S/O: Illegal Aliens (For or Against)

[Anonymous]

100% in favor of immigration, paperwork notwithstanding.

I know plenty of folks I suspect are without documentation, and they work much, MUCH harder than many U.S. born individuals, and instill better values in their "anchor babies". I live in a neighborhood with lots of immigrants and lots of generational poverty. We have a fair bit of crime. And probably 90% of it is caused by welfare-collecting natural-born Americans. I want a way to get rid of those leeches. Suggestions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The illegals violate civil law when they enter the US. Then, they violate criminal law when they obtain illegal documentation (forgery, identity left) and lie on their I-9 when they obtain employment. Illegals cannot live in the US without becoming criminals. They just start off civil law violators. So the use of "criminal" to describe illegal aliens is not inaccurate.

Very astute observation. I agree 100%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:100% in favor of immigration, paperwork notwithstanding.

I know plenty of folks I suspect are without documentation, and they work much, MUCH harder than many U.S. born individuals, and instill better values in their "anchor babies". I live in a neighborhood with lots of immigrants and lots of generational poverty. We have a fair bit of crime. And probably 90% of it is caused by welfare-collecting natural-born Americans. I want a way to get rid of those leeches. Suggestions?

Did you read further back in this thread? Research has found that most "anchor babies" don't progress past the 10th grade. I say that goes a long way in continuing the cycle of poverty, no? I mean these immigrants aren't working at jobs that provide a lifestyle that would put them too far over the poverty line. You and I both know this...No matter how you slice it, illegal immigrants are a drain of the economy.

And if you live in a neighborhood with "lots of generational poverty", perhaps you should research ways to effect change (since you're close to the source) or move.

[Anonymous]

I am not at all uncomfortable. You cannot.reasonably equate the Holocost to America's need and right to protect its boarders. Your feeble attempt to make this connection does a disservice to every man, woman and child who were murdered in the Holocost. Antisemite.

[Anonymous]

This is an interpretation of the 14th amendment only. The supreme court has never ruled that this amendment is applicable to the children of illegal aliens. The framers of the 14th clearly stated that it should not apply to illegal alien children--that's why they included language about the person being under a "foreign power." Let the court make a ruling and if they refuse to follow common sense and rule of law then we need a national vote.

[Anonymous]

As immigrants, my family and I "fought" for our rights to become American citizens. The 1st thing my father did, after getting a job, was take night classes in English. Then he studied in order to pass the citizenship test as did my mother. Only then was I able to become a citizen also. How dare our government reinterpret the law to include illegals! I'm tired of needing to explain that I want help in English, not Spanish. I live in the USA and expect English spoken by all before being allowed to become a citizen. Pregnant women come here illegally in order to have medical benefits for their babies. Education is supposedly a right to all, overcrowding our classrooms, regardless of how they arrived in this country. When you fight for a right, you are apt to hold it more dear to your heart, as do I. Nothing was handed to me or to my family and I refuse to cater to, or hand over American rights, to people who break the law the minute they step foot on American soil. No paying of taxes, no benefits pure and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not at all uncomfortable. You cannot.reasonably equate the Holocost to America's need and right to protect its boarders. Your feeble attempt to make this connection does a disservice to every man, woman and child who were murdered in the Holocost. Antisemite.

First, it's Holocaust (and borders, but I digress). Second, you're the only one to mention the Holocaust. I merely pointed out that much of the rhetoric used in the immigration debate is similar to the rhetoric employed regarding Jews in 1930s Germany. If you don't believe me, go check for yourself. Whether it proceeds beyond rhetoric . . . well, I have faith in the majority of the American populace that it won't get there. (Note: that majority does not include you.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an interpretation of the 14th amendment only. The supreme court has never ruled that this amendment is applicable to the children of illegal aliens. The framers of the 14th clearly stated that it should not apply to illegal alien children--that's why they included language about the person being under a "foreign power." Let the court make a ruling and if they refuse to follow common sense and rule of law then we need a national vote.

A national vote? Like a referendum? Could you point to the constitutional provision that provides for that? Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not at all uncomfortable. You cannot.reasonably equate the Holocost to America's need and right to protect its boarders. Your feeble attempt to make this connection does a disservice to every man, woman and child who were murdered in the Holocost. Antisemite.

First, it's Holocaust (and borders, but I digress). Second, you're the only one to mention the Holocaust. I merely pointed out that much of the rhetoric used in the immigration debate is similar to the rhetoric employed regarding Jews in 1930s Germany. If you don't believe me, go check for yourself. Whether it proceeds beyond rhetoric . . . well, I have faith in the majority of the American populace that it won't get there. (Note: that majority does not include you.)

I like you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an interpretation of the 14th amendment only. The supreme court has never ruled that this amendment is applicable to the children of illegal aliens. The framers of the 14th clearly stated that it should not apply to illegal alien children--that's why they included language about the person being under a "foreign power." Let the court make a ruling and if they refuse to follow common sense and rule of law then we need a national vote.

You are swimming in ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an interpretation of the 14th amendment only. The supreme court has never ruled that this amendment is applicable to the children of illegal aliens. The framers of the 14th clearly stated that it should not apply to illegal alien children--that's why they included language about the person being under a "foreign power." Let the court make a ruling and if they refuse to follow common sense and rule of law then we need a national vote.

You mean, unless the Supreme Court agrees with your astute interpretation of the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is an interpretation of the 14th amendment only. The supreme court has never ruled that this amendment is applicable to the children of illegal aliens. The framers of the 14th clearly stated that it should not apply to illegal alien children--that's why they included language about the person being under a "foreign power." Let the court make a ruling and if they refuse to follow common sense and rule of law then we need a national vote.

Did you actually read the 14th Amendment? Did you know that it was adopted in 1868? Do you know Page Act of 1875 is the first act restricting immigration? Therefore, the framers did not consider any immigrants "illegal" when they wrote the amendment.

Text of the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

Nothing about being under a "foreign power" in the 14th Amendment. You confused "born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". It was agreed as international law in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations that diplomats are not subject to the jurisdiction of the country they are residing in as a diplomat. This agreement is based on centuries of tradition. Therefore, children born in the US to diplomats are not citizens of the US.

[Anonymous]

Hey, 15:03 , aka BItch, have you ever typed on an android, but I digress. 5he need to start you rebuttal with a reference to typos indicates that you recognize the weakness in your actual arguement.

[Anonymous]

15:58. This is a discussion of whether or not we are pro immigration. I am. It is a discssion of whether we are pro ILLEGAL immigration. I am not. Please stay on point.

[Anonymous]

15:58. I added more typos so you would have talking points.