First we must agree that illegal immigration is illegal. We must also agree that a fundamental responsibility of the federal government is control of its own borders. Without such agreement you are arguing something other than what is good and right for the United States of America, and if what is good and right for the United States is not your intention, then we have nothing to talk about regarding this topic, and you are excused.
So, the first order of business is to secure the borders – and no, that imperative does not require “comprehensive immigration reform” to implement. All that is required is the will to secure the borders. Fence, virtual fence, increased Border Patrol, National Guard, military forces, moats and alligators – I don’t really care. Use them all, and use them with purpose and intent.
If you were a husband and a father, and there were people creeping your house every night, raiding your fridge, taking your cash and sometimes sneaking drugs to your kids, how long would it take you to figure out a way to stop these guys? Would you try to figure out a comprehensive plan for them to have permanent, legal access to your home and a voice in your household decisions before you tried to stop them? I doubt it! Your first duty to your family would be to stop the intrusion. Failing that, your family is morally entitled to leave you to wallow in your own abject incompetence in failing to perform your most basic duty to them.
If you invited someone to visit your home for a specific period of time, and that person ignored the agreed term of the visit and continued to stay and behave as one of the family to the detriment of your true family – you would be failing your basic responsibility once again if you did not expel them from your home.
In either of these situations, could you reasonably expect your wife and children to have any patience with your continued whining about the “bigger picture”, the difficulties of locking the doors and securing the windows, how tough it is to locate the unwanted guest, how useful the guest has been in cleaning the home and washing the dishes or how concerned you are about the future and family of these intruders? Of course not!
We often hear that the physical border is not the whole problem and of course it isn’t, but acknowledging that does not excuse inaction. Back to the family analogy – if you had nightly intruders AND a guest who has overstayed her welcome, would your wife accept your lack of action regarding the intruders because, as you continue to point out, the intruders are not the only problem, and stopping the intruders will do nothing to get rid of the unwanted guest? Certainly not!
Suppose many, or even all, of the home invaders are truly good people with sad stories, would you then be excused should you endanger the health and wellbeing of your family because of your sympathy for their plight? Not in the least!
At this point, let us clean up our terminology: What do you call someone who comes, uninvited, into your home and helps themselves to what you have provided for your family? I know some who would call them a brother-in-law (I wouldn’t, I have great brothers-in-law), but none of us would call them uninvited guests, unofficial family members or accidental residents. You would call them deadbeats, crooks, trespassers, thieves, robbers and worse. In the national conversation we should call them foreign invaders – which they are.
I hope these analogies have helped clear your view of the politicians and pundits who make excuses for the government shirking its most basic duty – securing the national borders against invasion; and a duty that is closely akin to the first – keeping track of our foreign visitors and insisting that they leave when they said they would.
I’m not going to dwell overmuch on exactly how to secure our borders and monitor our guests, but I will make this point: The technology exists today to allow any business to secure their buildings and property against almost all intruders, and to know if a visitor left at the appointed time or if they are still on the premises. It can be done. NOTE: The impossibility of securing against all intruders does not excuse a refusal to secure against most of them.
Once the borders are secure, we can talk about what to do with the foreign invaders currently within our borders. Oh yes! It is impossible to deport them all! Who’s going to do it? How will it be done? All of the red herrings are dragged across the logical path. Let me lay out a simple, effective and just plan, keeping in mind that simply granting “a path to citizenship” spits in the collective eye of everyone who took, or is taking, the time and effort to play by the rules. Who would you rather have in your home, the person who comes at the appointed time for the agreed purpose, following the established protocol, or the one you find, unexpectedly, sitting in your Barcolounger watching your Sony big-screen, eating your Cheetos and drinking your Henry’s?
On the other hand, many worthwhile businesses would be unable to continue if every illegal were suddenly deported. So here is my plan…
First, we secure the borders – I cannot emphasize this enough, because without that we are simply hauling hay for the “howdys”.
Second, we insist that everyone within our borders have proof of legal standing – birth certificate, green card, naturalization papers, visa, etc. Those without such proof will be given a short grace period, say three months, to register their illegal status and establish a schedule for authorized re-entry (these schedules could be arranged so that a business did not lose its entire workforce at one time). After the grace period, anyone discovered, by whatever means, without proof of legal standing or proof of registration of illegal status (with a scheduled re-entry date sometime in the future) will be deported immediately – and upon such deportation will not be allowed back into the United States for ANY reason. If their baby daughter will die without their kidney donation…they’d better find a way to donate that kidney from outside the US borders. If their sainted mother is on her deathbed and begs to see her son one last time, he’d better appear to her in a vision, because he’s not entering the country to see her. We MUST have the will to see this through – keeping in mind, THEY made their choices and they are reaping the fruit of those choices.
Third, once registered and scheduled for authorized re-entry, the invader has a choice – do they wish to become a US citizen or not? If they wish to become a US citizen, they get in line with everybody else PERIOD and their former invader status can be used against their petition for citizenship. If they don’t wish to become a citizen, that decision is permanent and final. Under no circumstances will they ever be allowed to vote or receive public aid, of any kind, including Social Security – although they will be required to pay all taxes and withholdings along with everybody else. (A long term visitor in your home can expect to participate in household duties and share in household expenses, but they shouldn’t expect to inherit anything upon your death). Should a person choose noncitizen status, they will return to their country of citizenship for expedited processing for temporary resident status, allowing the United States to check their backgrounds and deny re-entry to drug dealers, gang bangers, rapists, murderers, thieves and other unsavory characters. Their temporary status allows them to stay only as long as they are legally and gainfully employed. Children born to temporary residents do not receive automatic citizenship – they are treated just like any other foreign national when they reach the age of majority. Any legal, alien resident who commits a felony or certain, specified, misdemeanors will be deported immediately upon conviction, with no obligation on the citizens to provide transportation of person or property or any other assistance to the families of the deported alien. Said families must either meet all requirements of legal residency or leave.
Finally, any entity (i.e. city, state, church, business, individual or institution), found to be knowingly harboring or shielding foreign invaders or assisting same in fraudulent voting activity will lose all rights of citizenship. In cases of nonpersonal entities, the principals of the involved entity as well as any individuals directly involved in such activity will forfeit their rights of citizenship.
This last may cause a large uproar among certain groups of people. When it does, we need to ask ourselves what would motivate someone to encourage, foster and assist a foreign invader. Once we acknowledge the answer to this question we will clearly see that disenfranchisement is both a just and a benevolent response.
All accepted avenues for petition for legal residence, family, political/religious asylum, etc. will remain open – except for those who are deported for felony activity or failure to register their illegal status.
For those of us who are Christians, our first concern must always be the salvation of souls. Obviously, soul salvation is not dependant upon one’s country of residence. We must then also concern ourselves with the wellbeing of the less fortunate. While it is true that, in a natural sense, being born or otherwise legally residing in the United States of America is rare, good fortune, we are not required by God to encourage circumvention of the law or to do so ourselves in our solicitude towards others. We may still work diligently to assist legal immigration, to help improve conditions in their homeland (which I consider to be the preferred option, since it plants a new seed of native Christians in a needy place) or to otherwise contribute to their health and happiness. Our Christian faith in no way requires us to put aside good sense regarding this problem, any more than it requires us to allow the needy to invade our homes and threaten the safety and security of our families.