IFEMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2074 times:
Quoting Superfly (Reply 1): This is absolutely horrible! I read this story this morning and I hope she is reunited with her son here in the United States.
Kudos to the United Methodist Church in Chicago for protecting her from being split from her child. She will be back here with her son sooner than you think.
She's a criminal. No matter how you paint it, or how vocal and public anyone (including her and her son) get about it, she's a criminal. Besides, I think she showed where her loyalities really lie in her own statement:
Quote: "I only have two choices. I either go to my country, Mexico, or stay and keep fighting. I decided to stay and fight."
If she still claims Mexico as her country, she should have just damn well gone back there rather than carry on her ridiculous pilgrimage for a free ride in to a country she has no claim or tie to. If she wants to come back that bad, then when son turns 18, he can file to sponsor a green card for her.
The authorities did exactly the right thing. And they need to do this more often.
AndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2063 times:
First of all, as some of you know, my wife and her family are from Mexico.
Here is our take on this, and it may be cruel to some.
What has happened is that in the last several years, ILLEGAL immigrants have essentially asked for and gotten the rights of lawful immigrants and citizens. I mean, why go thru all the hassle of becoming legal when you can do it for free. Not only that, from personal experience, some illegal immigrants are asking anywhere from $15 to $20/hr to do house cleaning.
We as Americans cannot simply go to another country and demand the same rights that country's citizens have.
While some may complain about the US immigration laws, they are nothing compared to laws in other places. For example, my wife's cousin, who is legally in Switzerland, had a daughter while legally there. Does her daughter hold Swiss citizenship? No.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12328 posts, RR: 12 Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2057 times:
There is a sad conflict here. Her son is a legal American Citizen who is a lot better off being in the USA - except for not having his mother with him, however she was fair game to be arrested and deported. She crossed the border illegally at least 2 times and committed serious criminal acts of identity theft and using a stolen Social Sec. number (probably from a dead person) and used that identify to get a job in what is supposed to be a secure area of a major airport. Too bad they couldn't have arrested and prosecuted her on the criminal charges of identity and S.S.N. theft and upon conviction, ending up with a jail term for a while then deported. It could also be used to keep her from ever returning the USA legally again or apply for USA citizenship.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2045 times:
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 3): No it's not. She's a criminal . . . illegally crossing an International Border is a crime.
Not on any moral level. At best it is an infringement of an antiquated, reactionary and entirely arbitrary line on a map, devised by a bureaucratic requirement but with no moral validity. You can't stop population movements, something the Romans discovered to their cost. There will always be a natural and unstoppable trend of movement from areas with poor resources to areas with plentiful resources, it's as natural as osmosis. Borders are so 19th century.
YOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4781 posts, RR: 17 Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2026 times:
Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 6): For example, my wife's cousin, who is legally in Switzerland, had a daughter while legally there. Does her daughter hold Swiss citizenship? No.
That is because being born in Switzerland is not enough to gain citizenship, this is not the case in th US. Currently just about anyone born in the USA and its territories (children of diplomats notwithstanding) is born a US citizen. If they repealed this law then this 'case' would be a total non-event.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2019 times:
Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 9): International borders are "entirely arbitrary" - I don't think so.
Of course they are - in very few cases do they reflect any kind of accurate natural ethnic or cultural boundaries. In the vast majority of cases they were drawn on a map as part of some treaty or other, and very seldom with the consent of the people across whose land the line actually travelled. Borders used to change all the time, as ethnic and cultural assimilation occurs, as economic power and influence fluctuated. Nowadays thanks to 19th century nationalism we're pretty much stuck with the crappy, unrealistic borders that were drawn then, with no option to recognise and accept natural evolution as demographics change. The only sensible option is to make borders irrelevant.
Travelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2020 times:
While I feel for her son, it is the mother that put them in this situation in the first place. She (like many others) ignored the potential ramifications of having a child in the US while she was there illegally.
You cannot pick and choose which laws you want enforced, and which are inconvenient to you. The minute that happens, our entire legal system flies out the window.
