Is illegal immigration a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter russell007
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Agreed. The fact that the small number of alotted visas do not match our society’s needs for labor means that the government’s restrictions are encouraging illegal border-crossings, and all of its resulting dangers. If voters were to face the issue with Christian charity instead of with sloth, xenophobia, and racism then maybe their elected representatives would be forced to institute justice rather than injustice.

.
You Grownups sure like to throw around terms.🙂

This term is cute: xenophobia
As is this term; racism

I notice terms like this are only used when someone challenges someones thinking - using logic …it seems to be a defensive counter…IMHO it serves the debater - ill.

Logic would dictate that the use of these two terms, as a ‘blanket’, within the content of Legal Immigration…would be a misnomer at the best…as the two terms would require NO Legal Immigration be permitted.
 
Supposedly, the word “ILLEGAL” has great power and connotation for those who worship at the feet of Caesar, but I’m just guessing.

.
Can you tell me what Caesar you are worshiping…by condoning illegal activities?
 
If it wasn’t for the lack of legal visas then we wouldn’t need any troops at the border. But it’s easier to hold 30 million poor people accountable than it is 535 men and women in business attire.

.
:rotfl::rotfl:

I’m not a Republican…Democrat…or Independent…I’m a kid.

But the more I run into Liberal Democratic posts ,like this one - I hope I never become one:D
 
If it wasn’t for the lack of legal visas then we wouldn’t need any troops at the border. But it’s easier to hold 30 million poor people accountable than it is 535 men and women in business attire.

.
What do you mean by “lack of legal visas” ?

You do understand the majority of illegal immigrants never even apply for a visa? Secondly not everyone that applies is approved.
 
:rotfl::rotfl:

I’m not a Republican…Democrat…or Independent…I’m a kid.

But the more I run into Liberal Democratic posts ,like this one - I hope I never become one:D
KL your debates are well thought out and logical…Im impressed
 
There is a huge difference in crossing borders lawfully - respecting the sovereignty of another country and ** purposely, intentional, with malice toward another country’s immigration laws**,… entering a country… illegally.

I know it is illegal
I choose to enter illegal
I choose to remain illegal

Is a bit different than

I will respect this country’s laws
I will enter legally
I will stay for the allotted time period
So you know the difference and choose to leave it out of your posts?, that would imply an intent issue…
If it wasn’t for illegal entries we wouldn’t need an extra 17,000 troops …would we? Even Mr.Obama sees the need
No, no need what so ever. You may choose one, zero, 100,000, 300,000,000 that is up to you. Your need to transfer your decision to them tells of a deep seated injustice.
Are you trying to say…they don’t know it’s illegal? They don’t decide to illegally enter and stay?..If you think God is making them commit illegal activities…😦
You made it illegal they did not make it illegal

Did God make YOU get involved in their job?

Did God make YOU get involved in their education?

Did God make YOU get involved in their medical care?

Again and again why must YOU blame them for YOUR decisions?
You Grownups sure like to throw around terms.🙂

This term is cute: xenophobia
As is this term; racism

I notice terms like this are only used when someone challenges someones thinking - using logic …it seems to be a defensive counter…IMHO it serves the debater - ill.

Logic would dictate that the use of these two terms, as a ‘blanket’, within the content of Legal Immigration…would be a misnomer at the best…as the two terms would require NO Legal Immigration be permitted.
kimmielittle;6699197:
As the Bishops and Church points out…The end never justifies the means…

Example…albeit we would probably like the result of an abortion mill being put out of business…for me to steal it’s property - is wrong and a sin.
The term is “besmirch” it involves speak of one while using terms as “steal” “abortion” “dictator” and on and on…
Can you tell me what Caesar you are worshiping…by condoning illegal activities?
I’ll be happy to help you catholic’s worship a God known by many names and 3 forms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He provides divine law which does not make immigration illegal. Nor does it allow for one to die on one side of the imaginary line when the needed medical care is on the other side of the imaginary line. Divine does not allow for one to remain unemployed on one side of the imaginary line when the needed job is on the other side of the imaginary line. Divine does not allow for one to remain uneducated on one side of the imaginary line when the needed education is on the other side of the imaginary line.
:rotfl::rotfl:

I’m not a Republican…Democrat…or Independent…I’m a kid.

But the more I run into Liberal Democratic posts ,like this one - I hope I never become one:D
So what is a “Liberal Democrate”?

Let me give you a warning, if most people write down what they consider Liberal Democrate ideaology and then compare it to republican action they find a perfect match! Just look at it before you consider one correct and the other wrong.

hope that helps you
 
Your need to transfer your decision to them tells of a deep seated injustice.
Are you saying they illegal immigrants ] don’t decide to enter and stay illegal? Who’s makes that conscious decision - if not them? Who consciously acts repeatably ] on that decision - if not them?

You sound as if you believe Illegal Immigrants are mindless wanderers.
You made it illegal they did not make it illegal
Did God make YOU get involved in their job?
Did God make YOU get involved in their education?
Did God make YOU get involved in their medical care?
Again and again why must YOU blame them for YOUR decisions?
I didn’t make it illegal to kill someone either…BUT If I do…I’m held responsible for MY ACTIONS 🙂
I’ll be happy to help you catholic’s worship a God known by many names and 3 forms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He provides divine law which does not make immigration illegal.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors goods.

By your standards…I should be legally allowed to break in to my rich neighbors house because they have - what I don’t.
And my actions to be acceptable by God…I’m having a hard time seeing your logic here.
Nor does it allow for one to die on one side of the imaginary line when the needed medical care is on the other side of the imaginary line. Divine does not allow for one to remain unemployed on one side of the imaginary line when the needed job is on the other side of the imaginary line. Divine does not allow for one to remain uneducated on one side of the imaginary line when the needed education is on the other side of the imaginary line.
Can you cite references to the above statement,please? You seem to believe Illegal immigrants are all persecuted refugees from Mexico Just how many of Illegals or Legal Immigrants apply for political asylum - Charity asylum - ?

If you were arguing the plight of Hondurans for example ]…it might hold more weight.
 
Are you saying they illegal immigrants ] don’t decide to enter and stay illegal? Who’s makes that conscious decision - if not them? Who consciously acts repeatably ] on that decision - if not them?
Nope, I am saying they cannot make it legal nor illegal that decision has to made by us not them. I do not need to claim they decided what is and is not legal. I can take responsibility for my decisions.
…I didn’t make it illegal to kill someone either…BUT If I do…I’m held responsible for MY ACTIONS 🙂
God wrote that law, it is divine. Not my decision, not your, not the immigrants
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors goods.
By your standards…I should be legally allowed to break in to my rich neighbors house because they have - what I don’t.
And my actions to be acceptable by God…I’m having a hard time seeing your logic here.
It is simple:

A man says “I went to work” You imply you must look at his skin and hair then YOU decide if he is a lying thief.

A man says “I went to school” You imply you must look at his skin and hair then YOU decide if he is a lying thief.

A man says “I went for medical care” You imply you must look at his skin and hair then YOU decide if he is a lying thief.

The church teaches his work, school, and medical care are not your business in this type manner. And I flat out say to you and all others who support these wink and nod systems you nor any other can look at any man and know these things.
Can you cite references to the above statement,please? You seem to believe Illegal immigrants are all persecuted refugees from Mexico Just how many of Illegals or Legal Immigrants apply for political asylum - Charity asylum - ?
It is irrelevant to me who is “from Mexico”, I think you reading what another poster claimed and I asked him to document. Political Asylum is very different as it involves preventing injustice, thus an imminent injustice must exist. But for a cited reference that is no problem:

Catechism of the Catholic Church

IV. Economic Activity and Social Justice

2426
The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all *to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. * Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God’s plan for man.209

*2427
Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth, both with and for one another.210 Hence work is a duty: "If any one will not work, let him not eat."211 Work honors the Creator’s gifts and the talents received from him. It can also be redemptive. By enduring the hardship of work212 in union with Jesus, the carpenter of Nazareth and the one crucified on Calvary, man collaborates in a certain fashion with the Son of God in his redemptive work. He shows himself to be a disciple of Christ by carrying the cross, daily, in the work he is called to accomplish.213 Work can be a means of sanctification and a way of animating earthly realities with the Spirit of Christ.

2428
In work, the person exercises and fulfills in part the potential inscribed in his nature. The primordial value of labor stems from man himself, its author and its beneficiary. Work is for man, not man for work.214

Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.

2429
Everyone has the right of economic initiative; everyone should make legitimate use of his talents to contribute to the abundance that will benefit all and to harvest the just fruits of his labor. He should seek to observe regulations issued by legitimate authority for the sake of the common good.215* Catholi Catechism

I would suggest to you the worker is called to observe “legitimate authority” and when current authority rebukes the call from god to man for work that current authourity resigns any legitmatacy
If you were arguing the plight of Hondurans for example ]…it might hold more weight.
? why ? why are Hondurans under a different teaching

