Illegal is anything that is against the law including drug trafficking, smuggling, terrorism or crossing the border into a country in violation of the law.
2006-09-09 12:19:31 · 17 answers · asked by dwh320 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I love common sense's scenario it is the best analogy i've heard yet.
Keep posting that analogy on immigration.
2006-09-09 12:25:16 · answer #1 · answered by Greshymn 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Good question...
Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.
Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house).
According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he, too, is hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part). If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there.
It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm a hard-working and honest, person, except for, well, you know.
And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being an
anti-housebreaker. Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.
Why can't people see how ridiculous this is? Only in America!
2006-09-09 12:22:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
"Guest" is stretching it, becaue guest implies someone who is welcome, whether invited or not.
But yes, the analogy is valid. Both are acceptable terms, because both describe specific legal statuses. Most people consider alien and immigrant to be interchangeable, even though under the law they are not.
And an illegal alien may be documented, and may not be an immigrant, so those terms aren't interchangeable either.
Sadly, very few people using the terms actually care enough about the issue to be precise, which itself is half the problem.
2006-09-09 12:24:10 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
More like an, uninvited undocumented house guest !
2006-09-09 12:25:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I just wish their home country would install the infrastructure so that it also would be a land of opportunity. The US with our tax dollars has created infrastructure that enables creating wealth.
2006-09-09 12:31:53 · answer #5 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Kind of. It's definitely a more liberal/pro-Mexican label. It's like the difference between a pro-Gentile and an anti-Semite. It's all about the label, and the interpretation of that label.
2006-09-09 12:26:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
YES!! The leftist liberals have a problem with calling a spade a spade.
2006-09-09 12:22:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Similar...typical euphemistic political correctness
2006-09-09 12:22:58 · answer #8 · answered by GreenHornet 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I love the comparison
2006-09-09 12:23:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yup! You have the balls to say what I'm thinking.
2006-09-09 12:22:31 · answer #10 · answered by ?Bob?NYC? 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