Thread: Phil Araoz: Legal or illegal? Yes, it makes a difference

http://www.postbulletin.com/newsmanager ... 2&a=293428

5/8/2007 9:12:11 AM
On May 1, 150 people marched in Austin "fighting for the rights of immigrants," according to the march's organizers.

What's missing there? How about that the "immigrants" they were marching on behalf of were illegal immigrants? The omission of the word "illegal" is more than semantics. It gets to the heart of the issue. Are immigration laws real laws? Should any immigrants be considered "illegal?" Listen to debate over illegal immigration and you see that those fighting for "immigrants' rights" (actually illegal immigrants' rights) are working from the assumption that immigration laws aren't real laws. Look closer and you see that their core assumption is that the United States should not exist as a nation.

It doesn't take much to see that supporters of "immigrants' rights" don't believe immigration laws are real laws. Consider the statement by one of the Austin march's supporters: "The majority of (illegal immigrants) are good law-abiding family people." This is a frequently echoed sentiment that overlooks that these "law-abiding" people are breaking immigration laws each and every day they're in the country.

What thought process allows people to dismiss immigration laws so easily? One line of thinking is economics. The argument is that illegal immigration creates a net economic benefit and that benefit should outweigh other factors, like the law. That argument ignores the burden illegal immigration puts on our social services. It also ignores the probability that if illegal immigrants were not present, supply and demand would ensure that the jobs they perform would be filled, only at a higher wage.

The second argument states that widely violated laws can be ignored. This assumes the illegal activity isn't really harmful. This is the thinking behind movements to legalize marijuana or prostitution and is very much part of the thinking behind the fight for "immigrants' rights."

So, is there harm in uncontrolled immigration? That brings us to the core assumption -- that the United States should not exist as a nation. What is a nation? First, a nation has well-defined borders and its own laws, decided upon by its own people. In the illegal immigration debate, we are seeing foreign nationals influencing our political system to serve the economic interests of Mexico. This not only weakens U.S. sovereignty but also keeps Mexico from facing its internal problems of poverty and corruption.

Second, a nation contains people with a common language and a common culture. Even though the United States is a young nation, and a nation of immigrants, it has a common language (English) and a unique culture. In this country, we are so isolated from the rest of the world that we often don't appreciate how unique our culture is or understand its strengths and weaknesses. But it's there. Our culture is the product of British colonization, the protection of two large oceans, a recent history of frontier expansion and, of course, the assimilation of many immigrants. We see our country as created with a high calling. We're independent, sometimes to a fault. We're American. And that's a good thing.

Some would suggest that acknowledging the existence of a dominant culture is racist or denigrating of other cultures. It's not. As a first generation immigrant, I have a lot of pride in my Latin American heritage, and I think American culture can benefit from the strengths of Latin culture. But our politically correct emphasis on diversity for diversity's sake sometimes causes us to devalue the things that bind us.

That's the problem with uncontrolled rapid immigration. It allows immigrants to form isolated pockets, where they don't learn the common language, don't adopt the common culture. This is not healthy for a nation. Look at how even a stable country like Canada suffers from separatist instincts because its people speak two languages. Things are worse for the immigrants themselves, who are destined to second-class citizen status until they can join the mainstream.

Without regulation, illegal immigration will slow down only when economic conditions equilibrate between the United States and Mexico and there is no more incentive to enter the U.S. This will result in large sections of our country not considering itself part of the United States and overall worse economic conditions in the United States.

The solution is to enforce our own border and to help Mexico help itself, so that Mexico can provide for its own people and be a proud nation on its own. The solution is not to blind ourselves to the distinction between legal and illegal immigration.

The omission of the word "illegal" is more than semantics

You are so right about this. I read some headlines in
newspaper around te world and all of them failed to
mention the "illegal" part. They all say the rallies were to
demand rights to immigrants in the US, as if a legal
immigrant had none.

Great article, Steelerbabe, and odiesback, I agree with your quote. Here's the other one which the OBL crowd just can't get past 'cause it's the truth.....

This is a frequently echoed sentiment that overlooks that these "law-abiding" people are breaking immigration laws each and every day they're in the country.

The day they choose to be in this country, either sneaking over the border, or overstaying a visa, illegally....

BY DEFINITION, THEY ARE CRIMINALS!