Evidence for God from Science

It is generally agreed that American immigration policy is in need of reform. If it was up to you what changes would you make and why?

If you make a factual claim please cite your source.

Anyone that comes in illegally should be deported back, unless they come from a war zone or avoiding persecution ( religious)
Those that come under those circumstances should be monitored for at least one year and if they commit ANY crime during that period, are deported immediately.
Immigration has always been a "quid pro quo" :
You have a skill we need, we have a place for you here.
That said, if a country openly states:
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore"...
If a country openly spreads it's arms wide and says, "come on in", well...

Here is the thing, if the first act you do when entering another country is committing a crime, well...that is a problem.

edwardmurphy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:24 am If it was up to you what changes would you make and why?

Everything I would want immigration reform to be is explicitly spelled out here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/pre ... t-century/

And for full disclosure, lest anyone dare accuse me of any type of discrimination like racism or xenophobia, I am both a minority (Arab) and an immigrant (citizenship class of 1995).

Byblos wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 1:47 pm

edwardmurphy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:24 am If it was up to you what changes would you make and why?

Everything I would want immigration reform to be is explicitly spelled out here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/pre ... t-century/

And for full disclosure, lest anyone dare accuse me of any type of discrimination like racism or xenophobia, I am both a minority (Arab) and an immigrant (citizenship class of 1995).

That policy is not that bad at all.

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2020 11:22 am

Byblos wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 1:47 pm

edwardmurphy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:24 am If it was up to you what changes would you make and why?

Everything I would want immigration reform to be is explicitly spelled out here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/pre ... t-century/

And for full disclosure, lest anyone dare accuse me of any type of discrimination like racism or xenophobia, I am both a minority (Arab) and an immigrant (citizenship class of 1995).

That policy is not that bad at all.

Now compare and contrast: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-con ... /5383/text

Wow, that is something.

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:09 pm Wow, that is something.

I am especially fond of Titles VI and VII with emphasis on this:

• TITLE VI—DECRIMINALIZE MIGRATION
  SEC. 601. REPEALING MIGRATION CRIMINAL LAWS.
  (a) Criminal Penalties For Entry At Improper Time Or Place.—Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1325) is repealed.
  (b) Criminal Penalties For Reentry.—Section 276 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1326) is repealed.

It is no longer a crime to enter the U.S. illegally. If that's not an oxymoron I don't know what is.

• TITLE VII—RIGHT TO COME HOME
  SEC. 701. RECONSIDERING AND REOPENING IMMIGRATION CASES.
  
  (d) Transportation.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide transportation for aliens eligible for reopening or reconsideration of their proceedings under this section, at Government expense, to return to the United States for further immigration proceedings and shall admit or parole the alien into the United States.

Can you believe this crap? The right to come HOME? Are you kidding me? Those are not just illegal aliens, some are criminals who committed illegal acts either here or abroad and were deported. 20% of congressional democrats are proposing to bring them back home.

Subsection (d) takes the cake, though. Not only do we bring them back home, WE PAY FOR IT. I understand this act will never see the light of day but the mere fact that 44 congressional democrats even proposed it tells us where the majority of them fall on the socialist scale. Downright scary.

I had this conversation with my wife the other day, being naturalized and not native American, it is conceivable one day to consider renouncing citizenship and instantaneously becoming an illegal alien. I will have more rights than my wife and children and they will keep paying for it.

The border fence is a good idea, but border walls are worthless without armed guards around it. Whatever amount of money that is spent on infrastructure, half of it needs to go towards arming and staffing patrols.

Byblos wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:59 pmI understand this act will never see the light of day but the mere fact that 44 congressional democrats even proposed it tells us where the majority of them fall on the socialist scale. Downright scary.

Scary? Not really. Some Democratic lawmakers are way left of the mainstream, just like some Republican lawmakers are way to the right.

For example, the legislature in Alabama passed a law in 2019 that made it a Class A felony to provide an abortion to a person who has been pregnant for more than 6 weeks, regardless of how she became pregnant. In other words, if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, but doesn't find out for 6 weeks and a day, it's a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison to provide her with an abortion. The Governor signed it, so it's going into law.

