Immigration law: something's got to give.

Immigration law: something's got to give. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

kittinSol -> Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 5:33:40 AM)
FRESNO, Calif, June 3, 2008 (AP) The valedictorian at Fresno's Bullard High School won't be attending college in the United States this fall because he's scheduled to be deported. Seventeen-year-old Arthur Mkoyan's 4.0 grade-point average qualified him to enter one of the state's top universities. But he and his mother have been ordered back to Armenia after their last appeal for asylum failed. The family fled from what used to be part of the Soviet Union and has been seeking asylum since 1992. A spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement says they were given an extension until June 20 so Mkoyan could attend his graduation ceremony. A federal bill called the DREAM Act that would have given some high-performing illegal immigrants legal status to attend college stalled last year in Congress. CBS Reactions? Suggestions? Emotions?

hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 6:01:40 AM)
That's the way the cookie crumbles. In '92 when his mother applied for assylum, the Soviet Union still existed. Now it doesn't - it has reverted to the various individual countries that started out as. She fled from something that - truthfully - no longer exists, and has not returned to find out whether she is still in some sort of political danger there. If he wants to go to college here in the US that badly, let him go back home with his mom - find out the truth for himself of what things are like there now instead of the bad memories of something from 16 years ago - and then apply for a student Visa to return. If he's as smart as the article indicates, then there will likely be colleges and universities falling all over themselves to offer him scholarships and such to pay for it - not to mention the fact that if he's that smart, he should already be thinking along those lines.

kittinSol -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 6:03:45 AM)
But where do you think this young man's home actually is (regardless of what you think his rights should be)? Where has he lived all his life? Which language is he the most fluent in?

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 6:11:04 AM)
His age is also such that he might even have been born here, or missed it by one year maybe. I skimmed the article and it doesn't say much. I think there is also a reasonableness factor in expecting asylum given that they have waited all these years to receive an answer. That the answer should be no at this time is just dumb as hell. Why weren't they deported sooner if this was to be the result? Why does it take this many years to answer a simple immigration question? At first glance I thought the reply by hizgeorgiapeach was even-handed enough, but given a moment or two of reflection it began to seem quite heartless. This is one of those situations that requires a rethink and even a bending of the rules if it comes to that. Obviously we have scant details on this case. More details might make some issues clearer.

hizgeorgiapeach -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 6:33:57 AM)
If he had been born here, there would be a birth certificate on file and therefore this would be a non-issue, as HE would not be facing deportation and his mother would likely be granted some sort of extention/exception if she had no one that he could stay with until reaching his majority. (That of course assumes that he hasn't already reached his majority - legal adulthood - of 18.) For that matter, if he had been born here and that were an issue, it's become both easy and relatively common practice for 16 and 17 year olds to go to court to be granted legal emancipation from their parents prior to attaining their majority, so that they are no longer considered a ward of their parents but neither do they become a ward of the state or some other guardian until that point. It (the potential he was born here) is therefore an invalid arguement. As the article says nothing concerning his language skills, and none of us know him personally, I don't know what language (or languages) he is fluent in any more than kitten actually does, regardless of what sort of pretty assumptions are going to be made. They haven't been waiting "all these years for an answer." They were turned down on their final Appeal - which means they've been given the same answer repeatedly over the course of several attempts/years. Why weren't they deported sooner? Because they were given a legal Privilage of appealing the decision a certain number of times - hence why this was their Final appeal. The conditions which caused the mother to flee and request assylum are no longer extant - the political entity she fled from, the Soviet Union - no longer exists. Therefore the conditions under which she requested assylum are no longer valid TO be granted. There is no time when it is appropriate to "bend the rules." If you're going to start "bending" them here and there, you may as well do away with them altogether, because they become meaningless. If you "bend" for one for whatever "good" reason - you obligate yourself to "bend" for all who profess to have a "good" reason - because what YOU consider a "good" reason is not going to seem sufficient to everyone else, and vise versa. Is my answer potentially heartless? Yes - but it's also based on Reality, and reality isn't always rose colored romance, sugar and spice and everything nice, a pat on the head, and everybody getting everything they want. Reality isn't necessarily Fair, but too bad. Whine about reality not being fair in one hand, shit in the other, see which one has something substantial in it.

kittinSol -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 6:40:46 AM)
I can assure you that US immigration rules aren't nearly as logical, clear, or evenly applied as you seem to think. As a matter of fact, the whole immigration process is such a mess it wouldn't surprise me if it ended up costing the US taxpayer the kind of money that would make your eyes water. The bureaucracy is worthy of the ex RDA. You are correct that had he be born in America he would automatically be granted US citizenship. That he should be punished and deported because of the numerous loopholes in the system is beyond fucked up.