Exactly. Look, I feel for the child as much as anybody, but if you send this women home, it sends a strong message, don't come here illegally or this could be your consequence. If you sweep this under the rug, it sends a strong message that you can get away with it in these circumstances. I vote for the first option.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2004 times:
Quoting Travelin man (Reply 14): How then would you account for varying laws in different countries? Or are you saying there should be no "countries"? Just one big mass of humanity?
Yes I'm saying there should be no countries. It is possible to maintain and grow unique and valuable cultural identity without the need to ring-fence it with the notion of a country. Countries imply that everyone within them has in some sense to be heterogenous, in order to comply with some arbitrary national "standard". This leads to nationalism, and nothing good ever came from nationalism. Like it or not, we ARE just one big mass of humanity, why create artificial differences when the natural differences between us are interesting enough already.
Quoting Travelin man (Reply 14): Perhaps borders will disappear when people stop trying to come in to commit acts of terrorism
Yeah, borders really help there. If 12 million illegals can wander across the Rio Grande, what's to stop the 12 millionth and one bringing a suitcase bomb with him ? Hell, a hundred bucks and good deal of patience will get you a US tourist visa, then who's going to stop you ?
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7428 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2000 times:
Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 12): The only sensible option is to make borders irrelevant.
Hahaha. There you go. You admit borders are in fact very relevant in today's world. Now, more than ever.
We can't rely on vast oceans to protect us. Instead, we need borders.
It's not impractical. Just try to go to Norway and become a citizen. Try. It's a very wealthy country that most humans would love to join. But unfortunately, they have border patrols with guns. Why? Because the Norwegians do not want 100 million newcomers to overrun their country and mess things up. This is Norway's privilege.
And, Mexico, a very middle-class country, is paradise for many of the world's poor. Do you suppose Mexico is eager to take 100 million Nigerians and Angolans? Of course not, Mexico would round them up and deport them if they came.
Your logic says that just by having babies, you can claim a rich nation's assets. Just send your offspring over there and collect the rewards. Just not the case. I do not understand the idea that anyone deserves the rewards of a successful society, even if they have not participated in that society. It disrespects the whole idea of the hard work it took to build a successful society. I am not entitled to things just because I was born. I am entitled to things because my society is well organized, helps me, and in return I will pay it back and more. To destroy the integrity of the society by an assault of amneotic fluid is simple biological warfare. This woman is doing no less.
China is also aware of this bio-colonization, which is what they are doing in Tibet, again using women as incubators to neutralize the Tibetan society biologically. I find that objectionable too, but for different reasons. Societies have rights equal to -- or greater than -- outside individual humans.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7428 posts, RR: 2 Reply 19, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1991 times:
Quoting ORFflyer (Reply 15): if you send this women home, it sends a strong message, don't come here illegally or this could be your consequence.
I'm not sure it's a strong message. It's just showing we are not brain-dead, we still have a few brain cells working.
Sending 1 million of these visiting foreign friends home would be more of a "strong statement." Like, we have enjoyed having you here in our country, but now your visit has come to an end. Everyone has a home, including these women. Surely Mexico will allow these to bring their American babies home to Mexico. These are strong and useful women that Mexico should be proud to have. How can Mexico build its country when its most industrious people leave?
Mexico has plenty of money. It is simply a horribly governed middle-class country with a horrible education system. It is up to Mexicans to fix this. They are not short of money. I am not sure why I should feel sorry for them. Because in fact, they are asking for a profound charity. It's not standard procedure, it's asking to become brothers. I am not sure one always needs to consent to this request, even though it is flattering.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7428 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1986 times:
Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 18):
When there are no jobs and no possibility of jobs the flow of illegals will be substantially reduced.
Everything else, fences, border patrols, etc - is just some one getting rich off political connections.
You are absolutely correct. It's a mathematical fact that too few people understand. You have correctly identified the complete, 100% answer to this problem.
Those simple changes and this "intractable" issue is solved before 2007 is over. It may yet happen with these IRS "non-match" letters being sent out. That is one way to solve this problem, if they actually DO IT like they say they will.
RFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 6140 posts, RR: 25 Reply 21, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1982 times:
Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 6): While some may complain about the US immigration laws, they are nothing compared to laws in other places. For example, my wife's cousin, who is legally in Switzerland, had a daughter while legally there. Does her daughter hold Swiss citizenship? No.
In about 40-50 countries the US standard applies - children born in the country are legally entitled to be citizens of that country. (Many of those countries took their immigration / citizenship laws from the US)
But most developed countries have stricter limits.
In Japan, children of Japanese mothers married to US servicemen have NO rights to stay in that country after turning 21. (As of 1986 - might be wrong on that right now).
The US has a big problem compared to those other countries, we don't have a way to identify our citizens positively - not having a national idenity card system and database.
Both of my children HAD the right to citizenship in the Republic of the Philippines.
However, like the US - they had to initiate efforts to claim that citizenship before age 25.
A child born in the US, taken to Mexico and raised there to age 25 does not have US citizenship - even though he/she may have a US birth certificate. However due to our lack of an identity standard - that would not be uncovered until he/she applied for a passport.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1979 times:
Quoting Flighty (Reply 17): It's not impractical. Just try to go to Norway and become a citizen. Try.
I can very easily go to Norway, I don't even need a passport to do so. There is no border between Norway the rest of Europe, Norway has signed the Schengen Treaty. I may not be able to become a citizen, but why would I need to, I can live and work there without restrictions.
Quoting Flighty (Reply 17): But unfortunately, they have border patrols with guns. Why? Because the Norwegians do not want 100 million newcomers to overrun their country and mess things up. This is Norway's privilege.
They do ? Where ? I never saw them.
Quoting Flighty (Reply 17): t disrespects the whole idea of the hard work it took to build a successful society.
So you feel somehow deserving because by an accident of birth you were born in the USA. Was this your hard work ? No - it was blind luck.
Quoting Flighty (Reply 17): Societies have rights equal to -- or greater than -- outside individual humans.
Fascist claptrap. Societies only consist through the consent of the individuals of who make up that society. "Society" itself has no existence independent of its constituents.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7428 posts, RR: 2 Reply 23, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1965 times:
Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 22): Fascist claptrap. Societies only consist through the consent of the individuals of who make up that society. "Society" itself has no existence independent of its constituents.
We agree. However, those "constituents" do have a meaningful relationship. An enemy cannot simply inject amneotic fluid and "democratically" become part of that society. There need to be rules. Or, indeed, there will be no highly developed countries. Why bother, if you're just going to get amneotic fluid sprayed all over you?
Ultimately the defenses of borders arose as a biological necessity when humans passed the hunter-gatherer stage and settled on lands. The same biological necessity remains valid today. A rich country still cannot function with open borders. Dubai is a rare example, but the EU is _certainly_ ... certainly!!!! not an example of an open-border region.
Africa is just to the EU's south. Given open borders, the EU would essentially collapse into anarchy and the largest slums in the world. This is not a racist or fascist statement. It is simply a mathematical statement about what 500 million poor people would do to the EU in the space of 2 to 3 years. They would destroy it.
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 7428 posts, RR: 2 Reply 24, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1958 times:
Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 22): So you feel somehow deserving because by an accident of birth you were born in the USA. Was this your hard work ? No - it was blind luck.
It's not about what I deserve. It is about what my society deserves. I am no better than the poorest baby in the world. However, my society is better than the poorest and most lawless societies. I think it is good that my society is functioning well. If I simply give that society away, I participate in its destruction. I am not overly concerned with my own comfort. I will be fine either way. It's the society I feel proud of, and therein lies a duty for me to protect it.
25 Mt99: You cannot be seriously be asking this question. Why? I dont know what work you do (and i really dont care) but i would bet that whatever is that you
26 JGPH1A: How is letting other, economically vital people participate in the growth and continued prosperity of that society, "destroying" it ? Formal borders
27 ANCFlyer: Haven't read my profile have you . . . And based on the balance of your post, you haven't read much of posts on this either . . . No matter . . . I'v
28 KaiGywer: Along the Norway/Russia border. Only Norwegian military personnel armed while on duty in time of peace. Although, getting into Norway isn't that hard