I hope you consider these things
 
Nope, I am saying they cannot make it legal nor illegal that decision has to made by us not them.
Their acts opposing the laws made them Illegal - not the color of skin - the law didn’t just drop from a space ship - we have had Immigration laws since 1940 The 1940 Naturalization Laws can be found library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmi…tat%201137.pdf .
]…so the law didn’t make them illegal etc etc….their actions alone did.
I do not need to claim they decided what is and is not legal. I can take responsibility for my decisions. God wrote that law, it is divine. Not my decision, not your, not the immigrants It is simple:
A man says “I went to work” You imply you must look at his skin and hair then YOU decide if he is a lying thief.
A man says “I went to school” You imply you must look at his skin and hair then YOU decide if he is a lying thief.
A man says “I went for medical care” You imply you must look at his skin and hair then YOU decide if he is a lying thief.
You might want to reconsider this usage of argument against me.🙂

I have never said or presented a race card. Please prove otherwise, if you think I have.
For one: I’m Native American 😛
The church teaches his work, school, and medical care are not your business in this type manner. And I flat out say to you and all others who support these wink and nod systems you nor any other can look at any man and know these things.
😃

Catechism of the Catholic Church

IV. Economic Activity and Social Justice

2426
The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all *to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. * Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God’s plan for man.209

*2427
Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth, both with and for one another.210 Hence work is a duty: "If any one will not work, let him not eat."211 Work honors the Creator’s gifts and the talents received from him. It can also be redemptive. By enduring the hardship of work212 in union with Jesus, the carpenter of Nazareth and the one crucified on Calvary, man collaborates in a certain fashion with the Son of God in his redemptive work. He shows himself to be a disciple of Christ by carrying the cross, daily, in the work he is called to accomplish.213 Work can be a means of sanctification and a way of animating earthly realities with the Spirit of Christ.

2428
In work, the person exercises and fulfills in part the potential inscribed in his nature. The primordial value of labor stems from man himself, its author and its beneficiary. Work is for man, not man for work.214

Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.

2429
Everyone has the right of economic initiative; everyone should make legitimate use of his talents to contribute to the abundance that will benefit all and to harvest the just fruits of his labor. He should seek to observe regulations issued by legitimate authority for the sake of the common good.215* Catholi Catechism

I would suggest to you the worker is called to observe “legitimate authority” and when current authority rebukes the call from god to man for work that current authourity resigns any legitmatacy
The assertion that there is and should be an absolute right to immigrate, including a right to immigrate to improve your economic condition’ has been a teaching of The Catholic Church for years.
‘since Pope John XXIII [the church has also taught that] the primary duty of the state is to provide for the common good. One way of doing that is to protect its borders.’ He acknowledged that too many immigrants ‘concentrated in too limited an area, can cause real economic hardships.’
Answer me these simple question, please.What are the Immigration Laws of the Holy See Vatican City ]? How many Immigrants / Refugees are allowed residency?
Since none at all are accepted, one begins to see a bit of a credibility problem. Namely, why should the Catholic hierarchy ask the United States to do (i.e., accept huge numbers of immigrants and refugees) what its own little country will not?
thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc0504/article_473.shtml

Now let’s discuss the concept of false compassion.

Here are all three parts of the segment. He does make a hit against gays here, please don’t turn it off because of that, as that is not the main subject matter.

youtube.com/watch?v=jXQP3UJnagM&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=Ip7pKqfhWeo&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=z6O7MVrtHq0&feature=related

Keep in mind he was speaking all the way back in 1965.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen on (False) Compassion
I hope you consider these things
I hope you reconsider throwing Catholic Doctrines at me as evidence, when they seem to be at odds sometimes with their own Teachings on Immigration.
 
There was no law regarding immigration here prior to the founding of the Government of the US.

So I’m not certain how this relates to orignial question about immigration.
If there was an organized government with immigration laws at that time, immigrants would need to obey the law at that time as well.

Do we believe that citizens of today are guilty (until proven innocent)
for all the wrong doings of past generations over which we had no control - " of course not".
 
