Saturday, January 19, 2013

Double-Take Redeaux

Okay, I promised that I would not do anything more about Gun Control Today’s rant is about illegal immigration. Here’s a short one for you: What is so wrong about calling an illegal immigrant an “illegal immigrant?”

We are told in the media that this phrase is culturally insensitive; but I reject that statement entirely! I have no problem whatsoever with any culture. Mexican culture – to pick one that is usually in the news here as being a location from whence illegal immigrants come – is fine. Love their music, food, and parties. (And who can argue with the concept of the siesta?)

But this morning I heard another wonderful and completely illogical argument. Please remember – I have nothing against immigration. I was an immigrant myself for the years I lived in the United Kingdom. The difference is that I was a LEGAL immigrant. I followed the laws of my host country in getting there, establishing residence there, working there, and paying my taxes to the government.

What I DO have a problem with is ILLEGAL immigration. By its very definition, it is a crime and any move to forgive the criminal for the crime seems a backward way to change the law. If the law is a bad one revise or repeal it – DO NOT IGNORE IT!

There was a great argument that I have heard but never really listened to before. The argument came up in a report on the status of “The Dream Act” which is meant to give legal status in the US to illegal immigrants who came here as children when their parents illegally immigrated. These people are know by proponents of The Dream Act The quote seemed to make light of the fact that the law was being broken (regardless of WHO broke it) and was ignoring that one salient point.

The quote was this:
“The ‘Dreamers’ have done nothing wrong, they came here as children and why should we now sunder them from their family just because they were brought here undocumented?”
What an interesting argument. Let’s try substituting a specific name for the noun in that sentence and change the crime we are talking about. If you still agree with the logic, then perhaps we have something to talk about.

The revised quote now reads:
“Bernie Madoff’s children are innocent of embezzlement. They didn’t defraud their clients of millions of dollars. Why should they be deprived of their fortune just because their father stole it?”
You initial reaction may be that it is not an equivalence, but why isn’t it? Illegal immigration is a crime. So is running a Ponzi scheme. It could be argued that Bernie Madoff’s family had no knowledge of how he was getting his money. It could be argued that the children brought here by illegal immigrant parents don’t know that they are here illegally. I suspect the opposite is true on BOTH these points. Finally, the millions that Madoff definitely has value – but then so does coming to and living in the US; if it didn’t why would so many people risk prison, fine, and deportation to do it illegally?

No – I submit that there is no difference. You cannot grant with impunity access to the spoils of the crime just because the benefactor didn’t actually commit the crime. THAT is what makes no sense!

Wherever you are today, I hope you enjoy the logic (or illogic) of the world around you!

Don Bergquist – January 19, 2013 – Lakewood, Colorado, USA

No comments: