CNN: Man sentenced after leaving water bottles for immigrants

[AsburySkinsFan]

In all fairness I think CNN could have worded the title better; "for those crossing illegally". However, with that said sentencing a man for giving people water itself should be a crime. I hope they don't come after my church, because I know some where along the line we probably gave assistance to someone who was here illegally.


Man Sentenced after leaving water bottle for immigrants
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08/13/arizona.immigrant.advocate/index.html

An Arizona man caught leaving water bottles in the desert for illegal immigrants has been sentenced to 300 hours of community service and a year of probation, an aid group said.

Walt Staton, a member of the group No More Deaths, left full water bottles in December in Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge for the illegal immigrants who routinely pass through the 18,000-acre refuge, according to court documents.

A judge sentenced him Tuesday to 300 hours of picking up trash on public property and a year of probation, No More Deaths said in a written statement. He is also banned from the refuge during that time, the group said.

Although the case involved only a misdemeanor charge, both sides used the divisive issue of illegal immigration in their arguments; Staton's lawyer argued that Staton's actions were humanitarian, but the government said otherwise.

In a sentencing memo, the federal prosecutors wrote that Staton's "actions are not about humanitarian efforts, but about protesting the immigration (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/Immigration) policies of the United States, and aiding those that enter illegally into the United States."

Noting the phrase scrawled on many of the plastic water jugs -- "buena suerte," or "good luck" in Spanish -- the prosecutors said, "The obvious conclusion is that the defendant and No More Deaths wish to aid illegal aliens in their entry attempt."

They also said, as did the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, that leaving the full plastic jugs on the refuge is detrimental to the health of the animals that live there.

Citing a biologist, the prosecutors said that animals could eat the plastic and that others could get feet or antlers caught on the bottles.
Prosecutors had requested a $5,000 fine, along with five years of probation, according to court documents.

Staton, whom No More Deaths says is to begin seminary school at the Claremont School of Theology in Claremont, California, had initially refused to pay a $175 fine for littering, said Staton's lawyer, Bill Walker.
After his refusal, the government enhanced the charges against him, arguing that he "knowingly littered," said Walker, who is also a member of No More Deaths.

The charge can carry a $100,000 fine and a year in jail, Walker said. Charges against three other people who were cited with Staton in December were dropped, he said.

A jury convicted Staton in June of littering. Walker said he is appealing.
"We think that Walt did nothing wrong," he said. "We do not think that this conviction will be upheld on appeal."

He described Staton as "the kind of guy you'd want to have as your next door neighbor."

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's office in Arizona declined comment.
Mike Hawkes of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge said Thursday that although he had no issue with groups leaving water out for illegal immigrants, "there's ways to do it without leaving plastic jugs out there."
He said the plastic jugs were strewn throughout the refuge, which is home to hundreds of bird, reptile and mammal species, according to its Web site.
"We have sympathy for what they have to do," he said. But "they have do to do it without putting plastic bottles out there. ... You can't go anywhere in the refuge without seeing plastic bottles through the countryside."

Hawkes said refuge officials and members of No More Deaths had met and were trying to come up with methods that don't involve plastic bottles.
Staton is the second member of No More Deaths to be convicted of littering, according to court documents; however, the other received a suspended sentence.

Walker said that after Staton's conviction, 13 No More Deaths members were charged with littering on the refuge.

With tens of thousands of illegal immigrants crossing through the refuge -- Hawkes said last year's number was about 54,000, down from hundreds of thousands years earlier -- the last water-related death there was in June 2008, he said.

[Larry]

In all fairness I think CNN could have worded the title better; "for those crossing illegally". However, with that said sentencing a man for giving people water itself should be a crime. I hope they don't come after my church, because I know some where along the line we probably gave assistance to someone who was here illegally.

How about "for knowingly assisting in the commission of a crime"?

[zoony]

They also said, as did the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, that leaving the full plastic jugs on the refuge is detrimental to the health of the animals that live there.

Citing a biologist, the prosecutors said that animals could eat the plastic and that others could get feet or antlers caught on the bottles.


I'm okay with it.

I hope he picks up a lot of trash during his 300 hours

[twa]

Or facilitating and encouraging a crime?

Surprised they didn't nail him for ten yrs for animal endangerment:)

[AsburySkinsFan]

How about "for knowingly assisting in the commission of a crime"?
How about leaving water for people so they don't die? I thought it was hilarious that they were concerned about bottles "strewn around the park" but they don't seem as concerned about bodies being "strewn around the park."


I'm okay with it.

I hope he picks up a lot of trash during his 300 hours
I would gladly serve the time, serving the poor, and when my 300 hours were up, I'd do it all again.

[twa]

So encouraging them to both risk their life and break the law is a good deed in Methodist circles?

Going out and giving water I could understand,but not this .

[AsburySkinsFan]

So encouraging them to both risk their life and break the law is a good deed in Methodist circles?

Going out and giving water I could understand,but not this .

How was he encouraging them when they were already crossing and dying before he ever started leaving the water? And how is leaving the water there not "giving" them water? And if he waited in the dessert for them to cross and handed them the water would he not be just as guilty of the crime of aiding criminals?

[jnhay]

I'm sure this encourages Mexicans to cross the border because now they know that there's water bottles lying somewhere in the desert.

[twa]

We will just have to differ here

You gonna give them a ride next?...a place to stay,a job?

Where does it end or have limits?

[Zhouse]

Poor guy just got caught up in a mess for simply trying to be a kind person. It's a touchy subject but I don't think it's fair to label him as a criminal.
I don't see any intention to harm or even encourage illegal immigration.

[Larry]

I'm sure this encourages Mexicans to cross the border because now they know that there's water bottles lying somewhere in the desert.

They're just collecting them for the deposit. Doing work that Americans won't do.

[Larry]

We will just have to differ here

You gonna give them a ride next?...a place to stay,a job?

Where does it end or have limits?

I hear the stimulus package has funds to create rapid transit for them.

[/sarc]

[jnhay]

We will just have to differ here

You gonna give them a ride next?...a place to stay,a job?

Where does it end or have limits?

That's different. It's not a slippery slope.

[Larry]

That's different. It's not a slippery slope.

Unless it's wet.

Please, explain the difference.

[Sticksboi05]

How about leaving water for people so they don't die? I thought it was hilarious that they were concerned about bottles "strewn around the park" but they don't seem as concerned about bodies being "strewn around the park."


I would gladly serve the time, serving the poor, and when my 300 hours were up, I'd do it all again.

The fact remains they were crossing illegally so if they die, that's a risk they take.

And this whole "jobs we won't do" nonsense....there are plenty of people who would gladly take hard manual labor jobs in this country.

[AsburySkinsFan]

We will just have to differ here

You gonna give them a ride next?...a place to stay,a job?

Where does it end or have limits?

Come to central Kentucky and visit any one of our beautiful multi-million dollar horse farms, and start asking for green cards. Now I ask, who are the one's promoting illegal immigration; the farms that hire them or the guy who gives them water so they don't die in the desert?

[Burgold]

I get it and I guess the punishment is okay, but it feels icky. Afterall, we're sentencing this guy for being a compassionate, kind human being.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I get it and I guess the punishment is okay, but it feels icky. Afterall, we're sentencing this guy for being a compassionate, kind human being.

Water bottles are apparently more valuable than human life.

[twa]

They're just collecting them for the deposit. Doing work that Americans won't do.

Sounds like govt program;)

Libs buy water

Drive out in desert,leave water(with sanctioned propaganda label)

Illegals drink water,throw down bottle

govt employees pick up bottles

taxpayers bend over

Environmental group gets 100 million grant to study impact on environment

Govt to taxpayer...we need to look at a increase in PETA's grant for more study

Disability claims for park rangers rises 30% from stooping to pick up bottles

Govt...we need to appoint a panel of experts to study this phenomenon

[Larry]

Come to central Kentucky and visit any one of our beautiful multi-million dollar horse farms, and start asking for green cards. Now I ask, who are the one's promoting illegal immigration; the farms that hire them or the guy who gives them water so they don't die in the desert?

Both? :whoknows:

[AsburySkinsFan]

Both? :whoknows:

Who promotes travel? Daytona Beach or the McDonald's that you stop at on the way?

[Corcaigh]

I think the point of the story is that it's littering that he was warned about,and finally prosecuted for. The rangers have stated that plastic waste is harming animals in the refuge. I don't think there is an issue with him leaving water in metal containers, for example.

