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

Border Wall

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
Anonymous has forfeited round #2.
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: 8/3/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,971 times Debate No: 103386
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)



I believe that the Mexican-American Border Wall, also known as merely, the wall would be demonstrably inefficient at it's intended purpose, as well as being unethical. I don't think we should build it, pro should believe that we should.

Immigration and Cost
According to Pew Research Center, roughly half of all illegal immigrants came to the United States legally via the usage of Visas and Border Crossing Cards. So at the onset, the wall is at max 50% efficient. The problem of the wall as proposed by President Donald J. Trump could easily be circumvented by anyone who really set their mind to it. Of course, as we saw from the former escape of El Chapo, The Cartels are really good at building tunnels, and they already use them for the purpose of drugs, human trafficking and such. Hell, even some have electricity. Nevermind that, there's still the Pacific Coast and the Gulf of Mexico. And the wall has been estimated to cost anywhere from 15 billion to 25 billion(Or about half the price for free college for everyone), not including any of the land, to only cover 50% of the solution.


Now one might ask, in spite all of this, will this make native-born Americans(who are descended from immigrants anyway) be more likely to have a job? The short answer is no. A study published by the National Academies of Science, Medicine, and Engineering found that this is false.

Due to guest worker programs and such, 1.6 million entries by legal immigrants and 3.9 million by temporary workers from Mexico have occurred in the last 10 years. Entirely legally. This is primarily for farming jobs that Americans typically won't do. If immigrants are no longer allowed, then farmers will be in quite a pickle and will crash the market. If immigrants are allowed to continue working in the US, and the wall is built, the wall still won't stop them. They can merely stay in the country.

Besides the enormous cost of said border wall and inefficiency, one must ask is this morally acceptable. E pluribus unum, out of many, one. The original unofficial motto of the U.S. before it was changed to in "God we trust" in 1956. The US was formed almost entirely by those not indigenous. It is the land of immigrants, and we should at the very least, stay in our roots. Is it moral to turn away those in need? To not help the less fortunate?

Continuing on the moral front, one can clearly see that the vast majority of the States is Christian. And as the whole border wall idea is strongly supported by one the most religious parties, the GOP. One might ask what Jesus would have thought. How about Love your neighbor as yourself (Mt. 12:31)? How about loving others(John 13:34-35)? Admittedly, not all of this country is Christian, not even I am. But one must ask if one is, what would Jesus do? Take the nativity, there was a family in need and a pregnant woman looking for someplace to have a baby, but there was no room in the inn. The story didn't"t praise those that said no. The story praised those who said this may be a little inconvenient, this may be a little awkward, but otherwise found a way to help those in need.


Hello Judges and my opponent. The Border Wall proposed by the 45th President of the United States Donald J. Trump has caused a lot controversy and has faced strict opposition from liberals. My job is to prove that the Mexican-American Border Wall is a great idea and will deter human trafficking, the drug cartels, and illegal immigration from the Southern Border. First I will refute my opponents claims and then will proceed to explain the benefits of the Wall.

Immigration and Cost:
My opponent is correct that half of all illegal immigrants come from visa overstays, but the Border Crossing Cards is a little far fetched. There is no mention of border crossing cards in any of their sources. The Visa people primarily come from overseas and that problem is a whole different problem for which Trump has proposed expanding the E-Verify system. The problem we are discussing for this debate is illegal immigration via the Southern Border, so I urge judges and my opponent to not delve further on the visas argument. Now let's get on to the tunnels argument. Israel a key ally of the United States in the Middle East has developed a tunnel detection system to prevent Hamas from transporting troops beneath the wall in Israel. [1] The U.S. has invested 120 million dollars into this technology, so it will get the technology as well. [2] But if that isn't sufficient, the CBP is also developing new technology to combat tunnels built by the cartels with the help of the Department of Defense and private industries as well.[3] Now let's move on to the Pacific Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. In case you didn't know, there's the United States Coast Guard to protect navel entrances and smuggling. There are currently 38,000 active-duty people, 8,000 Reservists, and 35,000 Auxiliarists in the Coast Guard. [4] The United States shoreline according to the NOAA is 95,471 miles including the Great Lakes and Alaska+Hawaii. Even if we include these, and only use active duty CG, there would be a soldier every 2.5 miles. The distance would get lower if the reserve and auxiliaries were called in. Alaska would still be harder to defend, but just considering the mainland and not the smaller islands, it's easily defensible. Even if the cartels go to Alaska, it would take ages to get there by boat while avoiding the CG. Even if they get to Alaska it's a 44 hour drive to Washington State and even more to other states via Canada. And we are forgetting the Canadian police and Border Patrol as well. I hope that's sufficient to explain the shoreline argument, so now let's move to the cost. According to your CNN source the estimate given to Trump was 10 billion. Remember, Trump was a builder and these companies worked alongside him so the estimate is probably a good one, but because other people have said up to 25 billion, we'll go with that. The cost is going to be reimbursed by Mexico through one or more methods as explained by Trump during the campaign season: "Mexico must pay for the wall and, until they do, the United States will, among other things: "impound all remittance payments derived from illegal wages; increase fees on all temporary visas issued to Mexican CEOs and diplomats (and if necessary cancel them); increase fees on all border crossing cards " of which we issue about 1 million to Mexican nationals each year (a major source of visa overstays); increase fees on all NAFTA worker visas from Mexico (another major source of overstays); and increase fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico [Tariffs and foreign aid cuts are also options]. We will not be taken advantage of anymore."[5]

