• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

It Is Rather Callous To Deport Undocumented Workers In The U.S.

Dryson

Commodore
Commodore
Why is it callous to try and deport undocumented Latinos, Africans, Asians, etc. who are working in the U.S?

If you trace the ancestry of millions of Americans, who are clearly not Native American Indians, you will find that they seem to have a start here in the U.S. as if they just sprang up from the rock and trees. Not being able to trace their ancestry back to a European nation of origin basically makes them undocumented workers.

So what are the suggestions in deporting the millions of undocumented Europeans back to their country of origin if we don't know what country they came from to begin with?
 
Are you arguing in favor of sending US born European descendants back where their ancestors came from?

Honestly, I can't make heads or tails of your post (and others that I've read).

The United States has been in existence for a couple of years now. We have established borders, and laws on the books that outline the immigration process, including asylum for political refugees and other situations. People who bypass that process are here illegally.

Is it callous to enforce our laws?

No.

Don't think that I'm unaware of the hardships that people from other countries endure, and their desire to come here. But there's a right way to do it. There are a lot of people waiting to get in and stake their claim on the American Dream of opportunity and freedom from the oppression that they may be suffering.

Come in legally. Welcome to America.

Come in illegally, and you have to go to the back of the line. No cuts.

Sorry if you don't agree, but there are rules. In every little piece of life. Break the rules if you want, but there are consequences. That's a concept that isn't understood or recognized much these days.

So there you have it. Fire away. :techman:
 
Why is it callous to try and deport undocumented Latinos, Africans, Asians, etc. who are working in the U.S?

If you trace the ancestry of millions of Americans, who are clearly not Native American Indians
But not all immigrants are undocumented. Documented immigrants went through the legal immigration process in order to enter the country.

You (and others) might equate documented and undocumented immigrants, but not all Americans do. Some see them as two separate groups.
 
Why is it callous to try and deport undocumented Latinos, Africans, Asians, etc. who are working in the U.S?

If you trace the ancestry of millions of Americans, who are clearly not Native American Indians, you will find that they seem to have a start here in the U.S. as if they just sprang up from the rock and trees. Not being able to trace their ancestry back to a European nation of origin basically makes them undocumented workers.

So what are the suggestions in deporting the millions of undocumented Europeans back to their country of origin if we don't know what country they came from to begin with?
I'm all in favor of greater immigration and a path to citizenship for existing undocumented immigrants (and especially children who were brought here by their parents and have lived here most of their lives), and I concur that there is a degree of shortsightedness for people who are descended from immigrants in the not so distant past to be so hostile to immigrants of any kind today, but while I get the larger point you were going for, your analogy is poorly formed.

Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution:
"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."

If you can prove you were born in the US or its overseas possessions (or to a US citizen parent), you are a citizen and by definition not "undocumented". You would have been better off sticking to a "we are a country built on recent immigration and therefore should be more accommodating to immgrants" angle.
 
Are you arguing in favor of sending US born European descendants back where their ancestors came from?
Only the ones who oppose other people getting in the same way their ancestors did, which, in a lot of cases especially in the 300 years or so before the final codification of the final iterations of the US's immigration laws, did so "illegally." That would be fair.
Don't think that I'm unaware of the hardships that people from other countries endure, and their desire to come here. But there's a right way to do it. There are a lot of people waiting to get in and stake their claim on the American Dream of opportunity and freedom from the oppression that they may be suffering.
"Unaware," no. "Fully aware that some people come here in order to avoid getting murdered but don't give two shits," would be more accurate in this case.

Come in legally. Welcome to America.

Come in illegally, and you have to go to the back of the line. No cuts.
Overly simplistic, since a large percentage come in perfectly legally but then don't leave for whatever reason.

Sorry if you don't agree, but there are rules. In every little piece of life. Break the rules if you want, but there are consequences.
Meanwhile, Trump properties are being used by rich Russians to give birth to anchor babies. Consequence THAT.
 
Last edited:
I'm moderate in some things but I'm hard-core conservative on immigration. Line-jumpers should be deported.*

*Not as hard-line on the "dreamers." But their parents...

Also - if we did not EDUCATE illegal children for free ( why? This isn't their country) then perhaps some of the draw of bringing them here would vanish. Opposed to illegals getting in-state tuition.

What part of illegal is hard to comprehend?

I'm in favor of legal immigration as long as it benefits us. Meaning those who bring value to the country and not those here for handouts.
 
Only the ones who oppose other people getting in the same way their ancestors did, which, in a lot of cases especially in the 300 years or so before the final codification of the final iterations of the US's immigration laws, did so "illegally." That would be fair.
But those people came into the country under the prevailing laws and rules of the day. Their entry was legal.
"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."
The highlighted piece is the kicker. If you're in the country illegally, you not subject to the law that says you can't be.
 
