The Instigator
itssamtbh
Pro (for)
The Contender
GeneP
Con (against)

THW give Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
itssamtbh has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/10/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 265 times Debate No: 101840
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

itssamtbh

Pro

Hi,

My debate will be focused on a recent issue, illegal immigrant amnesty. For this debate, I will be affirming. I will be arguing why we should grant illegal immigrants amnesty. The negating will answer why we should not.

A few terms-

'THW'- This House would
'Amnesty' - Amnesty for illegal immigrants is defined as a governmental pardon for violating policies related to immigration.
'Illegal Immigration' The process of migrating to another nation without any form of valid documentation, and crossing the border anyway.

Each round will have 6,000 words max.
We will have 4 rounds, each 24 hours to respond.
At the end, there will be a 3 day voting period. Open voting is allowed.

I look forward to debating with you
GeneP

Con

The US Code, Title 8, is very specific about what constitutes 'illegal alien' and the laws concerning the hiring, aiding, housing, etc. of those who are here illegally. If for no other reason, the term 'illegal' should declare why those who are here without proper documentation must be deported.
The US Constitution allows for the creation and change of any existing laws. It defines 'citizen' and specifies the protections afforded by it. If we ignore the US Code and the Constitution, then we may as well just declare complete anarchy and have no borders.
The reason that people want to come to the US is for freedom and opportunity. Without the Constitution, neither is protected. Without it, we are like every other nation on earth, obliterating the very reasons why the world wants to come to the US. Ignoring it makes us the same as the countries from which they came, and affords no one protection OR freedom. The abolishment of one law is the abolishment of them all. Should murder be ok? Should theft be ok? Do you have locks on your doors? Why? To keep people out? It's no different with our country's 'doors' than it is with the ones in your house, and the reasons are no different, either. You lock them to protect your family. You lock them to protect your valuables. You lock them to keep out things that can bring illness and disease. You lock them so that you can control what goes on under your own roof. Our country has borders for the very same reasons.
Without borders, we are no nation. When our founding fathers came to this land and fought for our freedoms from King George, the outline of the reasons, the leadership, the creation of laws, etc. was defended with purpose supporting each one. That is the reason the Constitution is outlined the way that it is, and then further broken down into Articles and sections. They understood the importance of borders to allow freedom of the citizens. They understood the order of law that was needed to make a country, not an open-bordered section of land. To assure it, they took it one step further and allowed for the creation of the borders of states and the creation of state laws and individual preferences within each state, not subject to the overall governance of a federal government. That wasn't by accident and it wasn't unnecessary. They knew that with individual state laws, protected by federal law, the opportunity of a dictatorship or monarchy would be greatly limited. It was important for each state within its own borders, but more importantly for the borders securing the entire country. It wasn't just about keeping away from dictatorship, it was also about allowing a voice of the people within those borders. Without them, we also have no voice.
I live in a neighborhood that is 90% Hispanic. Some are here illegally, more are here legally. Ask them. They saved thousands of dollars, pennies at a time, and waited years and years to get here the right way. They will be the first to defend their country, our country, and the first to tell you the importance of following our US Code and the US Constitution. It's why they worked so hard and waited so long to get here. It's everything to them, the same way that it should be to those of us who take it for granted. I've helped some of them with the paperwork to get their families here. They are proud of being here and respect what makes it so very special. We should, too.
I understand the desire to live here, the importance of it. But if we open our borders there won't be anything left for others to want to come to. There won't be anything left for us. There won't be any way that we can ever close that gate again and maintain the United States of America.
Debate Round No. 1
itssamtbh

Pro

First off,

Thank you for accepting my debate.

I gave no specific referral to the United States. 'Amnesty' for illegal immigrants refers to all nations, including Middle Eastern nations. Nevertheless, I will try to cover all aspects of your argument.

'The US Code, Title 8, is very specific about what constitutes 'illegal alien' and the laws concerning the hiring, aiding, housing, etc. of those who are here illegally. If for no other reason, the term 'illegal' should declare why those who are here without proper documentation must be deported. The US Constitution allows for the creation and change of any existing laws. It defines 'citizen' and specifies the protections afforded by it. If we ignore the US Code and the Constitution, then we may as well just declare complete anarchy and have no borders.
The reason that people want to come to the US is for freedom and opportunity. Without the Constitution, neither is protected. '

Title 8 of the US Code is a law, it's not apart of the constitution. People come here for amnesty, because of dangers back home such as drug cartels in Latin America, increasing murder and homicide rates and abductions. In fact, net immigration from neighbouring nations such as Mexico are below net 0. The US Constitution can be interpreted in many different aspects. Ignoring the Constitution based on giving illegal immigrants amnesty is flawed, giving amnesty to immigrants does not break the US Constitution, so anarchy is not necessary. The reason people want to come to the United States are for life away from the dangers of their nation, and in comparison to the United States, doesn't relatively happen often. Yes, without the constitution, no one is protected however illegal amnesty breaks no rule of the constitution.