Their acts opposing the laws made them Illegal - not the color of skin - the law didn’t just drop from a space ship - we have had Immigration laws since 1940 The 1940 Naturalization Laws can be found library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmi…tat%201137.pdf .
]…so the law didn’t make them illegal etc etc….their actions alone did.
if tomorrow a law is passed requiring you convert to Muslim religion will you continue to hold a high support for the law?
You might want to reconsider this usage of argument against me.🙂
I have never said or presented a race card. Please prove otherwise, if you think I have.
For one: I’m Native American 😛
Does one being Native American prevent racism? If you want to look, look at post #41. you will find a direct reference but I see many indirect references as comments on Spaniards, English, French, Mexico refuges, Hondurans, and 17,000 troop reference. See the troops need not seal the border, only a certain section of the border.
Answer me these simple question, please.What are the Immigration Laws of the Holy See Vatican City ]?
The Holy See is pretty much all immigrants? hardly any of the Holy See was born in Vatican City
How many Immigrants / Refugees are allowed residency?
Immigrants close to 100%, refuges - probably few if any having the Pope appoint a member to the Holy See would not be closely related to any past or present refuge status.
So did you mean is Vatican City accepting immigrants for permanent residency? That answer would be no. Vatican City may well allow a temporary residency but this poorly written article would spin that also. Here is the issue: Vatican City is sovereign but not a real country. Vatican City has no real economy it is basically a non-profit. The sovereignty does a great job of covering many issues. btw I hope you know most of those people are celibate, they do not have wives or children, if they have any kindergarten or play grounds at all they are probably minimal, Vatican City does not reproduce itself it relies completely on immigration.
Now let’s discuss the concept of false compassion.
Here are all three parts of the segment. He does make a hit against gays here, please don’t turn it off because of that, as that is not the main subject matter.
Keep in mind he was speaking all the way back in 1965.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen on (False) Compassion
That is off by at least 9 miles. Archbishop Fulton Sheen was talking about preventing justice by allowing murders, rapists, drug pusher, and thieves to go unpunished. Those are crimes under divine law. Immigration is not under divine, coming to the US to work so one can support their family is required under divine law not defined as crime
I hope you reconsider throwing Catholic Doctrines at me as evidence, when they seem to be at odds sometimes with their own Teachings on Immigration.
?? you asked for a citation. The teachings are not contradictory at all. The government is to work toward a good economy, the citizens are to work toward a good economy, and in the absence of such immigration is to be used to better mankind. In the absence of a reasonable economy both the lacking country and the receiving country should place the care of mankind over the value of economic restrictions.
 
Can you document any of this, does it bother you if true is absent? Did you know all the 9/11 terrorists enter the US LEGALLY, did you know they were Saudi’s? Did you know economists are divided on whether immigration is positive or negative in affect?

What makes you think a stranger to you is a " *killer,rapest,child meloster,theif *" ? Is that what the constitutions says, check people assuming they are a *killer,rapest,child meloster,theif *?

You know this all sounds like race baiting lets see what future posts hold
Please tell me your not really a Texan

First of all its just COMMON SENENSE Most jobs these days require check your back ground even if your a citizen Its called a BACKGROUND CHECK. In your mentality by your question What makes you think a stranger to you is a " *killer,rapest,child meloster,theif Its not that a person company or goverment thinks every immigrant or possible future employee is a criminal its a safegaurd.

You playing “the race card” is a cheap shot

I am American Indian and Itallian my wife is from Peru. All parties involved got here legally!

You asked “does it bother you if true is absent?” I dont even know what that means

STICK THIS IN YOUR SEARCH ENGINE AND HIT ENTER:

usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_crime.html

Wanna know what happens to you if your caught as an illegal immigrant in Mexico?

Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven’t been sharing that idea with us as they press for our Congress to adopt the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill.

That’s too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.

At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it’s noteworthy that nobody has argued that the U.S. look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve

our illegal immigration problem. Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:

in the country legally;
have the means to sustain themselves economically;
not destined to be burdens on society;
of economic and social benefit to society;
of good character and have no criminal records; and
contributors to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also ensures that:

immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;
foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens – and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, illegal and illegal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Población, or
General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country’s immigration policy.

This article was first posted at CenterforSecurityPolicy.org.

God Bless Mexico!

We should learn from them when it comes to Illegal Immigrants criminals!

Pssst>>>what part of illegal Immigrant do you not understand? Perhaps the word Illegal?*
 
Can you tell me what Caesar you are worshiping…by condoning illegal activities?
The only ones condoning illegal immigration are those who thwart legal immigration, which is to say the politicians and their supporters. Legal immigration is thwarted whenever the number of available visas and the amount of time it takes to get one do not match the needs of society. Hence it is those who condone limiting legal immigration who in turn condone* illegal *immigration. I’m all for closing the border tight but also for opening up the number of visas to match the needs. It’s one of those darned pesky Catholic social justice issues whch separate the pagan from Christian.

.
 
We should learn from [Mexico] when it comes to Illegal Immigrants criminals!

Pssst>>>what part of illegal Immigrant do you not understand? Perhaps the word Illegal?
“Illegal” is just whatsoever legislators such as Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank decide, and it seems to serve them well to have frightened, cowering workers in our fields and kitchens, and allows the self-righteous to brand them as “criminals” and to look down upon them and judge their souls as “thieves,” and as “sinners” for not kissing Nancy Pelosi’s feet.

.
 