The problem I have is with folk who want to deport refugees. To what? Some would
be sent home to execution. Or abject poverty. And who remembers the Jewish refugees
denied entrance during WW II? No western port would take those ships.

How very American. The Statue of Liberty weeps.
"Great."

:sigh:
 
The highlighted piece is the kicker. If you're in the country illegally, you not subject to the law that says you can't be.
I wasn't using that clause of the Constitution as part of an argument defending illegal immigration, so I'm not sure what your point is. I was using it to point out the flaw in Dryson's analogy.
 
The problem I have is with folk who want to deport refugees. To what? Some would
be sent home to execution. Or abject poverty. And who remembers the Jewish refugees
denied entrance during WW II? No western port would take those ships.

How very American. The Statue of Liberty weeps.
"Great."

:sigh:

The statue weeps. REALLY? LOL. What a bunch of sentimental twaddle.

I've no problem with true refugees avoiding persecution*. As for poverty? HALF the world lives in poverty. HALF. And that is a modest estimate - I've seen figures approaching 80%. Are you proposing that we let them ALL in? Not happening. We have our own poor who should be at the front of the line first.

* as long as they're willing to assimilate and don't come here intending to turn our country into what they left behind with strict rules on how women should behave, etc.
 
The problem I have is with folk who want to deport refugees.
It would depend on the conditions "back home." A case by case basis. If what drove the refugees out no longer exists, then yes they could/should be returned.
 
I've no problem with true refugees avoiding persecution*. As for poverty? HALF the world lives in poverty. HALF. And that is a modest estimate - I've seen figures approaching 80%. Are you proposing that we let them ALL in? Not happening. We have our own poor who should be at the front of the line first.

I totally agree we should look to our own first. But poverty here is a different thing than
in a lot of places. Having a running well can be a mighty thing.


It would depend on the conditions "back home." A case by case basis. If what drove the refugees out no longer exists, then yes they could/should be returned.
I can see that, I'm mostly concerned with folk that have been here 20 years, built a life, then are told
"Get the hell on."

I think a good solution for 'Dreamers' would be to give them legal status, with citizenship
coming with graduation, if here for more than ten years. No graduation, out ya go.
And only for those children brought before, say, before 2015. I would give the parents legal status until that date, as well. They ARE here illegally, and the parents knew what the were doing. I don't know,
the whole thing might just be too complicated for any fix except total deportation. That sucks all the
way around.

:shrug:
 
If you’ve already been here the majority of your life and you’re a tax playing member of society with a family, you should get in by default. Some people are doing the right thing and are no different than anyone else in the country, they just fell through the cracks through no fault of their own.
 
I have a friend who went to the US on a holiday to meet a woman she met online and she ended up staying for years. When Oregon bought bought in gay marriage she and her girlfriend married. When gay marriage was bought in across the entire US she applied for a Green Card and got it without any trouble.

I asked her how did she manage to get away with being an illegal immigrant for so long (more than 15 years) She answered ‘it is an awful thing to say but no-one really objected to me because I am white’.
 
But those people came into the country under the prevailing laws and rules of the day. Their entry was legal.
The highlighted piece is the kicker. If you're in the country illegally, you not subject to the law that says you can't be.

Then that would mean that they are not under the protection of the laws that say you cannot be murdered just for walking down the street... Using that argument will not get you very far... Or rather, it WILL get you far, just not in the direction that you want to go.
In fact, that is where the term 'outlaw' comes from... If you were declared an 'outlaw', you were outside of the protection of the law, and you could be hunted and killed for fun, or any other reason...
 
*Not as hard-line on the "dreamers." But their parents...

Sadly the children suffer for the parents poor decision making. The UK changed the law so that if one is not a citizen and has a child your baby does not get automatic British citizenship. The state closed the loophole that people were using to keep in the country via their children. Now I think the child can only claim when they reach the age of ten.
I believe it is unjust on people who do things lawfully to give people who do things unlawfully a pass.
 
The statue weeps. REALLY? LOL. What a bunch of sentimental twaddle.

I've no problem with true refugees avoiding persecution*. As for poverty? HALF the world lives in poverty. HALF. And that is a modest estimate - I've seen figures approaching 80%. Are you proposing that we let them ALL in? Not happening. We have our own poor who should be at the front of the line first.

* as long as they're willing to assimilate and don't come here intending to turn our country into what they left behind with strict rules on how women should behave, etc.

Personally, I just perceive it as a given that most who emigrate do want to assimilate (not a Borg allusion either :D ). Few who go to another country and then demand the other country give them carte blanche are few and far between. Or I hope such numbers are over-reported rather than under-reported, the latter seemingly unlikely.

Which, to my understanding, seems to be true for every country? On a number of issues.

Some countries will try to trailblaze, but what if the rest of the world doesn't do the same thing despite said thing being a reasoned, genuinely good idea?

