The Instigator
estevezfaraon
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
overmind25
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Dream act

Do you like this debate?NoYes+6
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
overmind25
Started: 2/7/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,882 times Debate No: 20919
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

estevezfaraon

Pro

The drean act would benefit The United States.
overmind25

Con

The Dream Act would not be beneficial to the United States because most of the "illegals" in the US are of Mestizo origin (1). Mestizos are more likely to use a form of welfare proportional to their population size than whites or even blacks (2). Mestizos are the most likely demographic to drop out of high school and the children of Mestizo immigrants are more likely to commit violent crime, be in a gang, live in poverty, and be single parents than European Americans (and blacks in terms of gangs) (3,4). The majority of Latinos in the US, legal and illegal, are of Mexican origin. 58% of Mexicans believe the US SouthWest belongs to Mexico (5). This means that the US would be legalizing individuals that very likely support ceding portions of the US to a foreign power. It is hard to think of a worse group to give US citizenship to. People of Mestizo origin on average bring a diverse language with them. This type of a diversity is a weakness and causes disunity within a country. Belgium and Canada are two examples of where two competing languages, even within the same racial group, helps to cause extra tension (6,7). Why should US taxpayers subsidize universities for people with these types of averages and afford them certain temporary and possible permanent benefits of citizenship such as voting?

1. http://pewhispanic.org...
2. http://pubdb3.census.gov...
3. http://www.pewhispanic.org...
4. http://amren.com...
5. http://www.wnd.com...
6. http://onlineessays.com...
7. http://www.independent.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 1
estevezfaraon

Pro

There is no preamble rational enough to explain the notion that a comprehensive immigration is not beneficial for the United States. We know that the immigration system is broken, and I am acknowledging that alot of people broke the law. My argument for the Dream Act is the following. Once you come to this country as a child, learned the english language, get educated in the country, you should have the human right to legaly preserve your life by having the opportunity to employment and education. Furthermore, children's brain is not rational to understand that they infact were breaking the law. Is only just for them have an apportunity to contribute to this diverse nation made of immigrats.
overmind25

Con

I agree the immigration system is broken, but probably not entirely in the same way as you. It is true that the children of illegal immigrants are more likely (though less than the native population) to know English than their parents (see above sources). However, the children of illegal immigrants are more likely to commit violent crime, be in a gang, live in poverty, etc more than their illegal Hispanic parents. They actually go backwards in the 2nd and 3rd generation (see above source). Is increased poverty and violent crime a benefit to the United States? Not to mention that a majority of illegal immigrants are from Mexico where over a majority of them actually have treason like positions about the US Southwest (see above source). Again what benefit is this to the United States instead of scaring them out with laws and deporting those who stayed like was done in the 1950s and is being done now (and has succeeded) in AZ and AL where most self deported (8,9). They were and would educated at the taxpayers expense. What is a human right and how do you define/justify them? How and why should it be a right to stay in a country which didn't invite you to stay and live. That makes borders meaningless. No other country in the world is as liberal as the United States on immigration as the US (in fact way too liberal I would argue since the 1960s) yet Mexico for instance throws, robs, beats, and sometimes kills its illegal immigrants from people that speak the same language and are of a similar racial group! What does a child's brain and its lack of certain abilities have to do with if the Dream Act is beneficial to the United States or not verse other alternatives? Lastly, this is not exactly a "nation of immigrants". The nation was founded by pioneers with some conquest, not immigrants. The vast majority of people in the US are natives and did not immigrants from somewhere else. And the amount of immigration was severely restricted, especially before the 60s. The first Immigration Act passed in 1790 restricted citizenship to "free white persons" (10). Up until the 1960s the immigration policy put severe limits on the amount of immigrants from non European/white countries (11).

8. http://www.tshaonline.org...
9. http://www.cbsnews.com... http://www.reuters.com...
10. http://www.enotes.com...
11. http://www.thenagain.info...
Debate Round No. 2
estevezfaraon

Pro

What is a human right is not relevant because its defenition and notion is too broad, however it is false that the students who would benefit from the Dream Act are not an asset to this diverse country. In fact the founders fathers of this country and the decendents of today's successful americans were immigrants. Your claim about them joining gangs and comiting crimes shows your lock of knowledge on the oppression that monority communities faced and still face today. To suuport my claim, I stand were most educators stand, that this children deserve the opportunity because they are getting educated without any financial assistence, I would also like to make a deductive argument. If you in the United States elegal, there fore anything you do is ilegal. They are here elegal so whatever they do to preserve their life is also erelevent, and the fact that in order to qualify you most have some education, shows their merit.
overmind25