Last I looked just under 80% of voters feel that abortion in that circumstance should be legal through at least the first trimester, which puts Alabama's new law wildly outside the mainstream. Obviously the purpose of the law is to troll for legal challenges in hopes that they can get to the Supreme Court and kill Roe v Wade, but they still put it on the books and it will very likely do incredible harm to women and girls who were the victims of rape or incest before it gets to the SCOTUS and is hopefully, struck down. And it might not get struck down, meaning that providing an abortion to a victim of incest (Class A Felony) would remain a far more serious crime than committing incest (Class C Felony).

I assure you, I'm just as shocked and appalled by that Alabama law (and by many other policies that the GOP has proposed or enacted) as you are by H.R. 5383. Get over it. Lawmakers proposing things that you don't agree with is part of living in a free society.

So before you go too far with the hand-wringing about H.R. 5383 try to view it as part of the larger picture. Yes, some Democratic lawmakers support a law that's well to the left of the mainstream, much like many GOP lawmakers support laws that are far to the right of the mainstream. That's normal in a democracy. The problem is that there's supposed to be discussion about those differences and it's supposed to result in some sort of compromise legislation that aligns more or less with mainstream sensibilities.

Byblos wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:59 pmI had this conversation with my wife the other day, being naturalized and not native American, it is conceivable one day to consider renouncing citizenship and instantaneously becoming an illegal alien. I will have more rights than my wife and children and they will keep paying for it.

I'm not seeing how you'd have any rights that a citizen wouldn't have. In fact you'd have far fewer.

edwardmurphy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:10 am I assure you,I'm just as shocked and appalled by that Alabama law (and by many other policies that the GOP has proposed or enacted) as you are by H.R. 5383. Get over it. Lawmakers proposing things that you don't agree with is part of living in a free society.

edwardmurphy wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2020 10:10 am

Byblos wrote: ↑Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:59 pmI had this conversation with my wife the other day, being naturalized and not native American, it is conceivable one day to consider renouncing citizenship and instantaneously becoming an illegal alien. I will have more rights than my wife and children and they will keep paying for it.

I'm not seeing how you'd have any rights that a citizen wouldn't have. In fact you'd have far fewer.

Free healthcare, housing, education, and zero tax burden.
That's just the the tip of the iceberg and all paid for by you native suckers. Get over it.

Get over it? Are you saying that I should just get over the fact that in Alabama it's now a Class A felony to provide a rape victim with an abortion? I mean, honestly, as a middle class white guy in New Hampshire that law doesn't affect me a bit so I have no need to get over it. Still, as a person who's capable of empathy and compassion, I have to say that the notion of effectively forcing some dirt poor 14-year-old to carry her uncle's baby to term is...distasteful.

So do you support that law?

Byblos wrote: ↑Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:21 amFree healthcare, housing, education, and zero tax burden.
That's just the the tip of the iceberg and all paid for by you native suckers. Get over it.

Illegals pay taxes - sales tax, gas tax, property tax (as part of their rent) and the like. Many also pay income tax, in hope that having a record of having paid taxes will help their case for eventual citizenship. Granted, the majority probably pay no Federal income taxes, but then that's true of the majority of poor citizens as well, and poor citizens actually do get some of the benefits that you're talking about.

Since we're talking about suckers ponying up to help slackers pay their bills, here's a list of the states that contribute the most to the Federal budget recoup the least in Federal aid, followed by a list of states that contribute the least and collect the most.

Top 10 Donor States:

Connecticut (- $4,000)
New Jersey (- $2,368)
Massachusetts (- $2,343)
New York (- $1,792)
North Dakota (- $720)
Illinois (- $364)
New Hampshire (- $234)
Washington (- $184)
Nebraska (- $164)
Colorado (- $95)

Top 10 Recipients of the aforementioned Donations:

Virginia ($10,301) (Virginia is a special case - they collect a ton of Federal money because half the Federal government is located there.)
Kentucky ($9,145)
New Mexico ($8,692)
West Virginia ($7,283)
Alaska ($7,048)
Mississippi ($6,880)
Alabama ($6,694)
Maryland ($6,035)
Maine ($5,572)
Hawaii ($5,270)

So sure, I'll grant you that illegal immigration is causing some problems, but frankly I'm kind of distracted by the fact that my family and I, who mostly live in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire, are subsidizing the very same Trump country ******** that have spent the last 3 years calling us anti-American, coastal elite, socialist libtards and trying to destroy the Federal government that we like, support, and largely fund.

