2007-03-16 09:18:21 · 33 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
Yes, we should.
2007-03-16 09:22:30 · answer #1 · answered by Carol R 7 · 4⤊ 14⤋
I trust you in idea. I see people daily that are the strong hearted those who Bush describes. I see many which at the instantaneous are not regrettably to implement a software like you advise ought to weigh down us. maximum regulation enforcement does no longer cooperate with imigration both willingly or with assistance from edict so how ought to all of us be conscious of that they violated the regulation? Any form of legalization software in simple terms makes the placement worse. we ought to could position self belief in our elected officials to draft the legislations and as long as Feinstein and Kennedy are in place of work you be conscious of that there'll be such fairly some loopholes you should taxi a 747 via it. The historic past assessments you advise they could enable 24 hours to finish, a twin of in the most suitable shamnesty bill. not often sufficient time to make a valid selection. seem on the so called "dream" act. on the face it sounds fairly functional. we are only going to allow those detrimental youthful ones ,who've come right here as little ones, gone for the period of our faculties, graduated extreme college, to flow to varsity. Now what does the bill fairly say? in case you acquire right here formerly you've been 16 and were given a GED then you definitely qualify. Now does THAT sound like the man they initially defined? How can we verify that they were given right here formerly they were 16? effortless. we do not. in simple terms yet another free holiday for the illegals and they get in-state instructions everywhere they opt to flow. US voters do no longer. Your heart is in the right position yet, till we get elected officials that placed the great pastimes of the yank people first i visit could say no.
2016-11-26 00:25:17 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. There's no way with all the forged documents and such that you could actually beleive any of them. So far we have had perfect instances in which they have broken more than just being here laws and NOT once have they not pitched a hissy about having criminals....real criminals....deported. Excuse identity theft, no licenses, no insurance, medicaid fraud on down the line........no thank you. They fight simply speaking English so what conditions do you really think they would agree on? They demanded a stop to ALL deportations when it's people who wouldn't have met with the conditions of the last amnesty proposal if it would have passed.
So no......
2007-03-16 11:07:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
How can an illegal alien (ie one who has broken the law by coming into the USA) be considered to have a "good moral character"?
All illegals should be punished and deported with a life time bar to re-entry!
2007-03-16 11:42:32 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Over six million decent, hard-working people are still in their home countries waiting on the INS to process their papers so they can come to the U.S. One lady has been waiting in the Philippines for over 25 years!!
So, if you define "moral character" the way any true American would - go back to your home country and wait till those who've done the right thing get their chance...and in the meantime, learn English and U.S. history just like those millions - then maybe, if they've shown THAT kind of good moral fiber, (and paid back taxes, have no criminal record, etc) sure. Why not.
qwerty
2007-03-16 10:01:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
Well, if they're undocumented, how do you prove how long they've been in the US? Good moral character - you mean someone gainfully employed... do you think someone who has employed an illegal for 5 years will be willing to show records and jeopardize themselves? Good moral character means law abiding - there's a major discrepancy there.
To start "conditions" would make the muddy waters even muddier, so my answer is no.
2007-03-16 09:24:28 · answer #6 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 15⤊ 3⤋
No way. "Undocumented" means they're here illegally, and if they had good moral character they wouldn't have sneaked into this country illegally.
2007-03-16 12:08:12 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
hahaha NO. what does undocumented mean? did they lose their wallet on the way to home depot?
2007-03-17 07:41:31 · answer #8 · answered by nuff 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They are illegal aliens and if they had good moral character they would not be illegal. They would have immigrated via the legal channels like all the other legal immigrants,so my answer is no we should not. By the way just who is we anyway?
The majority of legal Americans are against illegal aliens from any country.
2007-03-16 09:23:52 · answer #9 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 12⤊ 3⤋
You cannot attribute "good moral character" to those who have engaged in feloneous activity for five continuous years, nor do you grant citizenship to those who openly demonstrate a lack of respect for the citizens of the U.S. by violating their laws.
2007-03-16 09:26:17 · answer #10 · answered by merlins_new_apprentice 3 · 11⤊ 3⤋
No...
Should I be able to rob a bank because I have good moral character?
Should I be able to move into someones house that has more than me because I have good moral character?
See breaking the law in itself shows that you do NOT have good moral character.
2007-03-16 09:22:15 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 12⤊ 3⤋