Why so much conservative hostility towards undocumented immigrants?

[compassion 4 humanity]

Good grief, talk about historical revisionism. The Indians often died because they didn't have immunity from diseases, not because European settlers went on a mass killing spree. The reservations didn't come about until the 1800s, long after the first European settlements. No one is claiming that was right, but you need to stop being guilted into feeling so sorry for the Indians.

There was no country with immigration laws when Europeans came. Therefore, they were breaking no laws. Settling to avoid religious persecution is not coming to a land to kill. You are a product of left wing, ungodly, cultural Marxist, anti-white, historical revisionist propaganda, and that you can't see it is sad.

I'm conservative and consistently vote Republican. But I believe in a humane, open immigration policy. That doesn't make me a liberal. Why do you think anyone who disagrees with you on immigration must be a leftist?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

I'm conservative and consistently vote Republican. But I believe in a humane, open immigration policy. That doesn't make me a liberal. Why do you think anyone who disagrees with you on immigration must be a leftist?

Did you vote for Trump?

 

[compassion 4 humanity]

Did you vote for Trump?

Yes. If you don't vote for your party's candidate in a presidential election, no matter how much you may not agree with some of their ideas, then it's basically a vote for the other party, especially if you live in a swing state.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Even legal immigration of unassimilable groups destroys a country. I have issue with legal immigration from any non-European (descent) nation, as it is being used as a weapon to destroy the West.

OK maybe I can put that differently people who come here legally and act civil once here I have no problem with.

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

Your desperate use of ad hominum is noted ...

It's not an ad hominem. For that to be the case, it would me be saying things that were untrue, but were rather trying to get you upset. I'm simply pointing a fact that your ideological views are that of the "progressive" mindset with regard to these issues. The "progressive" (really regressive) mindset is ungodly. It is anti-Christian.

 

[A_Thinker]

It's not an ad hominem. For that to be the case, it would me be saying things that were untrue, but were rather trying to get you upset.

You don't know what ad hominem means. It means that you are attacking PERSONS holding opposing views, rather than the opposing VIEWS ...

 

[A_Thinker]

I'm simply pointing a fact that your ideological views are that of the "progressive" mindset with regard to these issues. The "progressive" (really regressive) mindset is ungodly. It is anti-Christian.

You mean like .... "Love your neighbor as yourself" ???

How unchristian ...

 

[SolomonVII]

Using drugs like meth or cocaine, shoplifting, and stealing cars are examples of illegal activities. Since when is desiring a better life, wanting to feed your family, and seeking to economic opportunities an “illegal activity” that you’re against? And by the way, if you’re indifferent to all the deportation horror stories—there are a lot of them on the Internet, look them up—that sounds like hostility to me.

There are a lot of horror stories when it comes to immigrants entering the country outside of the legal channels. Any euphemism that we put on that kind of migration does not change the fact that they are in the country unlawfully, and that makes them vulnerable.
It makes them vulnerable to the criminal elements involved in the human smuggling trade, to unscrupulous employers looking to save themselves some money by hiring people with no recourse to rights of people in the country lawfully, and it makes them vulnerable to ruthless law enforcement authorities, some who love to use their positions of power to abuse those that they can.

People in general can fully understand that people desire a better life, and the economic opportunities that American capitalism has been able to provide people who make it across the southern border.
It is a sad commentary on the governments of Hispanic America that a life filled with snakes, and exploiters and sadists is the best option for them.
That is a problem that Hispanic America has to deal with on their own though. America ought not dictate to them how to run their countries.
What is humane for Americans though, is expectation of lawful activity. The inhumane situations would not be there is Americans would have respected their laws in the first place. Just by letting it be known that he was going to enforce the law, Trump stemmed the tide if illegal immigration to a trickle, without even having to build the wall.
Ultimately, impartial enforcement of the law is much more humane than policy based in euphemisms.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

To the OP, to answer the basic premise, one of the problems effecting many Americans is between undocumented immigrants and the job situation for as long as I can remember. The problem seems to have increased substantially over the past decade, to the extent of damaging the economy severely which effects a majority of people on many levels, forcing expansion of social programs to help aid those effected the most. For as long as I can remember, employers have taken advantage of the situation by paying illegal immigrants less than the minimum wage, doing this under the table so to speak. These type of practices have effected the ability of American citizens to find employment. My apologies for speaking in generalities as it would require hours and hours to document these assertions.

 

[Liza B.]

Actually, the Native Americans were more "christian" in their attitude of "sharing the land" ... than were their soon-to-be "christian" conquerers ...

