billions of tax dollars. you have to fight the demand.
as long as mexicans are catholic and come here legally to work to provide for themselves and family a better life, we should welcome them open arms. but if they are protestant or agnostic/atheist, we should send them back where they came from.
As long as they are catholic?! (BTW, I am a Catholic, who professes firmly that this Church belongs to Christ. I do believe in freedom of religion, and saying that non-Catholics shouldn’t be here is the exact reverse of what the colonists did to us in the old days of the U.S. I DON’T, however, believe that bishops are infallible when it comes to border security.)
That being said, I believe that a country has a right to border security, but only insomuch as they are needed for true security. I don’t believe that a country should arbitraily regulate immigration except to identify those who shouldn’t be here—terrorists, etc. This is where legal immigration comes in----to prevent those who should not be here (or for that matter, anywhere) from being here. That is the only reason I see for regulating the border—old reasons for border regulation notwithstanding.
The modern immigration system needs to be reformed—NOW. If it is truly reformed, there should no longer be any reason for “Refugee” or “Asylum” status, since all those considered safe to enter would be allowed. I think the border fence is a big fat waste of money.
Migrants, for their part, need to study our language (or the one where they want to live). This is very important—they need to communicate with those who they purchase goods and services from, and they also might need to communicate with emergency personel. They also need to use U.S. money on U.S. soil—if someone buys goods from me with Mexican pesos (or EU euros), I can’t do anything with it, since people may or may not sell me anything. And as the pope stressed, they need to follow the ways of the country they live in insomuch as it does not conflict with divine law.