'Without it, we are like every other nation on earth, obliterating the very reasons why the world wants to come to the US. Ignoring it makes us the same as the countries from which they came, and affords no one protection OR freedom. The abolishment of one law is the abolishment of them all. Should murder be ok? Should theft be ok? Do you have locks on your doors? Why? To keep people out? It's no different with our country's 'doors' than it is with the ones in your house, and the reasons are no different, either. You lock them to protect your family. You lock them to protect your valuables. You lock them to keep out things that can bring illness and disease. You lock them so that you can control what goes on under your own roof. Our country has borders for the very same reasons.'

'We are like every other nation on earth'. Every nation has a set of laws regarding immigration illegally. For example, Australia has laws on the hundreds of thousands of immigrants from Indonesia who come in illegally, and other nations like Europe (Germany) who offer resettlement programs for illegal immigrants coming from Syria and Iraq. Although the process is slowly working, illegal amnesty does work. It gives the nation taxes, which pays for your education and your law enforcement, welfare money going towards legal immigrants, contribution to America's diversity. If you are insinuating that immigrants come over the border merely to murder you must be mistaken, they are looking for a new life. Giving an illegal immigrant amnesty is not illegal by any laws. If you're stating about the 'locks' on your door, borders are merely just walls separating two nations. If we 'locked' them we would look bad on the world stage. Over 1,000,000 immigrants from Arabic countries are migrating to Europe, illegally. If we take them in as amnesty immigrants and help them through the process, then it would benefit us much more.

You also state that without borders, there is no nation. May I remind you that America itself is built on immigration. If it wasn't for migration by the Chinese, British, Irish, Germans, Italians, Indian, Pakistani's etc then we wouldn't thrive as much it does today, by a long shot. The Founding Fathers. Some of the Founding Fathers themselves weren't even born in the United States. At the time, illegal immigration wasn't a major concern of the nation.

I attend a high school that has many immigrants, legal or not. I also attend school with naturalised citizens. 95% of them support amnesty for illegal immigration. Put yourself in their shoes. You are escaping a place with no job, money and can't afford to support them, your papers are constantly rejected for lack of proper documentation you cannot get. What do you do? Amnesty. Those people you've mentioned had the papers and documentation to apply, what about the ones that can't get it?

The desire to live here is not because it's 'great' it's because it's a nation full of better life, better wages, job opportunities. After all, not all legal citizens are paying tax.
GeneP

Con

Thank you for your rebuttal.
"I gave no specific referral to the United States. 'Amnesty' for illegal immigrants refers to all nations, including Middle Eastern nations. "
Since you spoke originally of current conversation, I assumed you were talking about the US. I cannot address other countries as each will have their own laws, etc.
Of course the US Code isn't a part of the Constitution, which is why I addressed them separately. The US Code are US laws, supporting the Constitution.
I fear that you are confusing asylum with amnesty. If one is being persecuted in another country, they certainly may petition the US govt. for asylum. They cannot, according to the US Code, just walk through our borders and say, "things were bad in my country so now I'm here". The US Code, Title 8 is very easy to understand in its definition of "illegal alien" and in the process if that law is broken, along with the consequences of anyone who chooses to help them. I will ask you to please read and reference the Code (it's far too long to post here).
"..giving amnesty to immigrants does not break the US Constitution,...". Actually, it does. The Constitution states "The Congress shall have Power To...establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization...." (ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 4). Having been established by Congress, the US Code specifies the process for naturalization, citizenship, illegal entry, etc.
" If you are insinuating that immigrants come over the border merely to murder you must be mistaken, they are looking for a new life. " NOWHERE did I mention any social role of illegal immigrants, nor did I insinuate such. My comments were strictly from a Constitutional/US Code perspective.
" May I remind you that America itself is built on immigration." Legal immigration, yes. Illegal, no. That was the purpose of Ellis Island.
Many of the 'founding fathers WERE born here. Many fought for the right to be here. Many slaughtered innocent natives to be here....but that's a different topic. Bottom line, we fought for our rights and to escape from King George's tyrannical rule and did so with bloodshed on previously uninhabited land, not given to any other sovereign nation. To use the argument that our founding by immigration is the same as illegally entering a standing nation is absurd. We weren't a country then, and once we became a country, laws were created to keep our borders secure. Part of that was a citizenship process and a process for allowing those who are not citizens to be here legally.
" attend a high school that has many immigrants, legal or not. I also attend school with naturalised citizens. 95% of them support amnesty for illegal immigration. Put yourself in their shoes. You are escaping a place with no job, money and can't afford to support them, your papers are constantly rejected for lack of proper documentation you cannot get. What do you do? Amnesty. Those people you've mentioned had the papers and documentation to apply, what about the ones that can't get it?" That is an emotional argument. You cannot run a country on emotions. We all have emotional experiences that differ, that reflect different opinions, so an emotional argument isn't one that can be easily documented. Laws can be. Again without them, we have anarchy.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by GeneP 9 months ago
GeneP
Not a problem. If you want to try again, let me know. I enjoyed the debate and appreciate you being a civil opponent ;).
Posted by itssamtbh 9 months ago
itssamtbh
Just out of time to submit my rebuttal, thanks for debating however should of really set the clock to 48 hours.
Posted by itssamtbh 9 months ago
itssamtbh
Elizabeth Warren.. yes please
Posted by RR-MKIV 9 months ago
RR-MKIV
Elizabeth Warren.... Ew.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.