[AsburySkinsFan]

It is littering, regardless of the morality behind it.

So he got 300 hours for littering? Fine then, now, does the punishment fit the crime considering most fines for littering are $500.

[twa]

Come to central Kentucky and visit any one of our beautiful multi-million dollar horse farms, and start asking for green cards. Now I ask, who are the one's promoting illegal immigration; the farms that hire them or the guy who gives them water so they don't die in the desert?

I'd be more than happy to sentence those owners to 10 yrs in prison and fine them to recoup the illegals relocation costs.

A first class plane ticket back home sounds good.

Both encourage it,while they excuse it for economic and humanitarian reasons.:chair:

[AsburySkinsFan]

with sanctioned propaganda label
"Good Luck" is a "sanctioned propaganda?" Now I've heard it all.

[twa]

"Good Luck" is a "sanctioned propaganda?" Now I've heard it all.

You apparently have bought into it:D

[AsburySkinsFan]

I'd be more than happy to sentence those owners to 10 yrs in prison and fine them to recoup the illegals relocation costs.

A first class plane ticket back home sounds good.

Both encourage it,while they excuse it for economic and humanitarian reasons.:chair:

I wonder how many of your vegetables were picked by illegals, I guess by the fact that you buy them then you too are complicit, after all if you really wanted to make sure you weren't aiding in criminal activity then you'd grow all your own veggies. Oh, and beef too because they work in our cattle farms too, and pigs, and poultry...wow looks like we're all going on a diet.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You apparently have bought into it:D

LoL well I certainly won't use that term again, I'd hate to be a propagandist. ;)

[AsburySkinsFan]

I don't think there is an issue with him leaving water in metal containers, for example.

Anyone have a problem with leaving metal containers out there for them? I don't, heck I'd buy some to put out.

[twa]

Anyone have a problem with leaving metal containers out there for them? I don't, heck I'd buy some to put out.

You mean like a fence?...I'm onboard with containment

[Larry]

Who promotes travel? Daytona Beach or the McDonald's that you stop at on the way?

Neither the bottle guy nor the horse farm advertise.

(As far as I know.)

[Thiebear]

Aug 2009



From Jan. 1 through the date, at least 135 bodies have been found along that stretch, up from 120 at the same time last year, medical examiners' records show.


I find it odd that the same people that say the aborinal swamp rat is putting HUMANS out of work in logging...

but 135 people dying in 8 months due to a lack of water can't have a bottle of water.... (IN the Desert).

[hockeysc23]

Its one thing to be humanitarian ... its another to promote illegal activity.

While I understand its close to impossible to solve the problem of illegals crossing the border, we shouldn't be promoting the activity or encouraging it through those kinds of behavior.

They understand the risk they take when trying to ILLEGALLY enter this country.

[KAOSkins]

Funny how after you demonize people (they steal our jobs, our education and our healthcare) they don't deserve water when they're dying of thirst in desert anymore.

[Corcaigh]

Anyone have a problem with leaving metal containers out there for them? I don't, heck I'd buy some to put out.

No problem with humanitarian aid here. :)

I'd agree that the best way to stop illegal immigration is to greatly reduce or remove the employment opportunities. First priority should be providing tools for employers to validate that employees are legal, and then enforcing the law very aggressively.

If we need cheap immigrant labor, we should have a cheap and easy temporary visa program that supports it.

Commercial companies can quickly stand up databases and systems that manage millions of people, so it would not be a big deal to provide the tools that employers need to only hire legal immigrants.

[Larry]

Aug 2009



I find it odd that the same people that say the aborinal swamp rat is putting HUMANS out of work in logging...

but 135 people dying in 8 months due to a lack of water can't have a bottle of water.... (IN the Desert).

If 135 people had been shot while performing home invasions, would you favor humanitarians handing them Kevlar, "to protect their lives"?

[Larry]

No problem with humanitarian aid here. :)

I'd agree that the best way to stop illegal immigration is to greatly reduce or remove the employment opportunities. First priority should be providing tools for employers to validate that employees are legal, and then enforcing the law very aggressively.

If we need cheap immigrant labor, we should have a cheap and easy temporary visa problem that supports it.

Commercial companies can quickly stand up databases and systems that manage millions of people, so it would not be a big deal to provide the tools that employers need to only hire legal immigrants.

Oh, I'd agree. The biggest reason we have a problem with illegal immigration is because of the huge numbers of people who are paying people to do it.

(Funny. We can throw people in jail for buying drugs, because they are giving money to dealers. But we just can't seem to punish businesses for financially promoting crime.)

And the biggest reason why it's hard to punish businesses is because it's just too easy for the businesses to play the "I didn't know" card.

[GoSkins561]

I some what agree with MSF's approach to border protection less the muder part.

If we started firing liv grenades ane missles in the general direction illegals would have second thought about crossing our border.

[LaxBuddy21]

I think they should start spreading water out in the desert. And springing traps on anyone that drinks the water. That way, you give them the water they need so they dont die of thirst, then we can ship them back across the border immediately. Solves both problems right?

Im sorry but it is ridiculous that a country that worries about budgets and money spent the way we do continues to allow people to come to this country illegally with little or no recourse. All of the major job sectors that provide work to illegals should be audited and searched. Want to create jobs for Americans? Imagine the number of jobs that would create and the project would pay for itself with the money we save by exporting the illegals!

[AsburySkinsFan]

Neither the bottle guy nor the horse farm advertise.

(As far as I know.)

But, what I was responding to was the thought that leaving water is somehow encouraging them to cross. They were already travelling through there he just gave them water so they wouldn't die, it really sounds though as if some would be more comfortable if there was no water and the illegals died in the park.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I some what agree with MSF's approach to border protection less the muder part.

If we started firing liv grenades ane missles in the general direction illegals would have second thought about crossing our border.

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses...for target practice." Something like that?

[AsburySkinsFan]

If 135 people had been shot while performing home invasions, would you favor humanitarians handing them Kevlar, "to protect their lives"?

No one is shooting the immigrants...huge difference. BTW, in most states you can't shoot someone in your house unless your life is directly threatened.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Funny how after you demonize people (they steal our jobs, our education and our healthcare) they don't deserve water when they're dying of thirst in desert anymore.

Bingo

[Thiebear]

If 135 people had been shot while performing home invasions, would you favor humanitarians handing them Kevlar, "to protect their lives"?

Actually it would be "yard" not house and yes..
Walking through your yard is not a death sentence.
and water is a basic human necessity. No different than a cop doing CPR on a criminal to keep them alive after a car chase?

[hockeysc23]

Funny how after you demonize people (they steal our jobs, our education and our healthcare) they don't deserve water when they're dying of thirst in desert anymore.

If you put yourself in a life threatening situation for whatever reason (and yes crossing the desert to illegally enter a country with not enough water) is a life threatening situation .... why should people feel bad?

How about going through the proper means to enter this country? Then you don't have to risk your life almost dieing in a desert.

[AsburySkinsFan]

If you put yourself in a life threatening situation for whatever reason (and yes crossing the desert to illegally enter a country with not enough water) is a life threatening situation .... why should people feel bad?

How about going through the proper means to enter this country? Then you don't have to risk your life almost dieing in a desert.

I don't understand how people cannot feel bad for folks who are falling over dead even if they are entering illegally many of whom are promised jobs when they get here. I don't get how or when we lost our compassion for people.

[GoSkins561]

There are Federal installations all over the place that will shoot people for tresspassing or walkingon thier grass.

[Destino]

"I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink"

Make all the excuses you want people. It's not me you have to explain your positions to.

[AsburySkinsFan]

There are Federal installations all over the place that will shoot people for tresspassing or walkingon thier grass.

Tell ya what, next time someone walks on your lawn go ahead and shoot them...we'll see you in 15 to 20.

[hockeysc23]

I don't understand how people cannot feel bad for folks who are falling over dead even if they are entering illegally many of whom are promised jobs when they get here. I don't get how or when we lost our compassion for people.

Do you feel bad if people play russian roulette and lose? I don't. You make choice in life.

They decided for whatever reason to take the RISK to enter a country illegally (when there are legal methods) and they gambled and lost.

Had they played the game CORRECTLY it wouldn't be a factor. They know the rules of the game. They chose to find another way to win ... they lost.

[LaxBuddy21]

I don't understand how people cannot feel bad for folks who are falling over dead even if they are entering illegally many of whom are promised jobs when they get here. I don't get how or when we lost our compassion for people.

