people don't come to the US to improve their lives [that > rarely happens] but to improve their children's lives.) > > Theresa Pruett-Said > ESL teacher > Michigan > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:16:22 EST