To preserve a Republic, a border must be maintained, one cannot have a definition of a nation, per say, without defined borders. Who and where are the illegal aliens? Who determines what makes one an ‘illegal’ ? Those who oppose illegal immigration oppose it for a variety of reasons. Here are some…
1. A citizen has inalienable rights under the Constitution, rights are defined as God given, or natural, however citizenship is defined as an individual dubbed a “citizen” by the Government. Therefore, only government bequeathed “citizens” possess “rights”.
2. Illegals are tearing the precious welfare state apart, and we must prevent it. There are only so many teats per udder, and so many cows in pasture-America.
3. Illegals bring crime, which taxes our police forces. Anarchy will ensue if we do not build a wall as China did once.
Others, will promote immigration, legal and “illegal” the following ways…
1. Obamas numbers are tanking, this voter registration drive is needed to perpetuate the destruction of capitalism and constitutionalism, if one party does not have the support, one needs to find the support.
2. Mexico is falling apart, we can’t just let these people die, lets take them in keeping with our sacrificial altruistic conditioning.
3. Borders should not exist, we live in a new world paradigm, open the gates up wide.
Theres one principle to keep in mind when debating any political issue, that principle is senior to all others. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.
Individual Rights belong to all men, American or non. If they belong only to citizens, government can change citizenship status, whether you are born an American, or not…willy nilly. The welfare state is a violation of individual rights, it forcefully takes from some, and gives to others. Less than wealth, what is spread is unearned dollars and unearned guilt. One cannot support any aspect of the welfare state, and support individual rights as well. The two cannot co-exist in principle. In practice, when they do, freedom always yields. The rule of law is vital. Some Mexicans do bring crime, such as the drug violence we are seeing. But mankind is basically good, that means that one cannot address a group based on what 2-5% of its members do. A border should exist, it should have entry points, those should allow anyone in who does not pose a threat to the general populus. They exist to weed out the terrorists, criminals, and those with highly infectious diseases. 95% of those coming from Mexico should be allowed in. If one thinks that this cannot be fool proof, they are correct. However, restrictions on numbers of people are not based on the principle of individual rights, but loosely on eugenics, xenophobia, and statism in general.
We are the land of the free. Period.
We are an isle of hope.
We are a nation, that must maintain a border, with free admition to those who only seek to live here, wether temporarily or permanently. If they violate our laws within a certain period of time, they should be deported. If they intend to live off others, they should only be able to do so voluntarily, not through government force, and the welfare state.
The debate is moving in a dark direction. It highlights many dark premise accepted by both the right and left. We cannot address immigration by expanding the police state and preserving the welfare state. Theres enough statism to go around. We must preserve the Republic, and uphold the principle of individual rights for all men. Its time to stop selling freedom short, and go long on liberty.