I would have more compassion if there were not perfectly legal ways to come to this country without the risks involved by these people. Go through the proper channels if you want to come here. If you dont want to do that, I do not feel sorry for you.

[AsburySkinsFan]

"I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink"

Make all the excuses you want.

Oh surely Jesus didn't mean illegals. Prostitutes, adulterers and tax collectors sure...but not illegal Mexicans.

[Thiebear]

The Atheist is the one wanting to give poor people wandering in the desert looking for their new home water?


seems ironic ;)
theres another story about that in a popular book.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I would have more compassion if there were not perfectly legal ways to come to this country without the risks involved by these people. Go through the proper channels if you want to come here. If you dont want to do that, I do not feel sorry for you.

Then I feel sorry for you, that you don't have compassion on your fellow man.

[sjinhan]

Ok well I actually faced a somewhat similar sitatation...

I worked in the gas fields down in south texas. There are thousands of gas wells on these massive ranches over thousand and thousands of acres of nothing except for cactus and mesquite trees...

One day in the summer my crew of 15-18 people and I were driving through an area of a ranch that was so remote that only radio reception we were getting were from AM stations from Mexico.

So its like 100-110 degress out there and we happen to drive by this 99.99% sure illegal Mexican dude who crossed the river illegal. He had nothing with him.. no water or no food...

The crew decided to stop and give him some water. I gave him leftover ham and whatever food I had from lunch. Even knowing that its illegal for that dude to be there, its just hard to pass on a guy that look like he is walking toward sure death in the heat middle of nowhere... So basically since me and crew should be punished for showing some empathy for human life?

I would say that only reason we stopped was cause we were in convoy of 18-20 people otherwise we wouldnt have cause its potentially dangerous.

[AsburySkinsFan]

The crew decided to stop and give him some water. I gave him leftover ham and whatever food I had from lunch. Even knowing that its illegal for that dude to be there, its just hard to pass on a guy that look like he is walking toward sure death in the heat middle of nowhere... So basically since me and crew should be punished for showing some empathy for human life?

Book 'em Danno.

*BTW, good on ya mate.

[Destino]

The crew decided to stop and give him some water. I gave him leftover ham and whatever food I had from lunch. Even knowing that its illegal for that dude to be there, its just hard to pass on a guy that look like he is walking toward sure death in the heat middle of nowhere... So basically since me and crew should be punished for showing some empathy for human life?
Your and your crew did God's will regardless of your personal beliefs. There is no doubt about it. Those that would argue that you should have let him die because he took a chance would ask you to fail His test. The bible really couldn't be more clear on this.

[hockeysc23]

Ok well I actually faced a somewhat similar sitatation...

I worked in the gas fields down in south texas. There are thousands of gas wells on these massive ranches over thousand and thousands of acres of nothing except for cactus and mesquite trees...

One day in the summer my crew of 15-18 people and I were driving through an area of a ranch that was so remote that only radio reception we were getting were from AM stations from Mexico.

So its like 100-110 degress out there and we happen to drive by this 99.99% sure illegal Mexican dude who crossed the river illegal. He had nothing with him.. no water or no food...

The crew decided to stop and give him some water. I gave him leftover ham and whatever food I had from lunch. Even knowing that its illegal for that dude to be there, its just hard to pass on a guy that look like he is walking toward sure death in the heat middle of nowhere... So basically since me and crew should be punished for showing some empathy for human life?

I would say that only reason we stopped was cause we were in convoy of 18-20 people otherwise we wouldnt have cause its potentially dangerous.

How about giving him some food and water and calling the authorities because he was crossing illegally?

No one said you didn't have to be compassionate just not support an illegal activity.

If this guy was giving people food and water and sending them back then no problems.

Where is the compassion for the people that try to become citizens legally but get sent to the back of the line because of the huge influx of illegals that makes the process harder and harder?

[81artmonk]

You don't aide people in breaking the law. Stupid life choice if you ask me.

[DjTj]

I would have more compassion if there were not perfectly legal ways to come to this country without the risks involved by these people. Go through the proper channels if you want to come here. If you dont want to do that, I do not feel sorry for you.What are these "proper channels" that you speak of?

There is no "proper channel" unless you are related to an American citizen or permanent resident or unless you are qualified for particular jobs for which there are quotas for work visas (usually high-tech or medical fields).

People who decide to walk across the desert don't do so because they just feel like doing things the illegal way. If they had a real choice, don't you think they would avoid the whole wandering through the desert thing? Those dying in the desert are the ones with no other ways into the country.

This story is a weird counterpart to the other jobs vs. water thread: http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=294485

[Thiebear]

Another Ironic fact for christain people in the thread.
Were talking about Mt. Sinai in another thread...
The mountain with those two tablet things... that then lead to the promise land after a while of walking about in a desert...

[Destino]

You don't aide people in breaking the law. Stupid life choice if you ask me.
So if a shoplifter falls down and hits his head while running out of the store... we should leave him on the ground and let him die? WTF is wrong with you people?! Seriously.

[sjinhan]

How about giving him some food and water and calling the authorities because he was crossing illegally?

No one said you didn't have to be compassionate just not support an illegal activity.

If this guy was giving people food and water and sending them back then no problems.

Where is the compassion for the people that try to become citizens legally but get sent to the back of the line because of the huge influx of illegals that makes the process harder and harder?

thats not really an option...
if we did call then we would tell them

"we are on this dirt road about 1 hrs away from any paved road.. between this well X and well Y... come pick him up... "

yeah that would surely get the illegal picked up... its a 1 hr drive too from not a town but a paved road...

I am not sure if you were ever exposed to the "immigration" process here in the USA but the problems runs deeper than influx of illegals.. But I guess thats a different topic

[sjinhan]

You don't aide people in breaking the law. Stupid life choice if you ask me.

its great that life choices are so simple for you.

[DjTj]

Where is the compassion for the people that try to become citizens legally but get sent to the back of the line because of the huge influx of illegals that makes the process harder and harder?Who is getting sent to the back of the line because of illegals? :whoknows:

Illegals don't have anything to do with the line for green cards.

[boobiemiles]

It's good to see my tax dollars at work. I mean why not prosecute a guy for being a good person, and aiding a person in need despite their short comings. We ask people to take a stand and be a good person, then hold them to the letter of the law to promote a stance on a subject that irrelevant to this action. What type of message does this send.....I'll tell you, next time you see some one in need be aware some gun hoe prosecuter looking to get a chair on the bench is going to piggy back you to the world of judicial glory. Ah lovely.

[sjinhan]

It's good to see my tax dollars at work. I mean why not prosecute a guy for being a good person, and aiding a person in need despite their short comings. We ask people to take a stand and be a good person, then hold them to the letter of the law to promote a stance on a subject that irrelevant to this action. What type of message does this send.....I'll tell you, next time you see some one in need be aware some gun hoe prosecuter looking to get a chair on the bench is going to piggy back you to the world of judicial glory. Ah lovely.


its kind of like when dude is in a car accident. A stranger comes to his aid and saves the dude's life who otherwise would have died. The dude turns around and sues the st anger because the stranger isnt legally "qualified" to perform that actions that resulted in saving the dude's life...

yay for living your life in the black/white world according to some of the posters here

[Thiebear]

http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=294692
(its relevant) PM/Alleged Discovery of ‘Real’ Mt. Sinai Could Change the Middle East Forever

Sometimes i wonder about our "Morally superior" people.

http://www.tucsoncitizen.com
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/photos/2008/06/12/l88030-6.jpg

[zoony]

How was he encouraging them when they were already crossing and dying before he ever started leaving the water? And how is leaving the water there not "giving" them water? And if he waited in the dessert for them to cross and handed them the water would he not be just as guilty of the crime of aiding criminals?

we should go ahead and feed the bears, because they're gonna get in the dumpsters anyway

[zoony]

its kind of like when dude is in a car accident. A stranger comes to his aid and saves the dude's life who otherwise would have died. The dude turns around and sues the st anger because the stranger isnt legally "qualified" to perform that actions that resulted in saving the dude's life...



congratulations on being pointless.



yay for living your life in the black/white world according to some of the posters here


Yay for coming up with completely irrelevant scenarios :applause:

[zoony]

So if a shoplifter falls down and hits his head while running out of the store... we should leave him on the ground and let him die? WTF is wrong with you people?! Seriously.