MissSepphora1 -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 6:47:56 AM)
Perhaps we should just open the gates to anyone and everyone who wants to come here. Then the US would be overcrowded, the government would not be able to pay for all the social services, and we would be the biggest ghetto in the world due to all the illiterate uneducated people. Until of course all the terrorists who come over decide to go all suicide bomber and blow everyone up.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:06:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol I can assure you that US immigration rules aren't nearly as logical, clear, or evenly applied as you seem to think. As a matter of fact, the whole immigration process is such a mess it wouldn't surprise me if it ended up costing the US taxpayer the kind of money that would make your eyes water. The bureaucracy is worthy of the ex RDA. You are correct that had he be born in America he would automatically be granted US citizenship. That he should be punished and deported because of the numerous loopholes in the system is beyond fucked up. He's not being punished, nor is his mother. I am quite sure that somewhere along the line of the last 16 years, it was explained to his mother...the woman who, as a fully-grown adult, brought her baby here...what the laws were regarding legal asylum and the granting of it. She fled the Soviets and chose the U. S. to come to. While her choice may have been governed by the freedom given to the citizens of the U.S., it may well have also been influenced by the type of aid available to people within the U.S., even those here illegally. Despite what many in other places besides the U.S.---and sadly, even within the U. S.---would have you believe, this is still the country most people run to when they seek freedom from their country and the restrictive powers within their own society. The assumption that we should grant citizenship status to everyone who has fled elsewhere to come here is just illogical. Our immigration laws may be a maze and may even be applied in what seems an unfair manner to those outside the system...show me another country in the free world where they are applied any more evenly...France? England? Sweden? Canada? I sincerely doubt it. If things were that much better in those countries, why is it that those seeking refuge from the society they were born into come here rather than go to those countries---and others---I have mentioned? Perhaps what could be done is that some of these Hollywood types who assured us that they would move to another country if G. Bush was elected---and did not---could keep their promise and move their families and themselves to these other countries and make room for at least several of these cases that seem more worthy of being here...and that seem to have a genuine respect and love for this country.

MissSepphora1 -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:14:57 AM)
You know how it is, the whole world wants to blame the US... It's the point your finger solution.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:25:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol I can assure you that US immigration rules aren't nearly as logical, clear, or evenly applied as you seem to think. I'd say arcane and capricious is more like it. But then look at the people whom it serves, even in this thread. There's your answer. [8\|] People come here, not because we have the highest standard of living but because they believe (falsely) that we have the highest standards regarding political freedom. They believe the words on the Statue of Liberty and are thereby misled. Maybe we should tear the lady down to make sure no one misunderstands that message again. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

MissSepphora1 -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:30:54 AM)
I didn't know that plaque was part of the immigration law???

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:35:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol I can assure you that US immigration rules aren't nearly as logical, clear, or evenly applied as you seem to think. I'd say arcane and capricious is more like it. But then look at the people whom it serves, even in this thread. There's your answer. [8\|] People come here, not because we have the highest standard of living but because they believe (falsely) that we have the highest standards regarding political freedom. They believe the words on the Statue of Liberty and are thereby misled. Maybe we should tear the lady down to make sure no one misunderstands that message again. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" Well, it's really more of a numbers game. I looked into moving to Canada a couple years ago, and found that Canada takes roughly the same number of people proportional to its population as does Australia, NZ, or the US. Canada has about 10% of the population of the US, so they take about 10% of the number of people the US does.

cpK69 -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:41:44 AM)
Here's a video report on it. http://www.ksee24.com/news/local/19481239.html

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:42:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1 I didn't know that plaque was part of the immigration law??? Did I say they were? My point was that our reality falls far short of our ideals and that we might as well tear down our national icons as they now mean nothing at all. Is that any clearer for you?

CreativeDominant -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:43:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol I can assure you that US immigration rules aren't nearly as logical, clear, or evenly applied as you seem to think. I'd say arcane and capricious is more like it. But then look at the people whom it serves, even in this thread. There's your answer. [8\|] People come here, not because we have the highest standard of living but because they believe (falsely) that we have the highest standards regarding political freedom. They believe the words on the Statue of Liberty and are thereby misled. Maybe we should tear the lady down to make sure no one misunderstands that message again. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" How ironic then that this country's "restrictive" laws regarding political freedom allows groups like the Klan, the Black Panthers, The American Nazi Party, The Aztlan Group, to exist, isn't it? And you can express your views about the "repression" of political expression running rampant in this country freely without having to worry about being carted off to jail unless you deliberately break the laws against inciting others to violence or to overthrow of the legitimately elected government.

MissSepphora1 -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:46:27 AM)
What else are you tearing down that is meaningless? quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote: ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1 I didn't know that plaque was part of the immigration law??? Did I say they were? My point was that our reality falls far short of our ideals and that we might as well tear down our national icons as they now mean nothing at all. Is that any clearer for you?

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:50:39 AM)
Have you even been living in this country for the last 8 years? You can be arrested for doing practically anything at this point. Oh sure, maybe you will be exonerated at trial - but then again, maybe you won't. Google is your friend. Maybe you might try looking up political protest news and find out how being sequestered behind fences miles from an event, rubber bullets, riot cops, and tasers are now the norm on the protest scene. I almost didn't reply to you because your post was so divorced from reality it seemd like a troll to me.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:50:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote: ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1 I didn't know that plaque was part of the immigration law??? Did I say they were? My point was that our reality falls far short of our ideals and that we might as well tear down our national icons as they now mean nothing at all. Is that any clearer for you? And my argument is that our reality may sometimes fall far short of our ideals but at least we strive to reach them. And is it not strange that the communist countries of the Soviet Union and China...those havens of lofty ideals and non-repression...have found their biggest success as they have begun to incorporate our "wicked" capitalistic economic model?

kittinSol -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 7:56:32 AM)
Here we have a perfect example of a kid that is brilliant in school, about to get in to a good university... and the authorities deport him. Pragmatically, it's brain drain. Humanely, it's horrible. This country's richness comes from the great diversity of its inhabitants: everybody here comes from elsewhere. I am not in favour of illegal immigration: but there is a fine line between applying the law and the law being a bonehead. Specific cases demand specific reflexion: it's not cattle we're talking about, but people.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Immigration law: something's got to give. (6/4/2008 8:02:11 AM)
But the problem, kitten is that while this is the case that is publicized, how many more are there that are not? Cases just as deserving of having a more favorable dispensation than this one? So often, the cases that are publicized are those that are seen by the specific journalist as being great for reading...and increasing feelings in a certain direction. Beneath most human interest stories is an agenda that has nothing to do with the plight of the subjects in the story but rather with the author in mind.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.0625