Many countries support multiple languages, particularly overseas. Their form of democracy and politics has not required that a single language be defined for the country to enjoy the same benefits that we enjoy.

Additionally, just because someone is against illegal immigration doesn’t mean that they “should” be for a single language for the country.

I see language as nothing more than a means of communication. Period. It is not politicial in any way, shape or form. It only provides the means of communication. Society has placed “meaning”, so to speak, on the languages of which you are concerned: English and Spanish, to be sure. Spanish is considered substandard, and English is elite. This is not the case. In fact, Spanish is a cleaner and more logical language than the English language. English is the second-most difficult language to learn in the world. Spanish is one of the easiest. It follows a distinct set of rules and rarely deviates.

So the next time you associate a formal national language to political endeavors, particularly those surrounding immigration, remind yourself that language has nothing to do with it.

Seriously. Think of the Spanish Language. What images come to your mind? A dirty mexican? Border towns? Or do you just see a method of communication? Are you seeing a set of stereotypes of people in your mind when you think the words “Spanish Language”? If that is the case, then your issue is not with the language. It is with the image in your mind. Those images are what block your vision and cause small-mindedness.

I am opposed to a formal national language. I find no reason why we, as Americans, cannot be like Europeans, versed in three or four languages.

Of course, you will also probably find my beliefs about the immigration issues to be far different from yours. I tend to look more globally due to my global experiences, and I have found that you tend to look more locally at issues as you have not had a lot of experience outside of this country.

Michelle