What they didn't realize is that the "christian" Europeans had no intention of "sharing" ...

Still not answering the question.

Should the Native Americans have given up their resources, per your Bible verse, to the invading Europeans?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Still not answering the question.

Should the Native Americans have given up their resources, per your Bible verse, to the invading Europeans?

Some thoughts...

Without names and conversion stories, it really is difficult to assume the Europeans doing the invading were even Christians, or Christians at that particular moment in history. Also, it is all too easy for people to claim they are something that they are not. The person to whom you're responding, seems to be making assumptions where perhaps it's not helpful to make them.

As for the Native American Indian story, it's one long excruciating trail of tears, a shameful horrible blot in American history that should always be remembered.

I can only imagine how Paul (Saul) felt after his conversion, the fears he may have struggled with in facing those whom he previously persecuted.

 

[Liza B.]

Some thoughts...

Without names and conversion stories, it really is difficult to assume the Europeans doing the invading were even Christians, or Christians at that particular moment in history. Also, it is all too easy for people to claim they are something that they are not. The person to whom you're responding, seems to be making assumptions where perhaps it's not helpful to make them.

As for the Native American Indian story, it's one long excruciating trail of tears, a shameful horrible blot in American history that should always be remembered.

I can only imagine how Paul (Saul) felt after his conversion, the fears he may have struggled with in facing those whom he previously persecuted.

Yes, yes, and yes.

People who want to blame simplify history, and people who want to excuse it do too. It's never that simple. But it's a mistake from my POV to paint early American settlers as the worst humans that ever lived for what they did to the Native Americans, because this is the history of humanity--since Adam and Eve left the Garden, humans have been stealing land from one another, often violently and at great cost. Should it be excused? No. Are we the only people to do so in the course of human history? Not even close.

I think my favorite accusations come from the UK. Sure, Brits, throw some more stones, you of the Normans and Saxon histories...and you who colonized India. Honest to Pete.

 

[A_Thinker]

Still not answering the question.

Should the Native Americans have given up their resources, per your Bible verse, to the invading Europeans?

Per Jesus' instruction to "Love your neighbor as you love yourself", I think that God does expect His people to sacrifice personally owned resources for the sake of helping others.

Ironically, I think that the Native Americans were not inclined to keep Europeans off of the American continent. It appears that they felt that there was ENOUGH resource to be be SHARED.

Now, when it became evident that they were being invaded (i.e. their resources TAKEN from them .. with guns, cannons, etc.), I believe that it was incumbent upon them to defend themselves from the onslaught.

 

[compassion 4 humanity]

There are a lot of horror stories when it comes to immigrants entering the country outside of the legal channels. Any euphemism that we put on that kind of migration does not change the fact that they are in the country unlawfully, and that makes them vulnerable.

Yes, I’m aware that drug traffickers, sex traffickers, and other serious criminal illegal aliens exist. In fact, I mentioned that in my OP. I do think the bad ones should be deported, but what about the good undocumented immigrants? Over a decade ago, I had a high school friend who was here illegally, originally from Taiwan. He was a good student and never committed a crime in his life. He came here illegally through no choice of his own (it was his parents’ choice). Shouldn’t he and other good undocumented immigrants be given a chance at citizenship? Let me know what you think.

 

[SolomonVII]

Yes, I’m aware that drug traffickers, sex traffickers, and other serious criminal illegal aliens exist. In fact, I mentioned that in my OP. I do think the bad ones should be deported, but what about the good undocumented immigrants? Over a decade ago, I had a high school friend who was here illegally, originally from Taiwan. He was a good student and never committed a crime in his life. He came here illegally through no choice of his own (it was his parents’ choice). Shouldn’t he and other good undocumented immigrants be given a chance at citizenship? Let me know what you think.

I think that he was in the country illegally, like you say.
Either you believe that laws should be followed, or you don't
My own opinion is that no one ought to be above the law, including the president. I grew up seeing this demonstrated to me clearly with Nixon being forced from office. He entered his second term being very popular, concluding the Vietnam war successfully, and opening up trade to China, etc.
His cover-ups were nor horrific breaches of political behavior, but they were unlawful.
And even the president was not above the law.
There is such a thing in British-based law systems where judges can grant leniency on a case-by-case basis. There will be cases where this might apply.
But for masses of people in America unlawfully, now numbering in the millions, why do you think that the law should not apply to them, in a country where even presidents are not above the law?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Enforcement of existing immigration laws should be a no-brainer...

