Whether there is a "ghost in the machine" or not, as a spirit or just a emergent property of the brain would be nearly impossible to demonstrate.
From your point of view, had there not been slavery in many parts of the world in the past, then we would all exist as god placed souls in DNA created bodies. In fact, had the past been different, few of us would ever have been born.
The timing of conceptions would have been different by the shuffling of the DNA genome. In a way one should recognize that the past happened in order to get the present. One should recognize that the past, which produces the present, happened and as rational beings we have the power to not allow the same to happen in the future if it was bad in some way.

NO, you are welcome in my neighborhood, just don't do anything illegal such as enter when the law says "no."

Please do not venture into my neighborhood, you would be encroaching upon my rights. That would be stupid as would an illegal coming into my neighborhood. Rights are only encroached upon by some action against one's body or earned property or preventing one from the pursuit of rightful happiness.

But he wasn't too busy to have the one government official who could have proved it one way or the other mysteriously die in a plane crash...

Or a real birth certificate.

Because Hawaii has always been socialist. Hawaii never assimilated and became a state only for the monetary benefits.

Also the state where Barack Obama was too busy on drugs to get a real education.

Hawaii, which is the most socialist state in the USA.
Hawaii never assimilated. They only became a state to get the goodies.
Same situation as would happen if Puerto Rico (or Mexico) became a state, except PR has no strategic value.

I'd like to know where this particular Representative is from. I can only cringe at her voters who would elect someone so stupid. (No, this isn't ignorance, this is willing stupidity.)

I know this is only partially related, but it was too funny not to pass on. In a recent bog entry from someone called Dianny on patriotretort.com, I found this little gem:

"Give someone HIV and walk away scot-free. Give your customer a plastic straw in his drink and spend six years in jail. What the hell is wrong with the people in California?

Now, I realize that California will protect illegal alien criminals. But what if an illegal alien uses a plastic straw?

There’s a quandary."

The question posed is very reminiscent of the discussion Wesley Mouch was having with James Taggart, Orren Boyle, et al when discussing Directive 10-289.

Ahh, I see. How could a Hawaiian have the nerve to ask that question? There are places in the islands I may not even visit because I am white. Much less land there, stake a claim, and try to live! Because the land pseudo-belongs to some tribe or other.

Dumbocrat hypocrisy at its finest.

".....as that venture does not encroach upon the rights of another......" Invading another's country encroaches upon the rights of the citizens of that country.

Unoriginal wordy alternatives would be "You can't fix stupid" and "Stupid is what stupid does."

I agree Dino...we should add a few more categories for our posts..."Stupid" would be an excellent addition...laughing

If that senator was playing dumb, she was not smart enough to avoid looking stupid doing it.
Me dino is certain many libs looked past stupid playing dumb due to their grumbling that "undocumented alien" is now the politically correct replacement term for "illegal alien," which of course is their "proof" that the ICE official is a racist~all ICE agents being racists in the first place already a libtard given.

I am going to attempt to be serious.

First, a root cause of legitimate confusion is "Asylum". With good intentions but disastrous results is a law passed by Congress long ago giving people from all over the world a chance to claim Asylum in the USA to avoid persecution in their home countries. An unfortunate part of the law is that if someone can make it onto US land they can verbally ask for asylum and immediately have the right to stay until their case is decided. The court system backup is many years of waiting. Thus, the mayhem in our immigration system.

Second, the difference between a legitimate location where foreigners may enter the country at our borders and ask for asylum, such as ports of entry by vehicle AND everywhere else where it is NOT legitimate and therefore a crime is ignored by this Senator and the MSM and many other people.
Comparable examples that people do understand are an operating room at a hospital - everyone knows that you just can't walk in. Or someone's house, you have to go to the front door and ask.
This Senator obviously knows but is playing dumb to try to make the enforcement officials look mean spirited.
The general public's confusion, however, is real because of the stupid method of allowing people to petition for asylum.

While the Hawaiian Dumbocrap has no clue as to reality except to follow the party line, she incidentally has made a good point.

John Locke in his Second Treatise of Government stated so purely the concept of the natural rights of man. Too bad he has such a diseased mind that he could not overcome his fear of monarchy to a degree he tried to legitimize a divine being.

Man by his very definition is a creation of his DNA but the spirit that resides within that shell is another matter all together.

The spirit of man is endowed by his true creator with inalienable rights of which travel is most fundamental.

This fundamental right knows no bounds or borders. It is the freedom to venture wherever the spirit guides so long as that venture does not encroach upon the rights of another.

So illegal is what, a prohibition of another about something they cannot own. Then the real fight is not about travel but about being able to claim on the production of another something not earned.