Well WTF is wrong with you? :)

Terrible analogy. A better analogy... leaving magnetic strips in retail stores to help shoplifters commit their crime better.

.....

[GoSkins561]

Is it or should Americans be punished for knowingly harboring or protecting illegal immigrants in the US?

I have seen people on ES mention they have family members or friends of friends that are here illegally, should they be punished??

[DjTj]

we should go ahead and feed the bears, because they're gonna get in the dumpsters anywayIf bears were dying of hunger, it would be hard not to.

http://media.keprtv.com/images/070323cute_knut2_470.jpg

[zoony]

If bears were dying of hunger, it would be hard not to.



Helping someone in need is COMPLETELY different from enabling and encouraging bad (or illegal) behavior.

I wish that this thread wasn't confusing the two. And the fact that someone brought Jesus into the argument is really scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel.

(cute bear though! Just think, it will eat you given the chance :) )


.....

[twa]

Zoony, they cannot see it simply encourages more people crossing and dying.as well as the friggin caste society of illegals here that leads to them being taken advantage of in numerous ways

Not providing water in advance is not the same as denying water.

If those that oppose encouraging the risks are morally liable for inaction ,then how much more so are those that encourage risky ,illegal behavior by their actions?

Add on all the abuse ,crime,murder and suffering that results to your tab as well if we are keeping score.

[DjTj]

Helping someone in need is COMPLETELY different from enabling and encouraging bad (or illegal) behavior.

I wish that this thread wasn't confusing the two. And the fact that someone brought Jesus into the argument is really scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel.Well, the line is pretty fuzzy... sjinhan giving a lone guy in the desert a sandwich sounds like helping someone in need. Leaving bottled water in the desert with labels saying "buena suerte" is more like encouraging illegal behavior. But it's not really at the level of handing out maps or actually leading people through the desert.

And of course, this guy didn't get prosecuted for helping illegals; he was convicted of littering. It's fuzzy ... like a bear.

[Corcaigh]

Are you suggesting that people considering an illegal entry across the desert plan ahead to use the water stations set up by this guy along the way?

Is he encouraging illegal behavior, or providing a life-saving resource for those who find themselves lost in the desert and out of water.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Another Ironic fact for christain people in the thread.
Were talking about Mt. Sinai in another thread...
The mountain with those two tablet things... that then lead to the promise land after a while of walking about in a desert...

Moses and his darned band of illegal Jews!:silly:

"They are coming here to take all of our milk and honey!" I bet this is exactly what the people in Jericho said.

[AsburySkinsFan]

we should go ahead and feed the bears, because they're gonna get in the dumpsters anyway

Move the dumpsters.;)

[Pwyl]

Are "being compassionate for people in need" and "not aiding and abetting a criminal in the pursuit of his crime" really mutually exclusive?

[Thiebear]

Well WTF is wrong with you? :)

Terrible analogy. A better analogy... leaving magnetic strips in retail stores to help shoplifters commit their crime better.

.....

The bears analogy:
In alaska they cover the trashcans WITH bars to hold the lids down.
Not so the bears will starve, but to keep them out of town and help them also survive.
They also trap them in a way to keep them from contact... letting them go back in their onw habitat..


You don't HELP someone commit a crime by giving them water when they are dying. If a prisoner is down on the ground you don't shoot them.

[Larry]

But, what I was responding to was the thought that leaving water is somehow encouraging them to cross. They were already travelling through there he just gave them water so they wouldn't die, it really sounds though as if some would be more comfortable if there was no water and the illegals died in the park.

Ah, so it's OK to help someone commit a crime, as long as you don't aid them until after the crime begins?

[Pwyl]

You don't HELP someone commit a crime by giving them water when they are dying. If a prisoner is down on the ground you don't shoot them.

You also don't bandage them up and let them go.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Are "being compassionate for people in need" and "not aiding and abetting a criminal in the pursuit of his crime" really mutually exclusive?

Sometimes our compassion trumps law. This will blow the minds of some but those who care more about people understand this.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Ah, so it's OK to help someone commit a crime, as long as you don't aid them until after the crime begins?

In my faith as a Christian Methodist, we are called to "do all the good we can" which does not allow for inaction. If someone is trying to cross the desert then you give them water because you care about that person, if they get arrested when they cross then so be it, but you don't leave them to die.

[twa]

And sometimes our compassion simply adds to the problems.

[Larry]

I would have more compassion if there were not perfectly legal ways to come to this country without the risks involved by these people. Go through the proper channels if you want to come here. If you dont want to do that, I do not feel sorry for you.

Now, I will point out that, AFAIK, unless you're a Doctor or an Engineer or some such, then no, there isn't any legal way for "these people" to come to this country.

[AsburySkinsFan]

And sometimes our compassion simply adds to the problems.

I would gladly be convicted of the crime of compassion.

[Pwyl]

I would gladly be convicted of the crime of compassion.

Wouldn't it be better to find a way to practice your compassion without breaking the law in the process?

[kuraitengai]

How about leaving water for people so they don't die? I thought it was hilarious that they were concerned about bottles "strewn around the park" but they don't seem as concerned about bodies being "strewn around the park."


I would gladly serve the time, serving the poor, and when my 300 hours were up, I'd do it all again.
news flash, they are ILLEGALS. let me guess, you are the same one that wants to have the taxpayers shoulder costs to pay for benefits for them, right?

and whats next...lets go out and drop some seaworthy boats and rafts between florida and cuba for all those refugees... i mean cant have people going thirsty while illegally entering our country from mexico, so cant have people drowning and stuff while floating over here from cuba...

[Destino]

Helping someone in need is COMPLETELY different from enabling and encouraging bad (or illegal) behavior.

I wish that this thread wasn't confusing the two. And the fact that someone brought Jesus into the argument is really scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel.

trying to seperate the two is a bankrupt argument Zoony. People dying of thirst are people in need. They aren't busing them over the border or making fake papers for them... they are accepting reality that desperate people are dying of thirst out there.

I brought Jesus into the debate because frankly this is a one of those heaven or hell situation for the people that cross paths with a dying desperate immigrant. The bible is clear and the bible offers no weak willed cop outs like... oh well not if their breaking the law, let them die in that case. You can hold grace or works as your path to heaven but on the test that jesus talk about on the mount it is very clear. Believe all you like but if you turn away from a person that crosses your path in desperate need you turn away from Christ and salvation. The goats and the sheep are not seperated by their faith but by their action. They are tested with great need and those that pass are those that respond with great compassion.

There is a difference between laws, policy, and human need. We can debate laws and I'll be the first to debate immigration policy... but arguing that we should let the poor die in the desert is not something I'm prepared to debate. It's wrong. Those that take that stance are wrong. No grey area and I'm being diplomatic in the use of "wrong" because there are a host of other words that would be more fitting.

[Destino]

news flash, they are ILLEGALS.
News flash they are human beings!!! If you want to solve the illegal immigation problem, it can be done. This however is not the way. It solves nothing at all and makes no significant impact on the problem as a whole.

[AsburySkinsFan]

news flash, they are ILLEGALS. let me guess, you are the same one that wants to have the taxpayers shoulder costs to pay for benefits for them, right?

and whats next...lets go out and drop some seaworthy boats and rafts between florida and cuba for all those refugees... i mean cant have people going thirsty while illegally entering our country from mexico, so cant have people drowning and stuff while floating over here from cuba...

I guess you're right, if they are dying to get into America then why should we stop them.

I just hope none of ya'll speed on your way to the emergency room, heaven forbid you break the law for humanitarian reasons.

[hockeysc23]

I would gladly be convicted of the crime of compassion.

But in this instance there are ways to be compassionate without breaking the law or enabling illegals to enter the country.

Why don't you do what's compassionate and right (calling the authorities) instead of trying to be holier than thou?

[Larry]

Now, I will admit . . .

I'm doing some internal examination of my opinion, right now, because I thought of an analogy.

Having trouble explaining why I'm not in favor of leaving water bottles in the desert for illegals (because making it safer will encourage people to break the law), but I support making condoms available, for free, to people below the age of 18.

OTOH, a question for you folks who support this action:

If he were leaving bus passes, fake IDs, and directions to where illegal employers are, would you still be in favor?

[AsburySkinsFan]

News flash they are human beings!!!
Nah, they stop being humans when they become poor Mexicans who are trying to provide for their families.

