response

the article

you know whats weird? the term "second generation immigrants". what the hell is that supposed to mean? as if the title "immigrant" seems to like... be bestowed upon a whole new child, a whole new lifetime, spent entirely in like... basically like... in the country... yet they'er called immigrants. why? because of the place their parents were born. that's absolutely rediculous. there's like more things at work here. why would the parents history be important in the definition of the child. the children htemselves having lived never a day outside of the country at hand in some cases, are still called immigrants... but why is this considered to be correct. consider if they were sent back to the country where they're purportedly said to be immigrating from... they would be moving to a new place, foreign to them, where they themselves would be foreign as well to the land. like they wouldn't have anything in common with the people. absolutely rediculous. and yet in the country they were born in, where they were educated, all thats considered familiar to the,, in that country, they are labeled as immigrant, as if they are some foreign thing in the land. what a horrible way to entitle someone. they should be recognized as merely citizens, and little more than that. rather than going to the great effort to describe them as being... second generation foreign born. absolutely rediculous.