Cut the crap
Re: the letter “‘Illegal' advice” [May 7]. Mr. Schroeder said, “No person is illegal.” It may be that no person is illegal, but the acts that they commit are. Since the act of immigration into the U.S. is prohibited without legal documentation, the person coming in the U.S. without documentation is has committed the act of illegal immigration. That is likely where the term “illegal immigrant” came from, often debated by people who don't understand immigration law and do not realize that “illegal immigrant/ alien” really means “person that immigrated illegally.”
Let's cut the crap and call them what they really are, criminal immigrants. According to Subtitle A, Sec. 105 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, “Persons attempting to enter the U.S. illegally will be subject to civil fines of between $50 and $250 per entry or attempted entry and such fines shall double for each subsequent fine. These fines are in addition to existing criminal and civil penalties. This section goes [went] into effect in April 1997.”
I do not allow for the argument that these criminal immigrants were ignorant of immigration policies, because of the border patrols and almost-certain death they face trying to cross the border. If they really thought it was legal to come here without documentation, they would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and suicidal to not realize that they are not. Either that, or believe that the risks are some kind of “running the gamut” that they have to pass to be a legal U.S. resident.
He also said, “And using this nomenclature can easily perpetuate prejudice against undocumented people who have migrated here.” People who migrate here without documentation have committed a crime. The only prejudice they should face is what they deserve: being regarded as criminals under U.S. immigration law. The law is blind as to who it blocks from entering the country, if effectively enforced and followed by people who want to become productive and legal citizens of the U.S. It blocks people who roll the dice at having a better life in the U.S. after crossing illegally, and it also blocks terrorists whose sole purpose is to destroy our country.
To take emphasis away from restricting illegal immigration would be tantamount to treason: giving terrorists a free pass to the murders of countless citizens and destruction of the U.S.
I never miss reading your alternative rag. It is good to see what the liberal/anti-war/legalize drugs crowd thinks. I can honestly say I never miss reading two of your featured writers (Ms. Beak, the posterwoman for Fema-nazis with a voice and Edwin Decker).
Mr. Decker is an anomaly with me. There are times I want to take the old ball-peen to my monitor and destroy it! Other times I just laugh, secure in knowing that when he grows up (or when his first daughter is born), he will probably be as conservative as I am. But I digress. The point is, I never miss reading him.
Today, this paunchy, balding white guy salutes Mr. Decker for his “Taps” feature [May 21]. Mr. Decker, on behalf of all veterans, dead or alive-thank you, Sir. My fallen brothers, sisters and I wanted just this-a free society that allows you a voice, even when I want to ring your neck for using it or pat you on the head and laugh after some pithy comment.
Your “Taps” article was excellent.
Jobs and wages
It was interesting to read the interview with Scott Barnett in the May 21 issue of the CityBeat. As a person, he certainly seems like a good father, an educated citizen and yes, even a “good guy.”
The problem with Scott Barnett, unfortunately, is his politics. He closes the interview with his thoughts on the budget crisis. “In my view, I'd like more subsidy of basic services and less of salaries.” If we put him to task on this comment, Mr. Barnett is making very clear his position on the treatment of public servants. Rather than paying seven janitors $12 an hour, Mr. Barnett would like to pay 12 janitors $7 an hour.
It's no surprise to anyone, except perhaps Mr. Barnett, that you can't survive on $7 an hour in San Diego and raise a family. My view is completely different. I believe people who work for a living should be able to have a roof over their heads, food on their table and access to health care. If we are moving people off from welfare, we should be moving them into good jobs, not onto the streets.
I read your column about the confrontation between you and a few members of Atheist United [Sordid Tales, May 28]. First of all, let me commend you for your writing skills. I am a journalist and it is always refreshing to see a well-written column.
However, I was taken aback by your assumption that all atheists have little books concerning their doctrine and they take phrases or thoughts from them in talking to believers or agnostics. Nothing could be farther from the truth. If these three people seemed to be robot-like in their argument to you, it may have been from their common friendship, not from atheist literature.
I am the president of the Atheist Coalition of San Diego. We have a group that meets monthly at the North Park Recreation Center. If you attended a meeting and told me that you were an agnostic, I would say, “Welcome, brother. Come in and enjoy yourself.” The response you received from the AU people is not common among atheists.
It has been said that if you get 10 atheists in a room, the only common denominator would be their lack of belief. We can be an opinionated bunch.
I would like you to attend a meeting. If you are interested, I would like you to speak to our group about agnosticism and your new “movement.” We are courteous and will not knock your belief or non-belief system. In the past few years, we have had Pantheists, pagans, Muslims, Christian educators and Zen Buddhists speak to our group, as well as the multitude of godless scientists, psychologists, etc. You would find it an enjoyable experience and possibly would put the experience you had with AU behind you as merely a bad meeting with a few jerks.
By the way, I know some of the people from AU and they would not treat you the same way as those three octogenarians. Speaking of which, when I became president of the Atheist Coalition of San Diego, I was 48 years old and the youngest regular attendee. Today, I am 55 and over half of our membership can call me “gramps.”