[AsburySkinsFan]

if he were leaving bus passes, fake ids, and directions to where illegal employers are, would you still be in favor?

no.

[Destino]

If he were leaving bus passes, fake IDs, and directions to where illegal employers are, would you still be in favor?
Nope. There is a pretty huge gap between helping people survive and helping them falsify documents. I'd think that would be obvious.

[Larry]

Nah, they stop being humans when they become poor Mexicans who are trying to provide for their families.

Tell you what.

I'll admit that they're human.

When you admit that they're criminals.

Or maybe, you could stop telling everybody else what they think, and stick to stating your own opinions.

[hockeysc23]

no.

Why not they could die if they went the wrong way ... where's the compassion?

[Larry]

Nope. There is a pretty huge gap between helping people survive and helping them falsify documents. I'd think that would be obvious.

Both of them are actively aiding someone who is in the process of committing a crime.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Tell you what.

I'll admit that they're human.

When you admit that they're criminals.
Sure they are breaking the law, and if you remember I was the one who pointed out that the CNN title of the article was missing the term "illegal". As I see it, in instances like this their humanity needs to be valued more than an immigration law.


Or maybe, you could stop telling everybody else what they think, and stick to stating your own opinions.
I'm not telling everybody what they think, I'm just reflecting back what I see as the logical conclusions of their thought processes, with a hint of snark. That I will readily admit is not helpful.;)

[AsburySkinsFan]

Why not they could die if they went the wrong way ... where's the compassion?

Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed.

[hockeysc23]

Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed.

To aid people in illegal activity and claim it under the disguise of being "compassionate" is wrong headed.

Give them water and send them back. You have your compassion without breaking the law ... or you can go on keep making smug remarks about people not wanting to promote illegal activities.

[DjTj]

Both of them are actively aiding someone who is in the process of committing a crime.Aiding someone who is in the process of committing a crime is not the same thing as aiding someone in the commission of a crime.

[Pwyl]

Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed.

That would make the Tiramisu all runny :mad:

[twa]

Giving someone water in the dessert is not the same as planning their illegal immigration tactics to equate the two is just wrong headed.

But we are not dealing with giving,but rather leaving water.
If the guy had simply given water he would not have been charged.

More die in trucks and containers than of thirst in the desert.
You don't have enough compassion to give them a ride?

[AsburySkinsFan]

That would make the Tiramisu all runny :mad:
dessert! lol....oh my and all this time I have been watching to make sure I wasn't adding 2 S's....grrr.

[JMS]

How about leaving water for people so they don't die? I thought it was hilarious that they were concerned about bottles "strewn around the park" but they don't seem as concerned about bodies being "strewn around the park."


My wife lived 20 miles north of Mexico in the 60's, 70's and 80's and folks die in the desert all the time. I agree with you AsburySkin no crime what so ever leaving water bottles in the desert. The folks fleeing desolation aren't the criminals. The criminals and the crime is in the large and medium companies who employ these folks illegally. No jobs, no people coming or staying here.

Criminalizing the individuals while companies like Wall Mark are making bank off their backs is stupid and ineffective policy.

Handing water to a man dieng of thirst should not be a crime.

[AsburySkinsFan]

But we are not dealing with giving,but rather leaving water.
If the guy had simply given water he would not have been charged.
He may not have been charged but people would still say that he was aiding their illegal activities, much like what was said earlier in this thread.


More die in trucks and containers than of thirst in the desert.
You don't have enough compassion to give them a ride?

If I was in the truck with them then surely I'd give them a drink of my water. And you are making an illogical leap to say that illegally transporting someone across the border is the same as leaving a bottle of water in the desert in case someone passes by.

[JMS]

More die in trucks and containers than of thirst in the desert.
You don't have enough compassion to give them a ride?

I think you are wrong on that. I think the boarder patrol finds more folks in trucks, it's not the same thing at all.

Folks die all the time. Men, but also women and children die in the southern Arizona desert.

[twa]

Handing water to a man dieng of thirst should not be a crime.

It isn't

And I agree about the employers...as well as the govt officials that excuse it.

[AsburySkinsFan]

The criminals and the crime is in the large and medium companies who employ these folks illegally. No jobs, no people coming or staying here.
Agreed, if there was no work then they wouldn't be coming, but since so many regularly employ illegals then they do come, and eagerly so, by any means they can find, and when people are in such a desperate situation they become a very vulnerable people, and indeed they find themselves truly on the margins.

[DjTj]

He may not have been charged but people would still say that he was aiding their illegal activities, much like what was said earlier in this thread.:secret: He wasn't charged here either - at least not with an immigration crime.

He was convicted of littering. :kickcan:

[AsburySkinsFan]

:secret: He wasn't charged here either - at least not with an immigration crime.

He was convicted of littering. :kickcan:

Ahh, but why was he charged with it in the first place? The prosecution was pushed because of those wanting to stop him from giving water to the people crossing the desert.

[AsburySkinsFan]

There's the rub. No one was handing anything. It was left lying around the desert. Thus the littering violation.

And as we all know, plastic bottles are worse for the environment then dead bodies.

[twa]

And you are making an illogical leap to say that illegally transporting someone across the border is the same as leaving a bottle of water in the desert in case someone passes by.

Am I?

People here are equating opposition to leaving water to denying a person dying of thirst....Which is the bigger reach?

How fine is your line between compassion and aiding and abetting?

[AsburySkinsFan]

People here are equating opposition to leaving water to denying a person dying of thirst....Which is the bigger reach?
Considering that the people are actually dying of thirst... Oh and for the record I never said that any who aren't leaving water are denying people water. If an illegal was getting water from a fountain and someone pushed them away from it then yes, but that certainly doesn't apply here. As such its not really fair to use someone else's false logic on my argument.


How fine is your line between compassion and aiding and abetting?
Its thicker than you seem to think I'm drawing it.

[Destino]

People here are equating opposition to leaving water to denying a person dying of thirst....Which is the bigger reach?
I see no reach there at all. Where is the reach? You know where they come through, you know where they have died, you put water there. Where is the reach?

because you don't see it, it doesn't count?

[LaxBuddy21]

Ok here is a question for those who do not think this was a crime. If a serial killer comes to your house looking for refuge from the law knowing he will get the death penalty for what he has done, does your compassion say to hide him because he will die otherwise?

Or if you are a doctor and someone comes to your house in the middle of the night after committing a crime and running from the law with a broken leg, do you fix the leg and let him go?

See if I came across someone in the desert that was dying of thirst and I knew they were an illegal immigrant, I would most certainly give them water. But after, I would alert the authorities and have him sent back home. That is different than leaving a trail of water bottles through the desert. Helping a single person in need when you come across them is compassion. Reporting them to the authorities is your duty as a law abiding citizen. Leaving supplies for criminals is aiding and abetting and you should be prosecuted as well.

[Destino]

Why is it the people so opposed to giving desperate people water can't go this energetic about reforming immigration laws to actually deal with the problem. How about instead of worrying about who is giving who water why not spend that energy getting the same means we use to stop CEO's from cooking the books (holding them PERSONALLY responsible) applied to hiring illegals.

Want to stop the hiring of illegals? Throw the people that hire them in jail. No fine to the company or any of that nonsense. Hold the actual individuals responsible and jail them.

Do that and you'll stop a lot more illegal immigration that you will stopping people from leaving water for desperate people. The solution to a flooded basement is not lashing out at the water. Do something about the cause and the water will stop.

[Destino]

Ok here is a question for those who do not think this was a crime. If a serial killer comes to your house looking for refuge from the law knowing he will get the death penalty for what he has done, does your compassion say to hide him because he will die otherwise?

Or if you are a doctor and someone comes to your house in the middle of the night after committing a crime and running from the law with a broken leg, do you fix the leg and let him go?
Illegals immigrants are now equated to serial killers and mob doctor's?

Weak.

I have no problem with calling the authorities and have never argued that you shouldn't. I'm just saying leaving water in areas where you no people are dying to hopefully save them from a horrible demise isn't wrong and shouldn't be illegal. The solution to illegal immigration is not found in this debate at all.

[LaxBuddy21]

Why is it the people so opposed to giving desperate people water can't go this energetic about reforming immigration laws to actually deal with the problem. How about instead of worrying about who is giving who water why not spend that energy getting the same means we use to stop CEO's from cooking the books (holding them PERSONALLY responsible) applied to hiring illegals.

