I'll put it to you this way....The only ones I see disrespecting the United States, and demanding rights are those from the South. Those are the ones I have a major problem with.
2007-06-28 13:56:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by ▪ώhiteĝırl▪® 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
It's not about race, but language does make a difference. I'd rather have to deal with a Bangladeshi who speaks fluent english than with a white-as-snow Swede who speaks none. It's just a little easier to deal with. I wouldn't be inclined to let either stay illegally, but at least that's easier for me to explain to the one that understands english. And, if he does turn around his behavior and aply legally, he'll have an easier time assimilating, since he's already comfortable with the language.
On a more practical level, english-speaking illegals put less of a burden on schools and other services, since they don't require special ESL classes or translators.
Asside from those basically logicstical considerations, though, illegal is still illegal.
2007-06-28 13:28:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by B.Kevorkian 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
My view is this, if we still have people coming here illegally despite everything we tried before in the past, WHY aren't we thinking up of other ways to try to curb it? I mean, there has to be something that people have failed to look into before. It has more to do with the fact that we have a system that has excessive processing fees that are to be paid when someone wants to enter LEGALLY. When that individual finds that he/she cannot afford to go through legally and the red tape isn't helping much, but at the same time wants a better life for themselves and their family so badly they'll find that simply coming here illegally is their only other alternative. That alternative is desirable to them regardless of the consequences that could be faced.
2007-06-28 13:34:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by iwannarevolt 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
It makes no difference to me, illegal is illegal. But the British one might be more acceptable to some because they would have had to have been legal at one point just to get here. So there would have been some sort of medical check-up & background check. Someone from England couldn't just sneak in. Nobody is that good a swimmer.
2007-06-28 13:26:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
well both are illegal, so neither pays taxes. Actually a British illegal who is making 80K a year and not paying taxes would piss me off more than a Mexican illegal making 15K a year.
2007-06-28 13:34:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by littletricky 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'd rather have the British illegal. He speaks English.
2007-06-28 19:26:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by ClanSinclair 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Illegal is illegal but the Brit speaks English.
2007-06-28 13:33:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
The more educated person who speaks the best English is going to most likely be more productive to our society rather than a drain. Its not racist, its common sense. In the eyes of the law they are the same.
2007-06-28 13:25:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
The Europeans were the illegals! They came and settled already occupied lands, killed everyone, moved them to undesirable lands and when they try to come back they are called illegal? Hmm.... not cool.
2007-06-28 15:33:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by I LoVe ﷲ 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
It is not as exciting to say that it is white illegal...kind of hard to hate a white illegal..have to put some colour in theme for Americans to hate...Americans hate by colour, remember?...its just that hate now can be a lighter person or a darker person...both whites and blacks in the US have learned to hate others equally..if they were black or white illegals then it would be called racist..but in the US it is open season on anyone with a tan or not enough tan....but you are right..illegals come in all colours...
2007-06-28 13:26:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by bruce b 3
·
2⤊
4⤋