And how far back do people go, depending on the issue? Regarding immigration, some go back 500 years, but not 800 or 2000 or 10000 or more. Is that fair or right?

Our own countries do have a lot of people in poverty. All due to differing circumstances. That's a huge subject in its own right.

Many people do want to emigrate and add net value. And while people who do want handouts exist while shrugging off and/or laughing at those wanting to help, I used to know one such person and I've read about many getting help at the expense of others, how many of them exist compared to those who do want to work and contribute to society legally and fairly but didn't get helped they deserved?
 
The UK changed the law so that if one is not a citizen and has a child your baby does not get automatic British citizenship.

That's not something that can easily be done here, unfortunately.

I'd stop free schooling of anyone coming in from now on (not ones already here) and fine the $*#@ out of anyone who hires someone who is an illegal.

There is no reason why someone who doesn't belong here should get free public education. Parents might think twice if their illegal child couldn't get an education.

LEGAL immigrants are fine, btw. It's the line-jumpers that piss me off. Also - dreamers who are protesting/marching around people's houses? Shut the fuck up. YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS IN MY COUNTRY and DEMANDING THEM pisses me off.

As I said, I am as far right as one can go when it comes to illegal immigration.
 
I'd stop free schooling of anyone coming in from now on (not ones already here) and fine the $*#@ out of anyone who hires someone who is an illegal.

There is no reason why someone who doesn't belong here should get free public education. Parents might think twice if their illegal child couldn't get an education.
Many undocumented immigrants use false social security numbers (or legit ones that were taken from someone who is deceased) to be able to get work and/or put their kids in school, so a lot of the time the school wouldn't even know the child was undocumented. Incidentally, that's how undocumented immigrants pay way more into our social security system than they cost to be here, because they can't collect on social security benefits later due to the fake or previously used social security numbers. They're actually a boon to the social security system as well as the economy in general with their income and sales taxes and purchases. But I digress...

The other more common type of documented but illegal immigrants are the ones who came here legally for work on a green card/lawful permanent resident card (ie. not "line-jumpers") but have since allowed that waiver to lapse for some reason; and it's very easy for that to happen, often for ridiculous or arbitrary reasons that have nothing to do with them willfully flaunting the legal system. Those children would be known to the schools and could be expelled if they double checked their legal status during the next year's registration, but then you have the question of do you really want a bunch of children growing up here without an education?

If you think immigrant crime is a big problem (and besides the undocumented part, illegal immigrants actually commit much fewer other crimes per capita than citizens do, for the obvious reasons of not wanting to draw attention to themselves and get caught and deported), then how much worse do you think it would be when you're dealing with millions of undocumented and uneducated youths who don't have the skills to get jobs? The government isn't getting any more efficient at deporting them, nor is it politically expedient or popular with the voting public, so you're just begging to create a huge criminal underclass. Not to mention not giving them the skills to work, so they won't be able to contribute to the economy like the current Dreamers do.

LEGAL immigrants are fine, btw. It's the line-jumpers that piss me off. Also - dreamers who are protesting/marching around people's houses? Shut the fuck up. YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS IN MY COUNTRY and DEMANDING THEM pisses me off.
It's a common mistake to think that non-citizens have no rights under the Constitution, but that's not true. There are some rights only available to US citizens, but undocumented immigrants have the same First, Fourth, Fifth and Eighth Amendment (among others) protections as anyone else. So yes, they actually do have the right to protest and march.

Besides all that though, I don't understand all the hostility toward the Dreamers. They didn't choose to come here, their parents did, so they're not "line-jumpers" and didn't choose to break the law. Also, many of their parents came here legally and had their green cards lapse, so it's not like it was some kind of blatant flaunting the law situation even with their parents, it was just as likely a mistake or unfortunate circumstances. And most of the people who are "line-jumpers" are fleeing from war-torn or drug crime plagued regions that might as well be described as war-torn in many cases, or from oppressive governments and failing economies, and are just seeking a better/safer life. We did that with people from Cuba and Southeast Asia, so why not people coming up from Central and South America or the rest of the Caribbean? It's not like they're coming in such unsustainable numbers that we can't handle here, and they contribute positively to the economy and to future innovation (that is, if we educate them), since our population growth is stagnating, like it is in most Western nations.

I don't see how you can look at a kid or a young adults who's lived here almost their entire lives and never made a choice to break the law and be angry at them or want to throw them out of the country even if you have an otherwise hardline stance on immigration. They're as American as you or I except for a lack of papers, and have no idea how to live back in the countries of their birth. Some don't even speak their native language. It would be like throwing them into the lion's den to send them back in many cases. It's also a mistake to think they're all just working in unskilled labor or fast food jobs with high turnover, as many of them have the same types of jobs and careers as any broad spectrum of US citizens would, so it would be counterproductive to remove them from the workforce.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top