Or we could get more granular and talk about the hotel tax that gets collected in the town where I live, supposedly to help offset the strain that the hotels and their patrons put on our infrastructure. Know where that money goes? Not here, that's for damned sure. No, it goes into the state coffers and then out to subsidize a bunch of northwoods Trumpies who refer to us as coastal liberals as America-hating, socialist cucks.

Truth be told, I'd much rather pay to educate a hard working illegal alien's kids than ante up for some redneck's spurious disability claim.

In any case, I'm extremely skeptical of your claim that illegals get free healthcare, housing, and education. I'm not saying that it never happens, but where's the evidence that it happens enough to warrant this much hand wringing? Got a credible source to back the claim?

Ed wrote:
Get over it? Are you saying that I should just get over the fact that in Alabama it's now a Class A felony to provide a rape victim with an abortion? I mean, honestly, as a middle class white guy in New Hampshire that law doesn't affect me a bit so I have no need to get over it. Still, as a person who's capable of empathy and compassion, I have to say that the notion of effectively forcing some dirt poor 14-year-old to carry her uncle's baby to term is...distasteful.

So do you support that law?

Ed,

Think about what you’re saying. You’re saying that a rape victim shouldn’t have to suffer because of the rapist’s sin. But, hell, screw the baby. Kill off the baby so the rape victim won’t suffer.

Dude, get your priorities straight.

My priorities are just fine, and I'm on the same page as about 80% of the country, as well as the medical and scientific communities. The claim that a fetus is a full on human being whose rights supercede those of its mother is just your opinion based on your religious beliefs. I think that that law is misogynistic, meddlesome, and cruel. It's not about life, it's about control. It's about radical, right wing religious fanatics trying to impose their own version of Sharia law on their neighbors.

For example, the legislature in Alabama passed a law in 2019 that made it a Class A felony to provide an abortion to a person who has been pregnant for more than 6 weeks, regardless of how she became pregnant. In other words, if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, but doesn't find out for 6 weeks and a day, it's a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison to provide her with an abortion. The Governor signed it, so it's going into law.

Last I looked just under 80% of voters feel that abortion in that circumstance should be legal through at least the first trimester, which puts Alabama's new law wildly outside the mainstream. Obviously the purpose of the law is to troll for legal challenges in hopes that they can get to the Supreme Court and kill Roe v Wade, but they still put it on the books and it will very likely do incredible harm to women and girls who were the victims of rape or incest before it gets to the SCOTUS and is hopefully, struck down. And it might not get struck down, meaning that providing an abortion to a victim of incest (Class A Felony) would remain a far more serious crime than committing incest (Class C Felony).

I don't think that anyone would argue that the committing of an incestuous act should carry a higher penalty.
I don't think that anyone would argue that the UNJUSTIFIED taking of a life is a Class A felony.
I mean, the Law is very clear on that, right?
The taking of any life MUST be justified in a court room, correct?
Wither it be in the protection of self or others, the taking of life must be justified.
I mean, we don't want people going around taking lives just because they choose to, do we ??

Ed wrote:
My priorities are just fine, and I'm on the same page as about 80% of the country, as well as the medical and scientific communities.

Scientists and doctors know that life begins at conception, so I don’t know where you get your “facts”.

The claim that a fetus is a full on human being whose rights supercede those of its mother is just your opinion based on your religious beliefs.

What?!?!?!

Ok. Show me anywhere I’ve ever said that a fetus’ rights supersede those of its mother.

The right to life of any human being, supercedes
any other right of another human being. My conscience tells me it’s wrong to murder another person, not my religious beliefs.

I think that that law is misogynistic, meddlesome, and cruel.

And it’s not meddlesome and cruel to murder and rip from its mother’s womb, an unborn human being? Again, where are your priorities?

It's about radical, right wing religious fanatics trying to impose their own version of Sharia law on their neighbors.

Was it radical, right wing religious fanatics trying to impose their own version of Sharia law on their neighbors, when abolitionists went against the 80% of the south that wanted the right to own african slaves, because they weren’t fully human?

You have the unmitigated gall to claim that the black slave’s rights supersede the rights of its owner? You can take your religious beliefs that a black man is human, and stop pushing your morality on me!!

The hypocrisy is blinding.