Their acts opposing the laws made them Illegal - not the color of skin - the law didn’t just drop from a space ship - we have had Immigration laws since 1940 The 1940 Naturalization Laws can be found library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmi…tat%201137.pdf .
]…so the law didn’t make them illegal etc etc….their actions alone did.

You might want to reconsider this usage of argument against me.🙂

I have never said or presented a race card. Please prove otherwise, if you think I have.
For one: I’m Native American 😛

KL Dont worry about the “race card” He/She is playing…its a cheap defence when someone doesnt have a logical, intelligent response to your rebutal Its like a child arguing with their parent.
 
So, I haven’ a lot of knowledge on this subject. If I understand it, this is the argument that some have suggested:

Laws fall into two catagories, divine laws, and human laws.

Human laws can be good, but they can also go against divine aw, in which case they are bad.

The right to migrate is part of divine law - it is part of human nature.

Restricting migration is therefore a human law, but it can be an acceptable, just, and necessary law if it is protecting other natural rights.

Overly restricting migration for reasons that are unjust, however, is against divine law, and as such cannot be condoned. Those who disobey such a law may have reduced culpability. In some cases, it might be a duty to break the law.

THe US currently has overly restrictive immigration laws. We can see this because there are far more jobs available than there are workers to fill them, and yet immigration quotas are not increased.

So we could say the US has a large portion of the responsibility in creating a situation where people in need, trying to use their natural and divine desire to migrate in such circumstances, are being thwarted for unjust reasons. This reduces their culpability when they break the law.
 
The right to migrate is part of divine law - it is part of human nature.

Restricting migration is therefore a human law, but it can be an acceptable, just, and necessary law if it is protecting other natural rights.

Overly restricting migration for reasons that are unjust, however, is against divine law, and as such cannot be condoned. Those who disobey such a law may have reduced culpability. In some cases, it might be a duty to break the law.
THe US currently has overly restrictive immigration laws. We can see this because there are far more jobs available than there are workers to fill them, and yet immigration quotas are not increased.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States

Canada
2008 Canadian immigration Statistics are as follows:
  • 247,202 permanent residents; 70,000 more than in 1998. The Canadian Government had a target of 240,000 to 265,000 new permanent residents for the year.
  • 193,061 temporary foreign workers.
  • 79,459 foreign students
**Total permanent and temporary residents for the year: 519,722 **
workpermit.com/news/2009-02-23/canada/record-numbers-of-immigrants-to-canada-in-2008.htm
So we could say the US has a large portion of the responsibility in creating a situation where people in need, trying to use their natural and divine desire to migrate in such circumstances, are being thwarted for unjust reasons. This reduces their culpability when they break the law.
Hmmmm so in Canada they only deport 1/2 the illegal immigrant because Canada doesn’t hold them culpable?
 
This is a very interesting question, which gives rise to many thoughts in my mind.
There was a thread some months ago where the original poster asked if it is all-right to shoot abortion doctors. Almost everyone who posted said that it is wrong to break the law. Not just when it comes to shooting someone, but that it is wrong to break any law…
Now suddenly posters are saying many things about how it is okay to break the law. It seems that some people seem to decide whether it is okay to break the law simply on whether they already like something or not (though I doubt this is true of everyone who has posted on this thread.)
Personally I don’t know if being an illegal immigration is a sin or not. I doubt that priests hear more than a rare person confess that he is an illegal immigrant. It seems more likely to be a sin if they have stolen someone’s identity or perhaps voted for president in a U.S. election. But otherwise this is one for more consideration for my part.
 
Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s

Ok now that I have your attention.

Illegal by definition means prohibited by law

So whether your speeding, robbing a bank, stealing, or in the states illegally its an illegal act. There is punishment for breaking the laws as there should be.

Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals. “Washington Post”

So would this be a sin?
Is it a sin? No. As long as it is the ONLY way to support your family. However, do not be tricked by anyone saying that as a Catholic you must agree with illegal immigration, and help illegals. You don’t.

THe US currently has overly restrictive immigration laws. We can see this because there are far more jobs available than there are workers to fill them, and yet immigration quotas are not increased. quote from bluegoat

Don’t make me laugh. The U.S. has one of the most lax immigration laws in the WORLD. North Korea, middle eastern countries, most European countries, Mexico, all have more restrictive laws. The U.S. only sends the illegals back to where they are from. They spend time in jail during processing, but then are sent away. Most countries detain illegals AFTER they have been processed. My guess is that you live no where near the Texas border.

P.S. before anyone calls me racist, I am part Hispanic, I have no problem with legal immigration. I have a problem with people who spit upon the system, and those who cut corners.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top