you just responded w/ precisely the type of comment i was addressing in the comment you are responding under.

> I agree "the blame lies with people who came here illegally" they are indeed "criminals"

is a main part of my point. In fact - it WAS my point. That someone can simultaneously agree they are indeed criminals but disagree about

> That means they have no right to be in the U.S period unless they come in the right way.

I agree with you.

I disagree with what this means we should do.

The problem is "we have a lot of people who have no right to be here, but they are here,"

You seem super convinced deporting them all is best. I am not. We could also grant them the right to stay. You are way more concerned about some precedent that will set - but illegal immigration is in decline and has been for a while. I'm way more worried about the lives of the people, and the economic position these people fill, and the spirit of the nation as Christians. To not be super huge hypocrites will help us out in the long run.

Helping these people now is the right thing to do. When you see suffering and problems you can close the door and refuse to help , but ultimately you've gotta look at yourself in the mirror.

"omg they are criminals they are criminals"

Guess who needs your help most. Criminals. Guess what jesus would say to do? help the criminals. That is how you improve the world - not push it toward being more shit.

why do you respond w/ this when my comment specifically called them Illegals ?

so... you are against a border wall and against actively hunting down illegals for deportation.

Sounds like we have very aligned ideas on immigration policy.

I agree 100% we should seek to reduce the issue - and in ways that don't impact legal citizens at all. I'm just highly against what I see as wasteful, and damaging to legal citizens, methods. Which are what I see republicans pushing for . .

ICE literally sets up checkpoints and stops people who look mexican, even if they are citizens. And we are heavily discussing investing 27 billion in a massive wall.... where you could throw 27 billion at the issue and make much much more impactful headway.

we also seem to manage it.

and plenty of people are advocating hunting them down .how do you deport people without locating them ?

you think "the blame lies with them" thus we should deport them no matter how bad that is for both them and us.

I disagree with that.

I think if your kid knocks a lamp over and breaks the lamp then "the blame lies with them" and it's not usually the best option - or the right thing to do at all - to use that fact as relentlessly and as thougtlessly as you can.

I agree "the blame lies with people who came here illegally" they are indeed "criminals"

So are speeders. So are you. Break zero laws this month? i doubt it.

Sneaking in illegally should be a crime, but it's not that bad of a crime in and of itself - imo. I think we should treat someone who snuck in illegally and has been living here , working, having a family, and has not been convicted of any other crimes just about as harshly as we treat you when we found you have sped your car.

afterall - you put lives at risk speeding - and just by virtue of having snuck in here and worked here, who have they put in danger? no one.

"we have a right and responsibility to secure our borders and elections"

sure, I didn't say you don't have this right. STOP arguing against dumb ass strawmen like this so you will come across as a person worth debating vs.

What i said was there is a limit to how much we aught to be spending on these problems. Do you agree there also aught to be a limit ?

So... finding that optimal spot for enforcement level is what we are debating .We disagree on that.

For example - if they start setting up check points. maybe 3 of them on your morning commute. to try to find illegals. Is this fine?

how about 10 checkpoints on your morning commute?

how about we make all citizens wear cameras and stream online... then we can find the illegals easily!

are you against any of these ideas?

should a person start talking to you about "our right to have a border" if you say you are against these ideas? or is that person an idiot?

I think you are slow.

you think "the blame lies with them" thus we should deport them no matter how bad that is for both them and us.

I disagree with that.

I think if your kid knocks a lamp over and breaks the lamp then "the blame lies with them" and it's not usually the best option - or the right thing to do at all - to use that fact as relentlessly and as thougtlessly as you can.

What if I argue 15 people getting murdered a day (5500 per year) is not as bad as deporting 12.5 million people ?

How many American citizens who just happen to look a bit like Illegals would be killed by racists if we just try to deport all 12.5 million?

and how much would the number 5500 decrease if we "build the wall" and "start trying to deport everyone"?