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

We Must Deport Illegal Immigrants From The U.S.A. For 10 Major Reasons

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
gemmah has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/24/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 726 times Debate No: 98401
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




(1) Over 50% of illegals view themselves as citizens of their country of origin and have no intention of learning English or of assimilating. Some of them have the notion that they are in the U.S.A. in order to take it over with a crude overpopulation scheme called "reconquista". Their countries of origin view them as their citizens (soldiers) abroad. Fine. Go back to where you came from because you don't belong in the United States.

(2) Illegals broke U.S. laws which is WHY they are called illegal in the first place, yet, they continuously lie about their crime of illegal entry and state that they are "law abiding" citizens looking for "honest" work. Both of these statements are completely false.

(3) Illegals hurt those who choose to immigrate the right way by cutting in line ahead of them. Illegals should be subjected to a class action lawsuit by the people they jump ahead of for U.S. immigration. America loves immigrants and is a nation of immigrants. We do not, however, love criminals.

(4) Illegals deplete U.S. social resources intended for the American citizen stock population and they do not reimburse over 90% of the money used to deal with them (which impoverishes the U.S. tax payer).

(5) Illegals think that the U.S. is responsible for them and this notion is completely incorrect and childish. America is for Americans first. Just because the illegal's country dropped the ball and is unwilling to provide them with any opportunities is not America's fault. Instead of trying to mooch off of Americans, they need to grow a backbone, return to their own country, and make wherever they came from a better place for themselves and for their children.

(6) Illegals LOVE to blame any talk of removing them from the U.S. as an evil, racist scheme to break up immigrant families, but, they refuse to acknowledge the fact that the U.S. did not cause these heart breaking problems for illegals in the first place. Illegals themselves caused this tragic division of their families and the sooner they own up to it, the better. The fact that they refuse to take responsibility for their primary role in their disaster tells me that they are childish, irresponsible, criminal individuals who are quite willing to make innocent American citizens suffer forever for the horrific choices of these illegals. They should leave immediately. "Then" their families won't be broken apart, which is what they love to accuse U.S. deportation forces of doing. The longer they stay, the worse the situation becomes for them and especially for their children. If they truly love their children they will leave ASAP because there is no future for either of them here illegally.

(7) Whether the U.S. stock population will take certain jobs or not is none of the illegal's business, quite frankly. If the majority of the American people (also known as THE LAW) did not invite you into this country to dig a ditch, stay out of this country. Those American businesses illegally utilizing your services to depress U.S. wages and break the law will be dealt with also.

(8) The countries of illegals should pay for all of their expenses while illegals are squatting in the U.S.A. since illegals are NOT American citizens. U.S. taxpayers should not have to pay one cent for the expenses of illegals. This includes hospitals, schools, and any other social benefits. Since their countries of origin will not foot the bill for these expenses that have been passed on unfairly to the American taxpayer, illegals should be deported ASAP.

(9) Making the decision to give illegals a pathway to citizenship/amnesty will only encourage more criminality... It will only encourage more illegals to flood into our country so, the answer to illegal immigration is not to reward it, but, to follow and to enforce the laws of the land by summarily deporting these law breakers.

(10) Open, unenforced borders put the American people at a heightened security risk and make them prone to victimization by violent, criminal illegals. It's simply not worth it.


I think beginning the debate with a burden of proof is necessary. If the pro does not prove any of their points or provide any evidence, then you defer con.

Now, I stand as con, meaning that I argue that illegal immigrants not be deported.

I have three main points:

1) The American Dream
2) Economic gains from illegal immigration
3) Personal advocacy

My first point is the American dream. The famous poem, The Colossus, on our Statue of Liberty says:
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore."

Those that come from places like Cuba, Honduras, Mexico, etc., yearn to breathe free on our soils, as much of Cuban Americans came during the embargo, and were trying to escape the Castro regime. Some illegal immigrants were sent through traveling with their parents to gain education, except their parents were sent away after I-9 audits, leaving them parent-less into child-care systems or left homeless.

The pro also says that immigrants should have to "assimilate", but that premise is unconstitutional by nature. The First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, " within the first two clauses. An interpretation means that the United States should not infringe on the civil liberty of speaking whichever language they please. Since when has assimilation ever been peaceful, especially for Native tribes, when put into boarding schools? Read this article from 2008: ...
"'It wasn't really about education,' says Lucy Toledo, a Navajo who went to Sherman Institute in the 1950s."