Want to stop the hiring of illegals? Throw the people that hire them in jail. No fine to the company or any of that nonsense. Hold the actual individuals responsible and jail them.

Do that and you'll stop a lot more illegal immigration that you will stopping people from leaving water for desperate people. The solution to a flooded basement is not lashing out at the water. Do something about the cause and the water will stop.

I agree with you 100% that these people should be prosecuted. Thats where the biggest crack down needs to come. That doesnt change my opinion on this situation though!

[LaxBuddy21]

Illegals immigrants are now equated to serial killers and mob doctor's?

Weak.

I have no problem with calling the authorities and have never argued that you shouldn't. I'm just saying leaving water in areas where you no people are dying to hopefully save them from a horrible demise isn't wrong and shouldn't be illegal. The solution to illegal immigration is not found in this debate at all.

The serial criminal comparison is because not helping them would mean a death sentence for that person just like not giving water very well could mean one for an illegal immigrant. The doctor example was knowingly helping someone that committed a crime. Yes you should morally help someone in need when confronted with them but you report the crime at the same time. I support the doctor fixing the broken leg but I would not support the doctor setting up health clinics for illegals. See the difference?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Illegals immigrants are now equated to serial killers and mob doctor's?

Weak.
Ya-think!

[Pwyl]

Illegals immigrants are now equated to serial killers and mob doctor's?

Weak.

I have no problem with calling the authorities and have never argued that you shouldn't. I'm just saying leaving water in areas where you no people are dying to hopefully save them from a horrible demise isn't wrong and shouldn't be illegal. The solution to illegal immigration is not found in this debate at all.

I think the point is that just leaving water is aiding and abetting. There's no way to call it in if you're just dumping water bottles in the desert.

Maybe the guy should have left some 2-way radios set to border patrol frequencies so that the dying-of-thirst illegals could call for help :)

[AsburySkinsFan]

I, personally, recycle all of my dead bodies, so I would not know. I do know that if I litter, I risk getting a ticket, despite my higher morality.

Then I can only assume that you would not complain about getting a speeding ticket if you broke the speed limit on the way to the emergency room either, right?

[LaxBuddy21]

Then I can only assume that you would not complain about getting a speeding ticket if you broke the speed limit on the way to the emergency room either, right?

Big difference between speeding to get to the emergency room because there is an emergency and speeding to the doctors office for a checkup in case there is an emergency. If the guy here gave someone water who he found that was half head, I dont think anyone would be arguing. He left water in the middle of the desert in case a criminal came by and was thirsty.

[MurrayH81]

Okay, I read, and then re-read the OP article.

It is clear that members of this group leave plastic water bottles where illegal immigrants have died previously.

It is clear that leaving plastic water bottles, rather than being physically present to dispense water to those in need (which would leave them vulnerable to an aiding and abetting charge) is what is being done.

It is also clear from the Park Ranger's perspective that their issue is the littering of plastic bottles. I believe they would be okay if water could be left in a form that was not littering and did not endanger the wildlife for which the park is dedicated.

It would seem that the group could make the rangers happy by hanging out and giving thirsty people water/food/first aid.

It would also then mean that unless they then reported the illegal immigrants to the authoriities, they would be held guilty for aiding and abetting criminal activity, and would know that they were wrongly doing so.

I will openly state that if I came across a person in dire need of something like water, food, medical care, and I refused it based on their being a criminal (or likely criminal) rather than them being a human in need, that would be wrong.

However, it is would be equally wrong to not call the authorities and advise them of the location of a known or likely criminal.

It appears that this group of cowards want to help illegal immigrants, and are using the issue of providing to those in need as an essential christian value to be the cover. It's a good cover, and it's hard to argue with on a humanitarian basis. However, this group needs to either find a method of providing water without littering or just suck it up and provide direct personal aid and suffer the consequences.

[Larry]

Aiding someone who is in the process of committing a crime is not the same thing as aiding someone in the commission of a crime.

Even when the person's mere presence in that location is the crime?

[Larry]

Agreed, if there was no work then they wouldn't be coming, but since so many regularly employ illegals then they do come, and eagerly so, by any means they can find, and when people are in such a desperate situation they become a very vulnerable people, and indeed they find themselves truly on the margins.

Ooh, look, another picturesque way of ignoring the fact that you're discussing criminals.

Oooh, those poor, vulnerable marginalized, criminals.

[Larry]

Ahh, but why was he charged with it in the first place? The prosecution was pushed because of those wanting to stop him from giving water to the people crossing the desert.

from criminals crossing the desert.

[AsburySkinsFan]

from criminals crossing the desert.

Is that how you excuse yourself from recognizing that they are people and treating them as such?

[Larry]

And as we all know, plastic bottles are worse for the environment then dead bodies.

Death is a part of nature.

Plastic bottles are pollution.

(Sorry. Just had to point out how stupid it is to try to put words in somebody else's mouth, by agreeing with you.)

[AsburySkinsFan]

He left water in the middle of the desert in case a criminal came by and was thirsty.

You make it sound like they might have had a case of dry mouth or something instead of actually in the middle of the desert.

[Larry]

Ok here is a question for those who do not think this was a crime. If a serial killer comes to your house looking for refuge from the law knowing he will get the death penalty for what he has done, does your compassion say to hide him because he will die otherwise?

That's not a completely identical situation.

A better one would be "if the serial killer comes to your house on his way to his next killing".

See, in your situation, the serial killer who's asking for your compassion isn't killing anybody right that instant.

Just wanted to clarify that. :)

[AsburySkinsFan]

Death is a part of nature.

Plastic bottles are pollution.

(Sorry. Just had to point out how stupid it is to try to put words in somebody else's mouth, by agreeing with you.)

So let the group put trash cans and recycle bins out with the bottled water, problem solved right?

[hockeysc23]

So let the group put trash cans and recycle bins out with the bottled water, problem solved right?

Have the man sit out their with a bucket of water and then calling the authorities ... problem solved. They get their water and don't die and we get to keep the illegals out.

[endzone_dave]

I applaud the guy leaving the water bottles. There are better ways of dealing with illegals then letting them (and their families) die of thirst.

Having no compassion at all for someone just trying to have a better life is sad , IMO.

[KAOSkins]

If you put yourself in a life threatening situation for whatever reason (and yes crossing the desert to illegally enter a country with not enough water) is a life threatening situation .... why should people feel bad?

How about going through the proper means to enter this country? Then you don't have to risk your life almost dieing in a desert.

I could go into the myriad of (morally acceptable but still illegal) reasons they might do so, but why? To answer your question, why not.

[Larry]

Having no compassion at all for someone just trying to have a better life is sad , IMO.

You know, the word "criminal" is much easier to type than "someone just trying to have a better life".

I suppose child molesters are "just trying to be happy", too. But that's not the way I refer to them.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You know, the word "criminal" is much easier to type than "someone just trying to have a better life".

I suppose child molesters are "just trying to be happy", too. But that's not the way I refer to them.

So now illegal immigration which is a misdemeanor is equal to child molestation?

[SparkleMotion]

It's like that moron at the beach who always wants to feed the seagulls.

He thinks he's doing a good deed, but what he's really doing is encouraging people getting crapped on.

[Pwyl]

So now illegal immigration which is a misdemeanor is equal to child molestation?

:hysterical:

Nice twist.

[Destino]

You know, the word "criminal" is much easier to type than "someone just trying to have a better life".
But far less accurate not to mention irrelevant. Criminal or not... putting water out in areas where people are known to die for lack of it isn't wrong. Hell even the authorities would help these "criminals" survive. Everyone in this thread knows that the state of illegal immigation doesn't hinge on bottles of water in the desert. They aren't coming for the bottles.

No one is helping them cross the border (if they get to the evil bottles they've already accomplished that). They are just saying that their status being what it may, they don't deserve to die out in the desert. Let them be deported. Change the laws to deny them employment. Build a giant fence that even king kong would struggle with. I'm all for stopping illegal immigration. Do you want to discuss how best to do that? Bump a thread. This thread is about bottles of water that can save the lives of individuals that could very possibly be children for all you know. Some of you seem to have a problem with that and because it's harder to type "I would rather let people die" than "people shouldn't support criminal behavior" we are going discussing illegal immigration as a whole.

This is about individuals dying in the desert. Not immigration as a whole. The reason is because no matter how this issues goes, the status of the immigration problem in the US remains unchanged.

