If he has I think he's forgotten it or misunderstood. The Constitution is pretty clear about he role of central government.

As if right on cue, I just received this email: http://www.westernjournalism.com/jesus-m...

Who would have thunk it?!

Revenue generation such as speed traps. So much for speed limits being moral. ;-)

45 million throughout Europe as we speak. England has legitimized Sharia law. They have riots in their streets every time something happens in the Middle East and their host country doesn't act in a way they wish.

I do as well. I agree, we're not dealing with boatloads of Cubans here. Keep in touch maybe we can have coffee and BS sometime, West Valley.

so many laws are made to entrap people for any given reason (shameless plug for my book: Shadows Live Under Seashells). :)

Thanks, I just sat down and was about to answer when I noticed your reply. Maphesdus contact the heritage foundation and they will mail you a pocket Constitution.

Agree 100%. They feel they can't lose so they put up those they owe or their agenda poster-boy. Unfortunately neither of those two things represents their base which is why they lost with McCain, Dole etc.

So were this illegal alien not in a country where she did not belong the accident would have happened just the same. Were this an isolated incident with a specific group I could agree with you. But I know of dozens of stories like this one, some more severe, some less severe all with illegal aliens as the counterpoint of an Americans pain and suffering. Since you hold this perspective please feel free to call me, as the illegals and their American sympathizers do, a racist, sexist or xenophobe or whatever you prefer. Complicity in their being here make ANYONE who condones their illegal presence and their activities partly responsible for the suffering they cause - that includes Bush and any other politician sworn to protect and defend.. My America first view is correct and will not be changed.

I'm not sure I see the distinction between maintaining order and morality in the speed limit example. I think it would be reckless and immoral to drive too fast given certain conditions, and injure a person or damage property as a result. I think the speed limit takes a stab at enforcing morality by setting a certain speed as the maximum safe limit -- at least that is the justification often given, whether it works or not.

I think the rationale of having laws, going back to Hammarabi's code, was to assign an official consequence for harming another person, so people wouldn't take matters into their own hands and try to exact revenge. Back then, it was "an eye for an eye." By "morality," I don't really mean laws trying to dictate personal choices about pornography, drugs, prostitution or the like. I mean morality under natural law, with the bottom line rule that we each own ourselves and should be free to do as we wish, as long as we don't initiate force against another person.

Yes, I think we all engage in it everyday, if we're honest with ourselves. There are too many laws, and most of them inane and do nothing to protect people.

I'm very sorry to read about your sister's accident. But I do not believe that it is my fault, nor is it the fault of a whole group of people, whether you classify them as "illegal immigrants" or "women drivers" or "people with brown hair" or whatever. Those who harm others should be punished, and those who do not should be left alone -- and this should apply to all people, I believe. We are individuals first and foremost, and should be treated as such.

Hi ObjectiveAnalyst,
In my last sentence, I stated that the government has no right to steal from someone and give to anyone else -- citizens or immigrants. So I think we're on the same page here.

To be honest, I have no idea if all of my ancestors came here legally. Some immigrated so long ago, there probably weren't even laws at the time. Some came across the border from Canada to work in the U.S. daily in the early 1900s, which may well have been illegal. Were they moral, hardworking people? Yes, and that's all that matters to me.

From what I've read, it now takes nearly 10 years to get approval to immigrate legally, and also requires jumping through numerous hoops. If that's not a door slammed in would-be immigrants' faces, it's sure a very, very long time before the knock is answered. Recall the poem on the Statue of Liberty? "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..." Of course, all the freebies offered by our government at our expense certainly draw looters as well as freedom-lovers.

I don't have respect for our government or its laws anymore, and I have no realistic hope whatsoever of convincing the powers that be to change laws I believe are immoral; I lack the connections and money that would give me any kind of political clout.

Regarding obedience to law, do you believe it's an absolute duty? Would you have obeyed the laws in Nazi Germany, or would you have relied on your own sense of right and wrong? I believe we each need to rely on our own judgment, and the vast majority of us know right from wrong.

How cheaply will I sell my citizenship? How much are you offering? I'm mostly kidding, but I have looked into the possibility of leaving the country for somewhere that's currently more free. In my opinion, open borders are not a threat to this country. The government's insanity and theft are, but not immigrants per se.

Thanks for the comments!

An example of this without referring to Mexico is Islam. There is a movement to change our law to accept Sharia law as legal here. Everything you said is accurate. Look at the media's fear of saying anything that would upset Muslims. There is a major shift afoot that is going unnoticed because we are concentrating on the borders. The Muslims are here legally. Watch the magician's other hand to see what's really going on.

That's what I call civil disobedience.

no such thing outside of our border...sad to say.

It is one thing to eliminate mooching via immigration reform (our way). It is another thing entirely to actively encourage (even recruit) producers from abroad. In your scenario, Mephesdus, there is no value in getting citizenship. Everyone can have it. Membership should have its privileges. An open border, even without a welfare system, invites moochers. As someone once said, "A fence makes a great neighbor."

Hello Kittyhawk,
What right does the government have to take from the producers here and create an immigration magnet for looters? Did your ancestors come here legally? Mine did. Is there someone in particular on this thread suggesting that the legal immigration door to this nation be slammed in the immigrants faces? Revamp the immigration quota by legal means if you believe there is plenty of space and opportunity without depriving those of legal status already. "The law is a ass"- Dickens. But, so long as I must be obedient, why should we make exception and special privileges for those that do not hold citizenship. How cheaply will you sell your citizenship? Of what value is it, if you have open borders?
Respectfully,
O.A.