I don't think my opponent knows the difference between legal and illegal immigrants. Trump likes legal immigration and there's nothing wrong with legal immigration. The problem is when you cheat the system and migrate illegally. Not only are you undermining the law abiding people patiently waiting in line, but you are cheating American taxpayers. According to a study by FAIR, illegal immigration costs American taxpayers 113 billion dollars every year at the local, state, and federal levels. There are more statistics present on this website about the harms of illegal immigration.[6]Hell even illegal immigrants get healthcare funded by the taxpayers. (Feel free to research the names to figure out the validity)[7] But, let's get back to the point. Immigrants that legally come legally are ok, illegally, bad. Legal immigrants can't affect the jobs of Americans, but illegals can, why? Because they lower wages. Let's think of a scenario. I'm an American that unfortunately had to drop out of high school to support my family. I work part time at a construction facility. I work hard everyday for minimum wage, to support my family, but one day I get layed off. I wonder why, but there is not much I can do. The real reason was that my employer found an illegal immigrant willing to do the same work I do for three dollars. See the point?

The difference between us and the Native Americans in the past is that we can enforce our laws and defend our borders. The Native Americans were outgunned by the Europeans and that's why they couldn't defend their land. The United States on the other hand can. The Americans fought for their independence through blood, sweat, and tears, to escape the atrocities forced onto them by the British, so why can't the people South of the border? And even if we don't "turn away those in need," how many do we let in? A hunded? A thousand? A million? A billion? Ethically speaking, it would be everyone. Even if we set a limit, how can we decide who's in need and who's just acting? There's a reason why we have laws and processes to determine who can and cannot come into the United States.

I am not Christian either, and don't know much about the Bible. Religion shouldn't be used to justify to go against policies in my opinion. But regardless, let's talk realistically, if a murderer lives next me, am I going to love him? Of course not. Let's move on to your second quote. Yes, I would help the woman without knowing anything. But if I knew that they traveled a hundred miles on foot and jumped the border illegally, then the case would be different. I'd of course do the delivery, but call ICE after and have them deported. Nobody is above the law. Nobody.

The Mexican-American border is infamous for drug smuggling. "Illegal drug abuse costs American society $181 billion a year in health care costs, lost workplace productivity, law enforcement, and legal costs. Mexican drug cartels make an estimated $19-$29 billion a year on drug sales in the United States. Conflicts between drug cartels over territory as well as the attempts to stop drug trafficking by law enforcement officials often results in violence, and this has caused over 55,000 deaths since the proclaimed Mexican Drug War began in 2006." As everyone knows, drugs are a huge problem and a majority of the problem comes from our border filled with holes.

Human Trafficking
"It is estimated that 17,000 to 19,000 foreign nationals are trafficked into the United States each year. Trafficking is the recruitment and possible transport of persons within or across boundaries by force, fraud, or deception for the purpose of exploiting them economically. Victims are lured with false promises of good jobs and better lives, and then forced to work under brutal and inhuman conditions."[9] Human trafficking is one of the worst crimes and human rights violations that can occur, and it is fairly common via the Southern Border. Just recently in San Antonio, a truck outside WalMart was found to have contained illegal immigrants. The trailer was closed in the sweltering Texas heat. Nine illegal immigrants died because of the cartels.[10] A Wall would deter human trafficking because there would be no method to get inside the U.S.

For now, I rest my case and look forward to my opponents rebuttals. Good Luck!

Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by ILikePie5 2 years ago
Your time is up....
Posted by ILikePie5 2 years ago
Thank You, I will most likely post my rebuttals tomorrow
Posted by DeletedUser 2 years ago
Go straight at it
Posted by ILikePie5 2 years ago
Could you repost the CNN and Newsweek articles. They lead me back to the main websites not the articles.
Posted by ILikePie5 2 years ago
Is first round acceptance, or do I get straight to the point?
Posted by ILikePie5 2 years ago
Is first round acceptance, or do I get straight to the point?
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.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.