Now, I would love for the Pro to renounce themselves of criminality when European settlers made illegal arrival onto the continent, and hold them to a higher threshold of "muh ancestors", because Natives have yet to get our rent for you "squatting" on our land.

Now, to my second point, immigrants have a higher impact on the economy than the pro spouts.

A major part of this is that illegal immigrants pay $12 billion in taxes, and that's just to Social Security on its own:

But other than social security, a research study conducted was immigrants in 2013 paid up to $11 billion in state and local taxes, as it goes following below:

Sales and excise taxes on goods and services ($6.9 billion), property taxes ($3.6 billion) and personal income taxes ($1.1 billion). (

Now, assuming the number of illegal immigrants is at 11 million, that's a huge portion of the economy going down the drain. Not only this, but the businesses "illegally utilizing" work pay them much less than legal citizens, even though LEGAL immigrants get paid 200% less than the minimum wage:

Interestingly enough, immigrants help provide for food security and agriculture economy, and are the reason there aren't any shortages:

Not only that, but this piece of evidence is damning on how illegal immigrants resuscitated the housing market:

And the fiscal conservative's favorite, small businesses:

Now, for my personal advocacy. Now, the pro preempts my argument for the Hillary Clinton universal amnesty, but that isn't the case. My plan is to expand the immigrant visa program, deport the violent crime-bosses, or as I'm sure the pro would say "bad hombres", ease up testing programs (as I'll explain why), and make the border stronger, and reform the corrupt Border Patrol.

Now, why ease up testing restrictions? The reason why immigrants come here ILLEGALLY in the first place, is because the system is too rigorous, that they can't come in. Several studies conducted on American citizens even prove so.


This next one can be considered a gag, since it's Alex Jones, but still:

Now, the pro has conceded that open borders are bad, thus this isn't a contest of whether or not a better border should be put into place, it's a question on whether or not mass deportation is good versus expanding visas and deporting the violent criminals. Blanket statements by the pro are not enough.

Here's proof that BP is corrupt & needs reform, so even if immigrants come in illegally and are thus deported, this proves the pro leads to zero-sum action:
Debate Round No. 1



The phrase, "The American Dream", was coined by a white man named James Truslow Adams in his 1931 book entitled, The Epic of America.
Proof Link:

In it, Adams waxed poetic about The Declaration of Independence and the unalienable rights of American citizens.
Proof Link:

I would like to ask you, 'What does that have to do with illegal immigrants residing in the United States of America?' They are called "illegal" for a very good reason and as long as they ARE in noncompliance with U.S. Law, they will be getting deported instead of the gift of amnesty and of white picket fences.

A sonnet about the Statue of Liberty is just that. It is not U.S. immigration law. The fact that you stress that it is a "famous" poem, makes no difference. And, if you are an illegal alien, I doubt that the Statue of Liberty is "ours" . France gave the statue to the People of the United States. The Congress turned it over to the Parks Service, which owns and operates Liberty Island.

"The New Colossus" is a sonnet that American poet Emma Lazarus (1849"1887) wrote in 1883 to raise money for the construction of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. In 1903, the poem was engraved on a bronze plaque and mounted inside the pedestal's lower level."

Therefore, this sonnet was merely a subjective work of literary art and had no direct correlation or significance to any legislation, policy, or practice of the U.S. government.

The fact that MILLIONS of Mexicans, etcetera, flood into this country without permission, says a lot about their fundamental lack of respect for this country. It also speaks volumes about their character deficits.

They are in no position to be begging the United States for favors since they have given us a collective "F You" with their belligerent behavior. They will pay for it by eventually forfeiting their eligibility to "ever" get a Green Card and,this is their own fault. Not ours.

People can come to the United States from places like Cuba, Honduras, Mexico, etc. However, they had better come here legally and respect the laws and the people of this land.

Comparing illegals who sneak across this country's borders to those fleeing the Communist Fidel Castro regime is like comparing apples to oranges. These are different groups of people who are viewed and treated differently by the United States government.