Con

What is a human right is very relevant because you are using it as a basis for your claim for giving illegals the Dream Act. I need to know what you mean by a right so it isn't a way of trying to inject a nice sounding mystical like word in order to obfuscate from the relevant information. Even establishing what a right is with reasonable justification does not automatically entail that rights should always supersede economic utility, aggregate happiness, or other factors. On to your next statement, most of the founders of the United States were Natives, meaning they were born in North America (12). The vast majority did not immigrate from Great Britain, continental Europe, or other overseas territories to the thirteen colonies in North America. The founding of the colonies in what is now the US was done by pioneers, not immigrants. They did not immigrate and live in Amerindian societies but built their own largely separate societies based on largely European ideas. A descendant of an immigrant is not the same as an immigrant. The United States and its majority European population are NOT immigrants, they are almost entirely natives of a country whose governmental institutions, legal codes, societal norms, common language etc were created by Europeans. Again the "Founding Fathers" helped to pass the First Immigration Naturalization Act of 1790 that restricted citizenship to "free white persons" (see above source 10). Before the Immigration Act of 1965 the previous immigration policy was designed to keep and strengthen the at that time 90% European majority (see above source 11) (13). My claim about Mestizo's more likely to join a gang than any other group in the US along with their greater likelihood to commit violent crime than European Americans is true (see above source 4). Being "oppressed" does not negate their violent and organized crime record. I would argue as well that them being "oppressed" is exaggerated and if you actually start giving evidence as well as sources I will respond to your claims of "oppression". Suffice to say for now this "oppression" is not bad enough for them to want to leave the country or for others to stop coming here illegally. Though "oppression" or current manifestations of problems with the white majority is not an argument in favor of the Dream Act. Quite the contrary, it demonstrates a weakness for the United States by adding more Mestizos to our population. What you said about them getting educated without financial assistance is completely false. Firstly, universities are subsidized by Federal and state tax payers (14). Primary education (K5-12th grade) is completely paid for by tax payers (15). Secondly I have no idea where you harvested the claim that "most educators stand" with you on the Dream Act and frankly it is just a majority appeal with little reasoning. If you could please start citing some of your claims.

12. http://www.archives.gov...
13. http://www.census.gov...
14. http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com...
15. http://www.heritage.org...
Debate Round No. 3
estevezfaraon

Pro

estevezfaraon forfeited this round.
overmind25

Con

I stand by my position that the Dream Act would be a weakness for the United States for the previous reasons given as well as cited.
Debate Round No. 4
estevezfaraon

Pro

estevezfaraon forfeited this round.
overmind25

Con

My opponent PRO did not address many of my points, didn't source at all, and forfeited two rounds. I encourage a vote for Con in light of these events.
Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by handbannana 2 years ago
handbannana
"Lawful contact" means they already had a reason to question, detain, or arrest a suspect. That does not mean they can pull over a vehicle if the only reason is to check an individuals immigration status.
Posted by Grae 2 years ago
Grae
If the bill were in existence solely to reinforce federal immigration laws, only the very first portion under article 8, which states the following would be necessary.
A. NO OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY ADOPT A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW.

However, it goes on:

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Federal law does not give law enforcement the right to pull over a vehicle, or otherwise stop an individual, to verify their citizenship status(That terrible LATimes article totally misses the point when it is not specified that under current law, an officer may check your status ONLY after you are stopped for breaking the law).
Posted by handbannana 2 years ago
handbannana
The enforcement of the laws is perceived as lax. SB1070 isn't stormtrooper tyranny bill that it is made out to be.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com...

http://articles.latimes.com...

Full text of bill:
http://www.azleg.gov...
Posted by Grae 2 years ago
Grae
That's true but usually when it's a countersuit you can assume a few things. SB1070 unfortunately does not mirror federal immigration law, its a reaction to the perceived lax laws which exist on the federal level.
Posted by handbannana 2 years ago
handbannana
A federal suit does not imply guilt. SB1070 mirrors federal immigration law. If our federal immigration law is illegitimate the the feds should be looking into their own actions as well.
Posted by Grae 2 years ago
Grae
I just moved away from AZ and Jan Brewer's illegal actions(the federal government is suing her) are not benefiting anyone. SB1070 does nothing but overextend the illegitimate powers of the police force (Joe Arpaio is also being investigated by the feds). Regardless of your position on immigration, these are ineffective measures which ultimately narrow the scope of all our rights eventually.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 2 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Short, sweet and to the point. Good form.
Posted by handbannana 2 years ago
handbannana
I think overmind summed it up pretty well.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 2 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Ew... Gosh no.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Reasoning 2 years ago
Reasoning
estevezfaraonovermind25Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't think my vote is especially controversial.