A fellow blogger has recently cluttered cyberspace with views contrary to mine on the subject of illegal aliens and amnesty.
This gentleman, who shall remain unnamed, has pontificated on and on about what Native American Indians faced when the pilgrims invaded Plymouth Rock in the 1600s. In the interest of spreading truth and wisdom, I often try to remind this blogger that we are living in 2006, not 1606.
In other words, unlike the situation in 1606, America is no longer an unsettled continent. And while “Manifest Destiny” was used to justify expansion of America in all directions in earlier times, the realities of 2006 are quite different: America is a sovereign nation with defined, established borders. Our democracy operates under the rule of law, including procedures pertaining to legal immigration.
Modern Americans welcome newcomers with open arms, provided that those who wish to join us do so in a logical, orderly, and lawful manner. That is the way immigration works in 2006.
The United States is hardly alone in this civilized approach to borders and immigration laws. Indeed, I suggest that this open-borders advocate try to sneak into Mexico illegally, and see how tolerant Mexicans are when it comes to illegal aliens.
My blogging buddy also advocates a form of amnesty--euphemistically termed guest worker by some--so that we can put the issue to rest and move on. In other words, this is the last 20 million illegal aliens that we will grant amnesty to.
In 1986, the United States granted amnesty to about three million illegal aliens in an attempt to end unlawful migration once and for all. Twenty years and 20 million illegal aliens later, the problem is completely out of control and far more dangerous because of global terrorism.
Amnesty will not work because it sends the wrong message to others considering illegal migration into the United States. That wrong message is: America’s borders and immigration laws can be ignored with impunity.
The 1986-amnesty disaster proves that America needs militarized borders and rigid enforcement of our laws.
But perhaps my cyberspace competitor is too old to remember 1986?
John W. Lillpop is a recovering liberal.