You state that "Some illegal immigrants were sent through traveling with their parents". Sent through by whom? Could it be by officials from their country of origin? If that is the case, this is an outrageous effrontery against the U.S. and the American people.

You state that the children are here illegally "to gain education", but, it's at the U.S. tax payer's expense. And, the illegal parents "should" be "sent away".

The only person(s) leaving these illegal immigrant children "parent-less" in the situation that you described, is the illegal immigrant parent themselves. Needless to say, the American People are not at fault. Laws, barbed wire and fences are there for a reason.

The assimilation that I am referring to has nothing to do with abandoning one's native language or religion. However, in order to become a Naturalized American Citizen, one must:

"Be able to read, write, and speak English and have knowledge and an understanding of U.S. history and government (civics)."

Another citizenship requirement is that you assimilate to the values and ideals of the United States of America: see Oath of Allegiance

And, as far as illegal nimrods appearing on news cameras as they riot in U.S. streets, it's unreal.. Wrapped in Mexican flags while burning American ones, they chant, "Dump Trump" and "Not my President!!" These imbeciles should have been deported the very next day for sedition.

Your statement about The First Amendment is incorrect. There are laws and ordinances against certain kinds of free speech.

The Republicans now control the White House, The Senate, The House, and The Supreme Court. Trump will have fewer obstacles pushing through his immigration reform legislation. He already expressed an interest in creating an American Flag burning law --- violation of which would be cause for deportation.

And, I am sure that it will become more and more difficult to remain in this country when the well of social goodies starts to run dry up and the government steps up its immigration enforcement.

I am not going to debate with you the rights of or the atrocities against Native Americans since that has nothing to do with the basic premise of this debate.

If you are interested in a discussion on the commons and land ownership, here is a good place to start:

"Now, I would love for the Pro to renounce themselves of criminality"

I am not the ancestor of an "English settler".

Furthermore, you can't steal something that you already own, nor can you squat on your own land. Stone-age Europeans were the first to set foot on North America, beating American Indians by some 10,000 years, new archaeological evidence suggests.

Finally, insofar as the "innocent" Native Americans are concerned, there were tribes conquering tribes everywhere in the Americas, for thousands of years. Sioux conquered Kaiowas, Huron conquered Iroquoi, Shawnee conquered Pueblo's, etcetera ad nausea. Incas, Aztecs, Mayans were conquering tribes... You ignore the history of mankind.


Your Facts:

$12 billion in taxes into Social Security w/ stolen SS#s(which illegals use for all forms of credit applications, too) and Individual Tax Identification Numbers (ITNS)
$ 11 billion in state and local taxes: sales taxes and excise taxes on goods and services
$23 billion U.S. GDP input by illegals yearly...

"Now, assuming the number of illegal immigrants is at 11 million"

"Not only this, but the businesses "illegally utilizing" work pay them much less than legal citizens, even though LEGAL immigrants get paid 200% less than the minimum wage."...

My Facts:

Here is a tremendous article on how illegals are ripping the Amerian People off BIG TIME...

Here is one excerpt from the article:

"In 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes. This generated an average annual fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $14,387 per household. This cost had to be borne by U.S. taxpayers. Amnesty would provide unlawful households with access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. The fiscal deficit for each household would soar."

Let's do some math based on your stated figure of illegal immigrants currently living in the United States in 2016 (soon to be 2017).

Let's suppose that an illegal household is made up of 5 individuals... Mom, Dad, 2 kids, and baby on the way - or- 5 adults shacked up in one house. I will divide that $14,387 dollar debt into the number "5".

The amount owed American tax payers AFTER each illegal pays their taxes is: $2,877.40 per illegal

Okay. Now, according to you, there are: 11,000,000 illegals. So, let's now do the math!

$2,877.40 owed per illegal "x" 11,000,000 illegals = $31,651,400,000 dollars per year OWED by all U.S. illegals EACH YEAR.. $31.6 BILLION

This doesn't sound like illegals are doing American Citizens any favors, at all.