 

[compassion 4 humanity]

I think that he was in the country illegally, like you say.
Either you believe that laws should be followed, or you don't
My own opinion is that no one ought to be above the law, including the president. I grew up seeing this demonstrated to me clearly with Nixon being forced from office. He entered his second term being very popular, concluding the Vietnam war successfully, and opening up trade to China, etc.
His cover-ups were nor horrific breaches of political behavior, but they were unlawful.
And even the president was not above the law.
There is such a thing in British-based law systems where judges can grant leniency on a case-by-case basis. There will be cases where this might apply.
But for masses of people in America unlawfully, now numbering in the millions, why do you think that the law should not apply to them, in a country where even presidents are not above the law?

I was born in 1988, so I don’t have much knowledge of the Watergate scandal. I’ve heard about it, but I honestly haven’t read much on it. For this reason, I can’t comment on this subject that you brought up.

I know that undocumented immigrants broke the law. But the compassionate part of me—the humane and Christian part of me—believes the good ones should be forgiven and given a chance at citizenship. It’s not an argument; it’s a feeling of compassion.

Consider this: we have all broken the law at one point in our lives. Have you ever gone past the speed limit while driving? Have you ever stolen something from a store when you were a teenager? Have you ever tried pot? These are all illegal things. And we have all done something illegal in the past, whether severe or not so severe. By the same token, undocumented immigrants broke the law by coming here illegally. But in many respects, we’re not so different because we too have broken the law at some time in our lives.

 

[SolomonVII]

I was born in 1988, so I don’t have much knowledge of the Watergate scandal. I’ve heard about it, but I honestly haven’t read much on it. For this reason, I can’t comment on this subject that you brought up.

I know that undocumented immigrants broke the law. But the compassionate part of me—the humane and Christian part of me—believes the good ones should be forgiven and given a chance at citizenship. It’s not an argument; it’s a feeling of compassion.

Consider this: we have all broken the law at one point in our lives. Have you ever gone past the speed limit while driving? Have you ever stolen something from a store when you were a teenager? Have you ever tried pot? These are all illegal things. And we have all done something illegal in the past, whether severe or not so severe. By the same token, undocumented immigrants broke the law by coming here illegally. But in many respects, we’re not so different because we too have broken the law at some time in our lives.

You know that Nixon happened. That ought to be enough to understand the point that nobody is above the law.
I don't think that it is compassionate at all to create a category of people who are above or beyond the law. If the law is a bad law, then it is contingent on the citizenship to change that law.
I know that Christianity is mostly cafeteria food for most of us, and we all pick and choose which parts we like. If we all pick and chose which laws we want to follow, that makes the law into a joke.

 

[Liza B.]

Per Jesus' instruction to "Love your neighbor as you love yourself", I think that God does expect His people to sacrifice personally owned resources for the sake of helping others.

Ironically, I think that the Native Americans were not inclined to keep Europeans off of the American continent. It appears that they felt that there was ENOUGH resource to be be SHARED.

Now, when it became evident that they were being invaded (i.e. their resources TAKEN from them .. with guns, cannons, etc.), I believe that it was incumbent upon them to defend themselves from the onslaught.

I've heard this before and I hope you have too. If not, I hope you find it as powerful as I do:

Imagine four men are eating dinner at a table, with plenty of great food to go around. A poor man is brought to the table who is very much in need. "Will you feed this man?" The men eating dig into their wallets to pay for a meal to feed the poor man.

Now, another scenario: four men are eating dinner at a table, plenty of great food to go around. A big man armed with weapons says, "you WILL feed this man," and begins taking food from their plates to make a fifth plate.

The first is charity. The second is not. It is not even close.

 

[A_Thinker]

I've heard this before and I hope you have too. If not, I hope you find it as powerful as I do:

Imagine four men are eating dinner at a table, with plenty of great food to go around. A poor man is brought to the table who is very much in need. "Will you feed this man?" The men eating dig into their wallets to pay for a meal to feed the poor man.

Now, another scenario: four men are eating dinner at a table, plenty of great food to go around. A big man armed with weapons says, "you WILL feed this man," and begins taking food from their plates to make a fifth plate.

The first is charity. The second is not. It is not even close.

I've not heard this story before.

But, I must say, the first scenario is more akin to the plight of Mexican migrant workers crossing the border merely for the purpose of feeding and supporting their families.

They're not arriving with weapons and taking food/jobs from Americans. The jobs they perform are, typically, those that Americans are not wanting to do ...

The second scenario is more akin to what happened to the Native Americans ...