BTW - weren't you the one that earlier said something like "I will admit they are humans... if"? They are humans. Doesn't matter what you are willing to admit it. The sky is blue, water is wet, and illegal immigrants are human beings. As such they are deserving of aid in times of need by those capable of providing it. Hospital ER's can't turn them away either (thank god)... and I'm sure that pisses some of you angels off as well.

[DjTj]

Even when the person's mere presence in that location is the crime?Yes, if a lot of kids trespass through your neighbor's yard, and you see one of them fall down and you give them a band-aid, you're aiding but you're not abetting. If you bring out a ladder and help kids climb into your neighbor's yard, then you're aiding and abetting.

If you leave bottles of water in your neighbor's yard, then you are littering. :silly:

[Pwyl]

But far less accurate.

It's neither more nor less accurate, since both phrases are 100% accurate :)


Yes, if a lot of kids trespass through your neighbor's yard, and you see one of them fall down and you give them a band-aid, you're aiding but you're not abetting. If you bring out a ladder and help kids climb into your neighbor's yard, then you're aiding and abetting.



If you leave bottles of water in your neighbor's yard, then you are littering.


What if you leave a ladder against the fence that allows them to successfully cross the fence?

[Larry]

So now illegal immigration which is a misdemeanor is equal to child molestation?

Nope.

But it isn't equal to "someone just trying to have a better life", either.

[Larry]

But far less accurate not to mention irrelevant.

Uh, you've got it backwards.

"Criminal" is a more accurate term than "someone just trying to have a better life".

Both labels are absolutely 100% true.

But "someone just trying to have a better life" is a much larger label. Covers a whole lot of people who aren't criminals, too.

"Human" and "Animal" are both 100% correct terms to refer to me. But the term "Human" is more accurate, because it's more specific.

The label that's smaller, but still true, is the more accurate label.


No one is helping them cross the border.

Untrue. This person absolutely, positively is helping them cross the border. Just as surely as if he were saving them from death by giving them a car ride to Phoenix.

Now, that may not be his motive. But it is what he's doing.

[81artmonk]

So if a shoplifter falls down and hits his head while running out of the store... we should leave him on the ground and let him die? WTF is wrong with you people?! Seriously.


No you would help him, there is a big difference. However, if he fell down and sprained his ankle I wouldn't help him walk out of the store.

[81artmonk]

Why is it the people so opposed to giving desperate people water can't go this energetic about reforming immigration laws to actually deal with the problem. How about instead of worrying about who is giving who water why not spend that energy getting the same means we use to stop CEO's from cooking the books (holding them PERSONALLY responsible) applied to hiring illegals.

Want to stop the hiring of illegals? Throw the people that hire them in jail. No fine to the company or any of that nonsense. Hold the actual individuals responsible and jail them.

Do that and you'll stop a lot more illegal immigration that you will stopping people from leaving water for desperate people. The solution to a flooded basement is not lashing out at the water. Do something about the cause and the water will stop.


brilliant, now if you can figure a way to get that done, ie get our politicians to do that, you might have something there.
I do believe that is what people are upset about. The fact that the powers that be won't do anything about it.

[81artmonk]

I applaud the guy leaving the water bottles. There are better ways of dealing with illegals then letting them (and their families) die of thirst.

Having no compassion at all for someone just trying to have a better life is sad , IMO.

While I applaud your compassion, how about not breaking the law. Crossing the desert without water to break the law. Doing something stupid like crossing the desert without water in order to break the law.

Honestly, if you cross the arctic without clothes in order to break the law, how much compassion should you be given??

[DjTj]

It's neither more nor less accurate, since both phrases are 100% accurate :)Technically, no. Simply crossing the border illegally is not punishable as a criminal offense. You cannot receive any jail time nor can you be fined. If you are caught and then refuse to leave, you can be held in a detention center while you wait for a hearing, but there is no criminal punishment. The only punishment is a deportation order.

Now, there are some real crimes that may be committed after crossing the border. If you lie about your immigration status to obtain work and you don't pay taxes on the income you earn, you may be committing fraud. If you get a fake ID or social security number, it could be more serious fraud.

Most illegal immigrants become criminals once they start working, but those that simply walk across the border are not criminals yet.


What if you leave a ladder against the fence that allows them to successfully cross the fence?Now that's a gray area, isn't it? I actually think it would be very hard to prosecute because you're not aiding and abetting any specific instance of a crime being committed. Proving intent would be tricky, although if there were a sticker on the ladder that said "good luck," it could be a lot closer...

[Corcaigh]

This person absolutely, positively is helping them cross the border.


They are already across the border. He's trying to reduce the odds that those wandering in that particular desert die of thirst.

[Destino]

Uh, you've got it backwards.No, I'm comfortable with my read of it. People looking for a better life is a phrase that almost instantly brings to mind immigrants... the context of it's use always reveals the illegal aspect of it. The word criminal however is less likely to induce thoughts of immigration than it is bank robbers. Not to mention the fact that illegal immigration is not punishable by criminal law. But if it makes you feel good, go for it. Like I said before in this discussion it's entirely irrelevant.


Untrue. This person absolutely, positively is helping them cross the border. Just as surely as if he were saving them from death by giving them a car ride to Phoenix.

Now, that may not be his motive. But it is what he's doing.You might want that to be the case but you're wrong. Technically the bottles aren't at the border - they've already crossed. The claim that you are helping them cross the border is completely inaccurate. You can accept reality or not, it remains the same with or without your agreement.

But again why are we talking about their immigration status? If we want to solve the immigration problem, let's do that. There are many thread in which we've gone over it. No matter how THIS issue turns out the immigration problem remains unchanged. What is at stake here on this topic is the lives of people dying in the desert.

[Destino]

Honestly, if you cross the arctic without clothes in order to break the law, how much compassion should you be given??You tell me Christian, how much compassion should you give them?

[herrmag]

Americans and semantics. It's laughable to the rest of the world. No wonder we spend so much time tying up our courts. With any luck, we'll see this case in the Supreme court under some guise (if not this one).

His intent is to assist those illegally entering the country. That's his intent. Undoubtedly, he is a good person and realizes the sacrifice people make to ILLEGALLY enter this country, and is trying to help save lives. End of story. However, he is assisting in a crime. At the very least, as DJTJ pointed out, he's littering. 300 hours of community service is a slap on the wrist. Had he been driving them, he'd have gotten jail time. IMO, the punishment is certainly reasonable.

[Yusuf06]

I find it odd that the same people that say the aborinal swamp rat is putting HUMANS out of work in logging...

but 135 people dying in 8 months due to a lack of water can't have a bottle of water.... (IN the Desert).
I also find it odd that most of the same folks arguing to let them die would argue just as vehemently against abortion and for the death penalty. Obviously I understand we're comparing innocents to criminals. However, these folks always claim to be all about preserving life. Go figure. I guess consistency isn't part of their deal. Maybe some life is better than others?



They understand the risk they take when trying to ILLEGALLY enter this country.
So why were so many folks all bent out of shape about this? (http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=283790) This guy was a criminal and the cop was merely doing his job.


congratulations on being pointless.

Yay for coming up with completely irrelevant scenarios :applause:....

Helping someone in need is COMPLETELY different from enabling and encouraging bad (or illegal) behavior.

I wish that this thread wasn't confusing the two. And the fact that someone brought Jesus into the argument is really scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel.

(cute bear though! Just think, it will eat you given the chance :) )
.....
Wow. The things you learn about people after you thought you knew them. I'm disappointed to see you on this side of this argument and especially that you're so far away from "reasonable" that you'd find that scenario irrelevant. :(

But how about I give you a couple of other scenarios. Would you consider the people that worked on the underground railroad to help blacks escape slavery in the south to be criminals? How about the folks that harbored Jews in Nazi Germany? Or those that helped Jews illegally immigrate to the U.S. during the holocaust?

In both cases, these folks committed illegal acts by actively harboring, aiding and abetting criminals actively involved in criminal activity. They did so based on their personal beliefs about right and wrong. I'd argue that this guy's leaving water to keep someone from dying of thirst in the desert is no different. He knowingly broke the law on humanitarian grounds. I'm sure that's why he chose not to pay the fine so as to draw attention to the issue.

Now I know many of you will argue that "the slaves and the Jews were fleeing persecution so that makes it ok." OK, but I thought the law is the law, right? Besides, he is trying to save them from death so that makes it awfully close to the other two cases.

