I'm one of a few Americans who know first hand where they're coming from. It's a horrible life with no hope. Not the USA's problem other than to get them out of country. The illegal entry of too many has been going on for a very long time under several administrations.
I would like to see legal immigration expanded and made easier, but none of those here illegally should ever be a part of that, ever, forever. We should bring in people that can integrate and be a productive member of our citizenry. The USA shouldn't have any trouble bringing in people who rather than be a burden to the hapless taxpayer, is a blessing.
Our govmint has failed the people miserably.
DISCLAIMER -- Please read only when you have time. I am not trying to belabor the point here. It's just that in my understanding the constitution will play a much much larger role I believe than we might think is coming. I could be off of course. But the trajectory of possibility increases daily. I doubt it won't become a major issue. So in the event this might be in proper scope, I think it is helpful to clarify why I might state more details here. It has more to do with the overarching themes of the constitution on the horizon, at least for me, than perhaps the illegal alien issue. On the merits of how you see things brother, I would understand and otherwise mostly totally agree. Blessings
I understand. And I agree with your concerns. That at the point our country has reached now for decades, solid immigration reform policy should be in place. And should it be legislated that no illegals get reentry, amen, so be it. But that is a view of right and wrong and what is best for country. Not that I disagree. In sentiment, I would. That we should only let in those that benefit the country in to begin with. I understand that sentiment and conviction. Amen.
But what if that were stated on the statue of liberty? "We only want your nation's best. The rest we will REFUSE or deport." In a twilightzone episode that might make interesting viewing. But from what the character and nature of America come out from and to originally be, in contrast it would seem more leaning toward elitist rule (not intended, nor do I think this is what you are saying, but just in contrasting with "what is" as the statue of liberty insignia). Or what those who would make there way through the system make it.
CONSTITUTIONAL CONUNDRUM
The idea behind America was to superintendent freedom from lording overing governance, and how that spills out amogst a host of policy. And why the constitution in theory is a bottoms up (not top down) governance. So from that perspective (which of course it is quite a different world today...and we need to take contemporary issues in sober consideration and stride, amen), the ways in which policy has arisen out of our original state of the nation, would be policies that flow out of the idea of America more than strict enforcement of social consensus of wrong vs. right--though, IMO. It would become what emerges from the idea of the constitution originally that would make its way into the social fabric. In the balance of more exacting laws, the liberals have turned immigration into a way to replace Americans to keep criminal syndicates in power (disinfranchising the vote of the people, and instead installing their leaders through cheating systems).
So the main issue and concern I would see would be all those agencies in America over the decades that weaponized a way to replace citizens with those less knowledgeable about the core values and principles of America. Because aliens are easier to dictate lording over criminal governance...in hopes to override the constituiton so crime at high levels could flourish. In the balance of America allowing herself to be overtaken by crime syndication with a globlaists face, is the inflow of immigration just trying to survive. Hearing duplicitious voices from America. "Don't come." And "Come with bells on." Even in our recent past few dacades the anchor baby boom syndrome came into play. As what would have been understood years prior would have been constitutional citizenship guaranteed to those born in America. This being in flux and working itself out for decades would be the outflow of what laws would look like arriving out of a constitutional Republic.
THE PRIME DIRECTIVE
Looking at things from this standpoint would have many messages sent to immigrants of course. I understand the bottom line of illegal entry in America's modern condition policy wise. Amen. But it's something that has evolved and is evolving. Unfortantunatley amidst globlaist encroachment perverting the system as well from the inside. Of all the choices to view this from, I favor the statue of liberty origin theme and the evolution of policy arriving from it. More so than lets say from how things look today. And making assertions from how we feel about it, today. Looking at it from those differing vantage points, I would say the testimony of what message is sent to other countries is as much a part of argument as is how citizens of America are effected. Obviously at the end of the day, of course, yes, it would have to be ultimately what is best for the country. My view on that though leans a little heavier though on what message we send the rest of the world "as" political currency to do this or that in the world." And that, would also effect the level of opportunities in the world, economics, etc. In general, the core value of what foundation America came from should never be quelled or overriden, I believe, by expedience. Although practicality is of sober consideration, navigating expediency too many standard deviations alway from the constitutional norm can produce what is better for society while also upending its core foundations, potentially. And in America's case, once that occurs to the constitution, we stop being America. Gaining sound legal foundations while eroding core foundational values of which we thought we were actually about (and what brought such power and majesty to our nation over the course of time).
