by Sandy » Mon Jan 07, 2019 11:01 am
I think that's the question, "How many illegals make it a problem?" According to the Trump administration's own Department of Homeland Security, illegal crossings have declined substantially since the early part of the Obama administration, and continue to remain low, well below previous "tolerable" thresholds according to previous administrations (back to Reagan at least). Is the goal to prevent every single illegal crossing? Not happening. Is it a crisis now? No, at least not according to the information that has been provided by Trump's own department of homeland security. The idea that the country is being overrun by "terrorists" in "the thousands" from Central America and Mexico is a lie. But this conversation and discussion isn't about "illegals." No one that I observe is advocating for open borders or amnesty for everyone who manages to cross the border regardless of how, that's another Trump lie. This conversation is about global refugees who are, under existing US law, able to enter the country and stay until their request for asylum has either been approved or denied.
As I said before, the analogy of having someone homeless come into your house is a false one. This is a democratic republic, a nation "of, by and for" its people. It's not just your house, it's the people's house collectively. Laws are made and passed by those elected who represent the will of the people and current laws allow for individuals to come to the US and remain in the country while applying for asylum as refugees. Refugees do not always have the luxury of being able to assemble all of their papers and documents and get visas before they flee, in most cases for their lives. So they do not always have the luxury of presenting themselves at a border crossing and asking for permission to enter without documents. Trumps actions and executive orders are going against the will of the people as reflected in current immigration laws, and in the court rulings that have put a stop to his bigoted, ridiculous executive orders.
What number is too many? Jordan, a county with 10 million people, a GDP of just under $100 billion, has taken in about 1.5 million Syrians. Refugees are, for the most part, limited by geography. Any Syrians who came to the US seeking asylum would have to find a way to get here. I doubt we'd ever have to consider more than the 60,000 proposed by Clinton. I know an Orthodox church in Pennsylvania that worked to bring 10 families here, getting them out of ISIS controlled territory. They don't cost the government a dime, the church raised the money to support them, helped them find housing and jobs to earn a living. Shouldn't be a problem if the economy is booming like Trump says it is.
Your use of the term "stupid" is inappropriate. My contention that this is a sanctity of life issue is based on fact. Refugees, in most instances, are in mortal danger when they flee. What number of abortions is low enough to be acceptable to pro-lifers? Or are unborn Americans simply worth more in the value of life than Syrian or Honduran refugees?