Monday, 1 May 2006
|1654 - What part of "illegal" don't you understand?|
How do you know whether they were legal or illegal? Yes, mine generally came to the US before 1870, as far as I know. They obeyed the laws as they were then in force. Those laws were much more liberal than those in force today. I see no inconsistency there.
Trying to claim that everyone in the US is descended from an illegal immigrant is both naive and intellectually dishonest, for it's an attempt to divert the discussion from the real issue: Illegal immigrants are, by definition, lawbreakers. Why should we accept someone into our society who's already demonstrated he's willing to break its laws?
what we're doing is criminalizing what people are going to do. the same thing would happen without a policy of criminalization.
face it, criminalizing things does not stop people from breaking the law. Do people not smoke marajuana, even though it is illegal? Who are they hurting?
you seem to forget that all immigrants (you, me, others) are people. people break laws that cannot be or should not be enforced to begin with.
We're not even trying to secure our borders. That is the problem.
If the Left has its way, we're going to grant lots of people amnesty, and even citizenship, for breaking the law. That is the problem.
There is no effective penalty for hiring someone who has no right to work in the US. That is the problem.
Fix those, and we won't have an illegal immigration problem.
you keep assuming that this is simply a PROBLEM. You are using your birth as if it were a right - and it comes off as prejudice to me and many others. what did you and I do, besides being born (of which we have no determination) in the US in the 20th century, to earn the right to work here?
you have to ask yourself, how is crossing a meaningless line is the problem? if you say soveignty so help you God.
PS - not trying to start a flame war, just acccidently found your blog. i'm enjoying this debate, in spite of several presumptions
If we do not control our borders and limit immigration, then we are no longer a nation, and being an American becomes meaningless.
Put another way, it's highly inconsistent to decry offshoring and then advocate unlimited immigration. (No, I'm not saying you do this, but a lot of other folks do, and don't even see the inconsistency.) If we did not control immigration, we wouldn't have a problem with jobs going where the cost is lower - for those same workers would come here instead.
I don't mind disucssions here. That's why I post opinions.
well said. you're talking about soveirgnty being useless if you are unable to project it. the funny part is, as far a as jobs go, NAFTA has already lifted our soveirgnty
you seem to forget that all immigrants (you, me, others) are people.
Do you believe we should allow anyone into the country who wants to be here, regardless of who they are, no matter what their goals, no matter how much they disagree with ideals like "freedom of speech" and "freedom of association" and "freedom of religion", and no matter how many want to come?