KALEIDOSCOPE - ING
In talking with you i kind of feel like a liberal...lol. And it does not feel good to feel like that. But I don't mean it from the way liberals do. I mean it from the core essence of the differences between: What is best for a people & what is actually most sound constitutionally. On this I may seem to be more liberal. I understand. But don't mean it to be in this sense. I mean it more in the sense of the strength of the Constituion over and above ways we would like to see things. I believe we can arrive at both. But the way to do that would be through understanding the evolution of a country under the Constituion, I believe. And our ways of seeing that may differ. Amen. For example, the concept of "what is best for the taxpayer," to me is a symptom thought of England motif-ed surfdom. I believe though your meaning is equal to "citizen." So I know what you mean. But I bring this up because as we see with Trump a challenge to taxation/tariff contrast in something the nation has not seen in a very long time. So i'm going to say something ridiculous to stress a point: Perhaps we might feel disadvantaged not being a tax payer. Because the notion of our supporting America financially like that grants us a feel of shared ownership and right. But our rights come from God. Not government. And not from paying taxes. That is not to say the we should not pay taxes should they be imposed. But it is to say that to the degree the rights of the citizenry is derived in part from being a surf of a system (rather than endowed by our creator), to that degree our sense making of right and wrong has perhaps been somewhat adjusted in how we view things.
I don't state the above to grant the illegal alien the same rights as a US citizen (even though organically the constitution did not see a difference). Out of the foundation of the constitution, we were able to have refined laws to protect the American people. I am saying something controversial though. Not that we should let illegal aliens have the same rights as US citizens. But rather my controversy is perhaps far more in how America understands herself. Those that are citizens. For we have come to see government as not we the people. But those governing us. We are a republic. So we do elect that governance. And they are agreed to be over us. But in that trade-off it seems to me we have let the Republic representation to some degree be kind of a similar problem found in evangelicalism. A tendency in the church to outsource our sense of Christinaty to a pastor or denomination. I'm not saying you or me in that. Just that it is a condition we have in the country. So the controversy to me I reckon would be in how we can at times percieve things through an identity filter different than the constitution of the country. I suppose it could be argued that the time has come for illegals never to return as who America has become. But I would say though even though I see your reasoning and it does mostly resonate, constitutionally the country needs to define that better for itself. I would find the danger not in illegals, so much. As much as in what liberal abuse of illegals provides for us to think about ourselves as a country. Its reasonalbe. Sober. Expedient. And moral to have a complete shut out against illgels ever returning. But is it the constitutional America? Once that completely erodes, there no longer remains any government on planet earth affirming our rights are from God. That would be I guess my concern.
THE RUDE MATURITY PATH OF A CONSTITUTION & ITS POTENTIAL END-TIME COLLISION COURSE
Just a closing note on that. I'm not saying that the Constituion has not been largely perverted. Some would say we don't have one anymore. What we have seen time after time is liberals doing stuff unconstitutional. Then later it gets shot down. But liberals rely on that span of time in-between to expand the public conscience away inch-by-inch from the Constituion. And in this way it could be understood that we no longer have an actual constitution. And to a degree I would agree on that. But I tend to get at that from a different direction though. More like, even though the cookie jar has been raided for many many decades now...we are still the most powerful country in world history. To the extent that Constituion has foundationally deep roots, it would appear it could withstand quite a beating. And yet still, in all the pervsion of it, come out the most powerful nation in world history. When the people are more ready to revive it, it can be. And I certainly think we are on the eve of that. So help us God. To me, it would seem that even be comingled with end times. A philosophical/theological paradox for sure, if true. Blessings.
www.nps.gov
