Anonymous wrote:This is the kind of issue that gets bozos like Trump elected. Of course entering a country illegally is an illegal action. Denying that defies logic. Whether illegal entry is morally or personally justifiable is a different matter.

Making a whacko claim such as "illegal alien" or "illegal immigrant" = "illegal human," and then trying to make that leap a Democratic litmus test, does nothing to help anyone and just turns off all the people that don't like being lectured about vapid ideas of political correctness.

Language matters, but requiring dishonest language is a flawed strategy, whichever end of the spectrum is pushing it.

1000%

They illegally immigrated but their not Illegal themselves. What's the big deal either way if they are illegal? How does that personally effect you? It's just racism.

Anonymous wrote:This is the kind of issue that gets bozos like Trump elected. Of course entering a country illegally is an illegal action. Denying that defies logic. Whether illegal entry is morally or personally justifiable is a different matter.

Making a whacko claim such as "illegal alien" or "illegal immigrant" = "illegal human," and then trying to make that leap a Democratic litmus test, does nothing to help anyone and just turns off all the people that don't like being lectured about vapid ideas of political correctness.

Language matters, but requiring dishonest language is a flawed strategy, whichever end of the spectrum is pushing it.

When you run on a platform of the feels, this is what you get. Why anybody would be astonished this is the dumb shit the democrats come up with is amazing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No human is illegal. But, humans do illegal things. By your analysis, we can't enforce any law because humans are the ones breaking them.

What are people who do not have permission to be in a country called in other counties? France? Japan? Australia? Argentina? UK? Poland? Kenya? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? South Korea?

Target practice.

In Saudi Arabia they are called infiltrators as well as illegal aliens.

Infiltrator is a proper term because it indicates these law breakers are entering the country as a hostile, invading force.

Seriously, what label do other countries use?

Wow. Maybe OP would prefer the term infiltrator for someone who breaches our borders? It might be the most accurate term without using the word illegal.

Invader.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just semantics. If you want us to say no human is illegal, that’s fine. But humans can be illegal immigrants, right? Humans can do illegal things, right?

If a human enters the US illegally, that’s a criminal action. Would you prefer we can them “criminals”. That would be accurate, no?

Here is the problem and I sincerely think you don’t know this.

It’s not “criminal” to enter the US illegally or to overstay your visa, just like it’s not criminal to do a 50 in a 35.

The first time someone enters the US illegally, it is a civil offense. And the civil correction for that offense is deportation.

Deportation is not a punishment, it is righting a wrong.

This is the kind of issue that gets bozos like Trump elected. Of course entering a country illegally is an illegal action. Denying that defies logic. Whether illegal entry is morally or personally justifiable is a different matter.

Making a whacko claim such as "illegal alien" or "illegal immigrant" = "illegal human," and then trying to make that leap a Democratic litmus test, does nothing to help anyone and just turns off all the people that don't like being lectured about vapid ideas of political correctness.

Language matters, but requiring dishonest language is a flawed strategy, whichever end of the spectrum is pushing it.

Anonymous wrote:

BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

Orange is the new black.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just semantics. If you want us to say no human is illegal, that’s fine. But humans can be illegal immigrants, right? Humans can do illegal things, right?

If a human enters the US illegally, that’s a criminal action. Would you prefer we can them “criminals”. That would be accurate, no?

But that’s seriously dehumanizing, don’t you agree?

Can ducks commit crimes? Can cows commit crimes? Crime is a distinctly human behavior.

Just to follow-up immigrant means you literally have a green card.

Anonymous wrote:Well, technically it sounds wrong. Undocumented means they are here legally just didn't do the proper paperwork, which could still jeopardize their status unless they've proof.

If they came here illegally, there are no documents to have. They aren't undocumented.

Immigrant means immigrated. Which means they have an immigrant status in our immigration system.

They can be a migrant and not have documentation but something is not right if they are an immigrant without documentation. Some forms of migration may be legal without immigrating, possibly amongst the native tribes along the borders. These confusing terms are a holdover from the frontier days, before the borders were settled, but after many of the tribes governance had collapsed (Natives knew about borders, they just didn't have enough people to defend it after the diseases.).

There are people who illegally acquire immigrant status via fraud, though in many cases the fraud is conducted by corporations rather than the individual. I would consider that an illegal immigrant.

Well, technically it sounds wrong. Undocumented means they are here legally just didn't do the proper paperwork, which could still jeopardize their status unless they've proof.

If they came here illegally, there are no documents to have. They aren't undocumented.

Anonymous wrote:Why is this basic message getting lost in the current news?

Of course no human is illegal on earth but unfortunately every human isn't legal in every country. You can't just decide to move somewhere and ignore their immigration policy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just semantics. If you want us to say no human is illegal, that’s fine. But humans can be illegal immigrants, right? Humans can do illegal things, right?

If a human enters the US illegally, that’s a criminal action. Would you prefer we can them “criminals”. That would be accurate, no?

Please call them undocumented immigrants. That's accurate.

Human beings are not "illegal." They are undocumented.

They documents. They are infiltrators.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about illegal slaves?

The ones liberals are freaked out about not being able to mow their lawns if they get booted out? Or the ones that pick their strawberries for purchase at whole foods?

Only liberals eat strawberries?

Only liberals get their lawns mowed?

I eat a lot of strawberries and I have a lawn service. I don’t defend illegal immigration by arguing either of these two will become too expensive in the absence of the illegals. That’s a liberal line of argument. Where have you been living, under a rock?