(1) Illegals refuse to go back home and many claim unConstitutional Rights to this land, view themselves as citizens of another country, and are here to game the system

(2) Illegals are eating up U.S. stock population resources like a swarm of locusts and they keep flooding over the U.S./Mexico border like there is no tomorrow (and there might not be)

(3) Illegals do not care about United States Government Laws because they feel that they are above the law

(4) Illegals will wreck the U.S. Economy if they are given amnesty and allowed to tap into means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare

Seems pretty accurate to me and deportation (along with other immigration enforcement tactics) seems to be a very reasonable response to neutralize this particular threat.

No one (in the United States) held a gun to their head and made them break U.S. Immigration Laws and SQUAT (Yes, SQUAT) in the U.S.A., live in a poo hole sanctuary city, and agree to a job that pays them less than minimum wage. That is the literal price that they pay to be a criminal in a foreign land; living under the radar. Also, if they had more than a third grade education, they could earn more.


What does it MATTER whether or not the Border Patrol is corrupt? Under a Trump Administration, all of that corruption will be routed out and dealt with. It won't have any long-term negative impact on solving the illegal immigration problem. Attorney General Jeff Sessions will make sure of it. The same argument applies to other corrupt government agencies. A strong border wall/defense WILL be put in place and this will cut down on the influx of illegals considerably. Additonally, other deterrents will be used along with effective detection and apprehension tactics and technologies to stem the flow. Trump has fully stated what he plans to do with immigration reform on

In regard to your naturalization test sampler featured at this link: :

I am a native born American citizen, I took the test once, and I obtained the highest score offered: "10". The test was easy for me and I am of average intelligence so, I am taking your argument and your article "proofs" with a grain of salt.

Also, your argument is obsolete, since this issue has already been addressed:

Furthermore, the last thing that we need is millions of functionally illiterate people in the interior of this country given amnesty when they can't even sign their name in their native language.

"According to a 2007 report from the Migration Policy Institute, an estimated 400,000 legal immigrants and 350,000 illegal immigrants were illiterate in their native languages, much less English. This contributed to the first decline in literacy in California"s history. In 2003, its adult illiteracy rate of 23 percent"up 50 percent in 10 years"put it last among all states."

That is the whole purpose of the testing protocol for U.S. Naturalization and Citizenship. The U.S.A. wants the best and the brightest to immigrate to this country to make it better and to make it competitive with the rest of the countries of the world.

It doesn't want a bunch of dullards added to the population in mass to turn us into a Third World country. We have enough problems getting our own people to rise up, contribute, compete and do better.


My roadmap will be my advocacy, the American Dream, and economic benefits.

Now, I come across a voting issue early in the debate. The purpose of the debate is to prove within an inherent barrier as to Pro action, as per the burden of proof.

They concede in their last speech: "What does it MATTER whether or not the Border Patrol is corrupt? Under a Trump Administration, all of that corruption will be routed out and dealt with. " However, Trump also does not talk about Border Patrol except plans to strengthen the program by including 20,000 new workers:

Since there is no inherent barrier between Pro action, you vote Con on presumption.

Now, even if Trump doesn't reform Border Patrol, considering Trump does not consider that an action to take, illegal immigrants will surge through the border the same way, as you saw the previous articles dealing with sex trafficking, cartel influence, cover-ups, drug trafficking, and many other crimes made invisible. The other articles deal with how our border security is CURRENTLY ineffective, and it's not to do with any lack of staffing, either. Other than the corruption, it's almost impossible to guarantee 40,000 people to cover a border of 2,000 miles, with a border wall only covering 1/4 of that.

Trump's wall is also economically infeasible: - analysts and architects

Specifically, on the economist, it reports that Trump's "suggested $10 billion" will be up to $25 billion USD. That's not covering the amount to transport bricks to the border within a 200 mile radius.

Now, furthermore onto the testing problem. First, that naturalization test wasn't the actual test, it's not multiple choice. That was a more simple test that would only take a semester's worth of government class, considering the actual test has 100 POSSIBLE civics questions, all of which are worded differently.

The argument made isn't obsolete- that's first only a few batch of states, and even if high school students have to pass the test, it's not an accurate representation of the civics test, the more realistic example is this next link.

American's don't know the answers either, 1/15 passed the test as you see on this video in the article:

Now, note how the whole testing protocol is to create the brightest to the country, when this is surely an observable fact, but in the same 2007 report pro mentions, legal immigrants were still illiterate in English.

