Get your affairs in order and get in line

[Vladd67]

Immigration takes centre stage for Republicans | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
So how are they going to round up these 12 to 20 million people?

[nj1]

deputes on the street corners armed with shotguns and a pack of dogs, stopping every hispanic looking person?

No, seriously it won't happen, America will have to bite the bullet and allow those already in the country some way to become citizens. Still, I found it a bit mad that they are thinking of building a fence across the border. That would be one long fence!
I'd think that if thety did try to round up all the illegals then they'd probably end up having a civil war or something

[Parson]

Sigh! The fence is very popular among most Americans. Unfortunately few people stop and consider all of the situation. The other related thing is the American law of citizenship. If anyone is born in the US, they can claim US citizenship. Ron Paul for sure and perhaps others of the candidates want to repeal that law because the children of illegals born in the States are legal citizens.

There is no way all of the illegals will be rounded up, but I would not bet against their being at some sort of try at it, at least in some states. Tribal thinking continues to rear its ugly head in humanity.

[pyan]

How does it go again? Ah yes....

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door."

[flygin]

I thought they were already building the fence.

I wasn't aware that Ron Paul and others wanted to repeal the law that says anyone born in the US is a citizen. I probably should have been, considering I've been hearing the use of terms like anchor baby (to refer to the new little citizens) being used by people in their camp. Citizenship by birth was one of our founding principles, and I am very disturbed by the suggestion that it be repealed.

[Delvo]

Originally Posted by Parson

There is no way all of the illegals will be rounded up

They wouldn't need to be. If the circumstances were changed so that their reason to be here no longer applied, they'd deport themselves.

Originally Posted by pyan

How does it go again? Ah yes....

Some lines that some poet thought sounded pretty cool for carving into a monument a couple of centuries ago are not particularly relevant in current legal/political decisions.

(Another example of this is the Post Office's thing about not being kept from their appointed rounds: like that thing you quoted, it isn't written anywhere in the law, and it isn't a mandate or policy or even a motto. It's something that the architect who designed the Post Office's building in Washington, D. C. thought would look pretty nifty written on the building. It has no weight in how things are really done or what the actual rules are.)

[pyan]

Originally Posted by Delvo

Some lines that some poet thought sounded pretty cool for carving into a monument a couple of centuries ago are not particularly relevant in current legal/political decisions.

Remained basically true until the Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965, though...

[j. d. worthington]

And it was much more than just "some lines that a poet thought sounded pretty cool for carving into a monument"... it was a genuine ideal of the more progressive movements in the 19th century....

[Dave]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

And it was much more than just "some lines that a poet thought sounded pretty cool for carving into a monument"... it was a genuine ideal of the more progressive movements in the 19th century....

I thought it was one of the ideals that the United States of America stood for. My daughter is going to America next month on a school AS 'Philosophy and Ethics' trip. One of the things she will do is to visit Ellis Island and read those "lines that some poet thought sounded pretty cool for carving into a monument a couple of centuries ago."

Maybe you should dismantle it and ship it back to France!

[Urien]

So are people here saying the Americans shouldn't attempt to stop the flow of illegal immigrants?

[j. d. worthington]

For myself... no. My problem with illegal immigration is just that: it's illegal. Giving amnesty and citizenship to those who take this route both disrespects (I'd call it a slap in the face, myself) those who do undertake the long, arduous legal process to become citizens, and -- whether people want to admit it or not -- encourages other illegal practices by giving them a "free pass" when they break the laws in the first place. It has nothing to do with not feeling they don't have a right, as people, to become citizens of this country, but that they are (at least) setting off on the wrong foot by disregarding the very rules and regulations they must swear to abide by in order to become citizens. In other words: after having done so, can one put any faith in their oath to follow any other rules they feel are too restrictive, or don't serve their self-interest? At least with those who do follow the process, it shows much more respect for and commitment to becoming a part of the society they are attempting to join....

My point about the bit of verse is that it represented (and still represents, to many) one of the things the United States stood for: the ideal that, whatever one's origins, they deserve a chance to live up to their full potential, and that this land was originally established to ensure this type of freedom....

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

For myself... no. My problem with illegal immigration is just that: it's illegal. Giving amnesty and citizenship to those who take this route both disrespects (I'd call it a slap in the face, myself) those who do undertake the long, arduous legal process to become citizens, and -- whether people want to admit it or not -- encourages other illegal practices by giving them a "free pass" when they break the laws in the first place. It has nothing to do with not feeling they don't have a right, as people, to become citizens of this country, but that they are (at least) setting off on the wrong foot by disregarding the very rules and regulations they must swear to abide by in order to become citizens. In other words: after having done so, can one put any faith in their oath to follow any other rules they feel are too restrictive, or don't serve their self-interest? At least with those who do follow the process, it shows much more respect and commitment to becoming a part of the society they are attempting to join....

J.D., you took the words right out of my mouth with this one. I've been trying to explain my problems with it for a while now, and here you give it perfectly. Maybe you can be my spokesperson. Just kidding.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Manarion

J.D., you took the words right out of my mouth with this one. I've been trying to explain my problems with it for a while now, and here you give it perfectly. Maybe you can be my spokesperson. Just kidding.

Thanks... I think. I've worked alongside people from damn' near everywhere on the globe. I've known both legal and illegal immigrants. My only problem with the latter is that they did circumvent the procedures that are set up to provide for immigration to this country. If those rules need to be changed, so be it... but it should be something that is done with deliberation and much consideration of the genuine pros and cons -- both realistic and ethical -- rather than based upon an unexamined emotional response. Like it or not, one must consider the realities of such issues because to do otherwise ensures a collapse of the socioeconomic system... and that will, in the long run, do much more harm to many more people, than a seemingly more hard-nosed approach which provides as much opportunity for as many as realistically possible will do.

As for those who come here illegally -- in many cases, my heart goes out to them, too, for their reasons for coming here. But sometimes the harder road really is the only truly viable one to take, even if it doesn't necessarily feel good. The solution to this, of course, is to attempt to improve the system to provide for as much humane aid and treatment as can be done with the resources at hand, and to -- as noted -- improve the actual process itself to enable more people to make that transition.

But... you do have to be a bit hard-headed about these things, as a fair number of immigrants (legal and illegal) to any country are going to be emigrating for less-than-savory reasons; and precautions must be put in place to protect the society from a large influx of this sort of immigrant, while encouraging those who will be a genuine asset to it....

[The Ace]

Yup, you've put your finger on it. Illegal immigration is a criminal act, and should be treated as such.

Having said that, mitigating circumstances should be taken into account, leaving your home is never an easy decision, and any reasons you have for doing so should be considered before deportation is examined.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by The Ace

Yup, you've put your finger on it. Illegal immigration is a criminal act, and should be treated as such.

Having said that, mitigating circumstances should be taken into account, leaving your home is never an easy decision, and any reasons you have for doing so should be considered before deportation is examined.

I'd agree with that. There are (at least were, and I don't believe they've been suspended) procedures in place for such things as political refugees, etc., where the details are examined before a decision is made. Of course, the "right" decision (whatever that may be) isn't always going to be made either, but having contingency plans in effect for handling such cases is indeed a good idea....