I don't understand why you are called anti immigrant or worse if you want illegal immigration stopped and legal immigration slowed down. I don't have any problem with anyone no matter where they are from. The problem I have is with the sheer number of people coming in, and the fact that we don't have the ability to take care of all of them.
In other words, I really like all animals, especially cats and dogs, but I only have 1 dog and 2 cats because I don't have the time or resources to take care of many more. If someone wanted me to have 20,000 pets in my home, I would tell them no. Would that make me anti pet, or if all the pets were cats would I be anti cat and accused of anti cat bigotry and told I just don't like cats?
Its the same thing now with immigration. I think its fine as long as the numbers are manageable, and if there is some diversity in the group. I don't like have 80% from one area and the fact that there are so many its overwhleming the country.
2007-07-24 01:24:26 · 13 answers · asked by Tommy 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
I didn't mean that people are animals. I just wanted to use as a comparison something that I care about and do want to help.
Maybe I should have said "if you don't want floods are you anti rain? If you don't like traffic are you anti car?"
2007-07-24 02:19:09 · update #1
I love your analogy! Also, if you want to adopt children, but you only can afford to adopt 1 instead of 100, are you anti-adoption? If you love children but you only have 2, are you anti-children?
You are sooooooo right! We should only take in the number of immigrants that we can afford to take in and they shouldn't almost all be from the same area. Those coming in, should be coming in legally, so we can account for them and know who we are getting. Those coming in illegally, should not receive any form of amnesty, but should be rounded up and deported or deported as they turn up in the many government systems or as they are found through criminal investigations. Our borders should be closed up tight to prevent more illegals coming in and those deported from returning.
2007-07-24 07:56:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, you are not alone. Our education and health systems cannot absorb the numbers of illegal aliens without reducing programs and services to Americans and raising costs to Americans.
Our capability to respond to the needs of citizens is dismally lacking and I give Katrina aftermath as an example. We responded more quickly to the tsunami victims than to our own.
We have poverty, homelessness, illiteracy, hunger and failures to provide adequate health care for our own citizens.
It is ridiculous to attempt to be a 'welfare state' for illegal aliens or exorbitant numbers of legal immigrants. We need to be selective and choose immigrants who will contribute to our society. We cannot support the entire world.
Until we can solve our own problems, it is a great disservice to Americans to continue to allow rampant violations of our immigration laws. We need to tell other nations to start taking care of their own citizens, and we will do the same.
Rain is a necessity, unfortunately sometimes it causes a flood.
2007-07-24 04:18:48 · answer #2 · answered by JustSaySo 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I agree 100% with you. And your dog and cat analogy is right on. Over population is the biggest environmental problem we have. And the over population of unskilled, low income, people seeking our social benefits and education is causing a back lash among tax payers that will result in the dismantaling of those programs for our own people.
2007-07-24 04:40:23 · answer #3 · answered by John himself 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I, also, agree and understand. We can't provide a life for every poor, uneducated,unskilled person in the world. That's why we limit immigration as it is. Those who can't pass the qualifications are the ones who jump the border and try to live here with no obligation to our nation.
2007-07-24 03:24:30 · answer #4 · answered by Ms.L.A. 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
No, I completely understand. This country was largely built by immigrants, but it was built primarily by people who came here legally, and within the limits set by a more controlled immigration policy.
2007-07-24 01:27:44 · answer #5 · answered by Tony M 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
i completely agree.. and what really bothers me is that in one city in the state i live in, starting today they are handing out id cards to ILLEGAL immigrants. these cards will make it possible for these people to get jobs,, use public library's, and open bank accounts. you know all those rights that we as LEGAL americans pay for out of our tax dollars. i don't mind if people want to come to our country legally but why are we making it easier for people coming illegally?
2007-07-24 01:38:06 · answer #6 · answered by yahman 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
You are absolutely correct. Cause and effect is quite logical.
I wonder how many other people really actually even consider the consequences of over population.
2007-07-24 01:36:15 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Your pet analogy -- while very accurate -- will alienate those on the emotional side of the argument and give weaponry to the other side to try and discredit your logic altogether.
"People aren't animals."
No but in the worst conditions their behavior resorts to animal like. And when we cant take care of all the people......
2007-07-24 02:00:31 · answer #8 · answered by ? 3 · 5⤊ 1⤋
The way you compare immigrants to pets is rather crude, which makes it less palatable and hence, less persuasive. However, some of what you say is true. States with the highest number of illegals also have the highest taxes.
2007-07-24 01:43:06 · answer #9 · answered by averagebear 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I agree with you 100%. i only had one dog and one kid so that I was able to give them both the best that I could.I gave you a star cause I like the way your question was phrased.
2007-07-24 04:20:39 · answer #10 · answered by Marilyn T 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