There's a conflict of interest in the pro's speech - if our people are a prime concern to literacy and doesn't want a "bunch of dullards ... to turn is into a Third World country", then it seems the pro's advocacy has shifted to stop all immigration, legal and illegal.

Now, onto my first point, the American dream. Now, a lot of the pro deals with using Wikipedia and blog posts from non-credible sources, like the author James Longstreet (pseudonym off of a Confederate General, direct subordinate to Robert E. Lee) from American Thinker, revealing the pro's ideologue of white supremacy,

Also using the same Wikipedia article, it describes the American dream about opportunity, liberty, and equality, all of which immigrants, legal and illegal, pursue:

The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States, the set of ideals (democracy, rights, liberty, opportunity, and equality) in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, and an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few ...

Rather, he also touches light on Patterico, an anonymous author who believes in white genocide. This isn't ad hominem anymore, especially considering he says immigrants are in "no position... given us a collective 'F You ... forfeiting their eligibility" - when the eligibility standards are more of safety from physical and mental disease, substance, prostitution, laundering, and terrorism, not of "little crimes", because otherwise Justin Bieber would have had his green card revoked too, again revealing the pro's ideologue.

Now, the pro tells us that illegal immigrants from Cuba are COMPLETELY different, and it's comparing apples to oranges. No, these are both groups of people who also fled, illegally to the U.S., and encouraging it across our ports in Florida.

I quote, "The Cuban government said its citizens "receive differential treatment"they are immediately and automatically admitted"including if they arrived by illegal means" lacking documentation, which undermines efforts to normalize relations between Havana and Washington, DC. " Interestingly enough, undocumented workers from Mexico get shunned, but the pro says illegal immigration from Cuba is fine? Another contradiction.

Let me restate my next claim the pro attacks, not only are children sent here illegally, and through deportation, parents are sent away, children are also only sent through the legal processes because their parents are looking for a new opportunity for them, but cannot afford to go themselves, leaving their children behind in foster-care systems, and even if they're sent illegally, they say just the parents should be sent away.

Next, they go onto the citizenship requirements, about how one must assimilate to values and ideals through the Oath of Allegiance, and be able to read, write, and speak English, refer back to my point about how legal immigrants themselves still cannot do this. Isn't this a fault in proving how one should reform immigration efforts then, instead of stopping it full point, and not the expansion of visa programs?

Next, they talk about burning flags and rioting, but their article talks about legal immigrants, rather than illegal. Remember that flag-desecration is a protected speech act, as per the SCOTUS decision in 1969 and Halter v. Nebraska in 1907:

They then say the First Amendment is irrelevant because of the limitations, but none of these deal with ethnographic or linguistic speech.

Next, they talk about the Tragedy of the Commons, assuming shared land responsibility - but remember Europeans (not just English settlers) voyaged across starting 1492? It wasn't your land to begin with?

Next, they talk about the Solutrean Hypothesis, grounded in fake stories, where the only thing they could find are tools in 20,000 year old ground - but no bodies or skeletons, just cave art from people that were brown (not even white), not to mention the Solutrean's support from several white supremacist groups. They then talk about how Natives were conquerors, yet Natives didn't slaughter 90% of their own population through biological warfare.

Now, onto the economy with the 800 characters I have left.

Their math is based on cherry picking data and amnesty (again, not the same program), their article also states: "in the U.S. population as a whole, households headed by persons without a high school degree, on average, ... [have a] fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of $35,113." Seems that illegal immigrants pay more than our own citizens.

They concede my next few points too, that immigrants are the reason why the economy prevails due to small businesses owned by illegal immigrants, the agriculture industry and as to why they're the lynchpin to our food security, and how they resuscitated the housing market, meaning they're perfect for the economy, meaning that I've inevitably won this debate.

Their video is about illegals in Mexico, and I've dis-proven the others
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
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by gemma2 1 year ago
Hello, dripht.

Having a problem getting into my original account. I have contacted tech support and I am waiting on a response.



I am not responsible for who comments on this thread..
Posted by dripht 1 year ago
Oh yay, common racism found within the pro's authors. I love me some good old white supremacists and biased numbers that would get any businessman locked away.
Posted by ILikePie5 1 year ago
#Make America Great Again
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
ban islam
This debate has 4 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.