ok..*grin*...less formal.

in your post of 15 Oct, 8:47, you note how bilingualim had come about in Canada, and how well it usually works, since everyone MUST learn, (at least superfically, I guess) both languages. Then you ask me "what are you afraid of?" and note ..." I know a Spanish speaker married to a French speaker. Their children speak three languages. All three languages are spoken at home."...etc...

I see those points, and I agree that it does work reasonably well in Canada, and I agree that it IS good for a person/family to know several languages if possible, but I do NOT agree that the US could simply 'do like Canada' and require compliance and order everyone to learn Spanish, for example. The US has a much larger pouplation and demographic complexity than Canada, and there would be huge groups that would resist any attempt to institute such rules! We have Southern Rural folks (Rednecks is the common word) who would not have anything to do with an idea like that....and African-American populations in many cities which barely tolerate Latinos...and vice-versa.

In a later post you say ".. Therein lies the argument for early education, hiring practices that include minorities, balanced media coverage, and an absence of racial profiling and stereotyping."

good luck!...especially with a Republican administration.......also, some ethnic groups do SELF-profiling and stereotyping. They flatly do-not-intend to be like anyone else, and ridicule members of their own group who try to 'blend in'. This is especially pervasive among blacks, but is also common among Latinos and some Asian groups.

Again, I agree that education is good, and differences need to be ironed out, but this..... "I don't know if you can really compare Canada and the U.S. on the language debate but you can certainly use it as an example of how a government can make laws to provide inclusion..." is not really a workable solution given the desire by many to avoid true inclusion.

It is SO hard to explain how huge the problem is, and that it bears only superfical resemblance to Canada's situation..(though I read that Canada, as well as some spots in Europe, are seeing rapid immigrant growth that threatens to swamp the system).

I am trying to find a way to express my opinion briefly and succinctly, but it ain't easy, as you see.   

Let me just say that while I agree that "multi-culturalism" can be a positive educational thing and contribute to understanding and other good things, this ONLY works if the process is monitored and does not overwhelm the ability of the society to make adjustments, especially in conflicts of value systems--which are directly reflected in language. If we cannot communicate easily, we cannot negotiate and appreciate. You cannot just state that bi-lingualism and multi-culturalism are 'good' and that therefore we ought to durn well make it a law! (Most US high schools require some classes in a 2nd language for graduation, but NOT any specific one, and no one is willing to choose just one to require)

"Seems to me that for a Nation to grow and prosper, it must flexible and willing to make some changes."....and for those changes to be viewed as anything other than having someone elses values forced down one's throat, they have to be done much more slowly than you suggest. This goes way beyond "freedom of opportunity" , because a 'Nation' cannot be willing to do anything....only its citizens can, and every one of them has to be convinced individually, no matter how many laws are passed.