OK so what about perhaps an even better example. Who among you would defend the actions of the paparazzi that busily snapped photos of the dying folks in Princess Diana's mangled car after the accident instead of even trying to see if they could possibly save any of the victims? After all, those folks were breaking the law by speeding, so the photographers shouldn't be criticized for ignoring any supposed humanitarian duty to save any of the victims. And yes, I know it happened in France and thus isn't subject to U.S. law, but morals are universal and I'm trying to make a point here. :)

For those of you that said give them water and call the border patrol, or that this could be used as a way to capture illegal aliens, I don't have a problem with that because those options don't ignore a basic moral obligation to save life. However, those of you that feel that it's OK to just let someone die simply because they're committing a crime are on shaky logical ground for a variety of reasons, compassion aside.

[Larry]

Technically, no. Simply crossing the border illegally is not punishable as a criminal offense. You cannot receive any jail time nor can you be fined. If you are caught and then refuse to leave, you can be held in a detention center while you wait for a hearing, but there is no criminal punishment. The only punishment is a deportation order.

Now, there are some real crimes that may be committed after crossing the border. If you lie about your immigration status to obtain work and you don't pay taxes on the income you earn, you may be committing fraud. If you get a fake ID or social security number, it could be more serious fraud.

Most illegal immigrants become criminals once they start working, but those that simply walk across the border are not criminals yet.

[Larry]

They are already across the border. He's trying to reduce the odds that those wandering in that particular desert die of thirst.

And they are criminals until they either

1) Die
2) Leave the country

(I suppose "become legal immigrants" would be 3rd possibility, but as long as the cry of "amnesty" is so potent, politically, I don't think that option is on the table yet.)

If you break into somebody's house, the crime isn't over the instand you fully make it into his house.

The crime isn't "crossing the border". It's "being in the US without permission".

[Larry]

No, I'm comfortable with my read of it. People looking for a better life is a phrase that almost instantly brings to mind immigrants... the context of it's use always reveals the illegal aspect of it. The word criminal however is less likely to induce thoughts of immigration than it is bank robbers. Not to mention the fact that illegal immigration is not punishable by criminal law. But if it makes you feel good, go for it. Like I said before in this discussion it's entirely irrelevant.

1) Since when did "looking for a better life" become a way of saying "illegal"?

I know that the illegal apologists have essentially trademarked that phrase as part of their attempt to claim that criminal behavior is a noble activity if motivated by money, but I wasn't aware that their efforts had been so successful as to now become official usage.

2) So, you want to claim that people who pirate DVDs aren't criminals, because it's prosecuted under civil law? (Are things like insurance fraud or embezzlement handled under civil law? I got the impression that if the crook gives the money back, then the punishment is eliminated, or at least reduced a lot.)

I could have sworn that "breaking the law" was what it took to become a "criminal". Didn't realize it only applied to certain laws.


You might want that to be the case but you're wrong. Technically the bottles aren't at the border - they've already crossed. The claim that you are helping them cross the border is completely inaccurate. You can accept reality or not, it remains the same with or without your agreement.

I think I've addressed this in another post.

The crime isn't "crossing the border". It's "being in the US without permission".


But again why are we talking about their immigration status? If we want to solve the immigration problem, let's do that. There are many thread in which we've gone over it. No matter how THIS issue turns out the immigration problem remains unchanged. What is at stake here on this topic is the lives of people dying in the desert.

Yes, I'm well aware that a lot of folks want to ignore the fact that this person is also providing logistical support to a crime in progress.

[Destino]

1) Since when did "looking for a better life" become a way of saying "illegal"?

I know that the illegal apologists have essentially trademarked that phrase as part of their attempt to claim that criminal behavior is a noble activity if motivated by money, but I wasn't aware that their efforts had been so successful as to now become official usage.
Your own words: "I know that the illegal apologists have essentially trademarked that phrase" That's what I was talking about. You wanted to be accurate by using a word that you yourself describe as anyone breaking any law.... instead of using the phrase you admit has been all but trademarked.

Way to be accurate Larry. Like I said, one creates the right image the other does not. If you personally want to put an emphasis on their status and downplay the human reality behind it, that's you personal bias. Don't pretend your bias is more or less accurate than those that prefer to focus on the facts behind illegal immigration instead of thier status. Those are the two sides of the debate.



I could have sworn that "breaking the law" was what it took to become a "criminal". Didn't realize it only applied to certain laws. You typically call everyone with a speeding ticket a criminal Larry? Fits your description doesn't it?





I think I've addressed this in another post.

The crime isn't "crossing the border". It's "being in the US without permission".
Your words: "This person absolutely, positively is helping them cross the border"




Yes, I'm well aware that a lot of folks want to ignore the fact that this person is also providing logistical support to a crime in progress.Interesting way of looking at things. They are trying to avoid people dying.... and you think that saving lives is a minor issue. Much more important to note that these people might be illegal immigrants. Great logic. You think ER doctors that treat illegals are "providing logistical support to a crime in progress" too Larry? I'm sure you do. Why focus on trivial things like life and death eh?

[Destino]

If you break into somebody's house, the crime isn't over the instand you fully make it into his house.there are other differences.... even if you leave you still have to face criminal prosecution. What happens if an illegal mexican comes into the country and leaves? Do the authorities go get him? Do they ask mexico to send him back so they can seek justice?

No?

I guess there must be a difference then.

[zoony]

Interesting way of looking at things. They are trying to avoid people dying.... and you think that saving lives is a minor issue.

Or, they could stay in their country and not break the law, and nobody dies.

Crazy ****, I know.

I think I'll start helping shoplifters, as long as they're stealing for what I personally deem are noble causes. Laws shmaws. These people need help, and I'm in a position to give it to them.


........

[zoony]

there are other differences.... even if you leave you still have to face criminal prosecution. What happens if an illegal mexican comes into the country and leaves? Do the authorities go get him? Do they ask mexico to send him back so they can seek justice?

No?

I guess there must be a difference then.



You want to help these people, go to their country and do mission work or join the peace corps or adopt a child or go teach them to fish.

Don't leave a trail of bread crumbs into our country for them and tell everyone with a straight face that you're saving lives. Because that is a serious load of bull****.

Almost as bad as calling everyone out who thinks this is a bad idea as heartless, but not quite.

[Destino]

Or, they could stay in their country and not break the law, and nobody dies.

Crazy ****, I know.

I think I'll start helping shoplifters, as long as they're stealing for what I personally deem are noble causes. **** the laws.

........
They would if the US didn't allow US companies to employ them. If the US didn't assign them tax ID numbers so they can pay taxes while employed. If the US didn't leave the border open as hell.

I could go on.

If you put a bottle of water across the street from a man dying of thirst and tell him "do not touch this it's mine... but if you do I might, maybe, escort you back to your side of the street. Maybe... or I might give you a cup to help you enjoy it" You aren't seriously expecting him to stay over there thirsty.

That is what US immigration policy is. It exists entirely to make anti-immigration advocates feel like the government is on there side. There is no one stupid enough to think this country is actually trying to stop illegal immigration. Hell, if it wasn't for the drug war I doubt there would even BE any border agents.

[Destino]

You want to help these people, go to their country and do mission work or join the peace corps or adopt a child or go teach them to fish.

Don't leave a trail of bread crumbs into our country for them and tell everyone with a straight face that you're saving lives. Because that is a serious load of bull****.

Almost as bad as calling everyone out who thinks this is a bad idea as heartless, but not quite.

Does it save lives Zoony? Yes or no works fine.

[Larry]

Interesting way of looking at things. They are trying to avoid people dying.... and you think that saving lives is a minor issue.

I'm outta here for a while.

I'm frankly getting tired of being called a murderer because I point out that there are two issues, here, to a bunch of people who want desperately to pretend that there's only one.

Go do your sanctimonious telling somebody else what they think to somebody else.

[Destino]

I'm outta here for a while.

I'm frankly getting tired of being called a murderer because I point out that there are two issues, here, to a bunch of people who want desperately to pretend that there's only one.

Go do your sanctimonious telling somebody else what they think to somebody else.You misrepresented your position and mine. Not really worth going into specifics but I will say this: I've never called you a murderer (don't think I implied it either... because I don't think your position would make anyone a murderer). Don't think it's moral or right, but murder is taking it way too far.

[zoony]

I could go on.

Oh I'm sure you could, however I doubt personal responsibility and accountability would ever be a part of your rap. Don't blame the people breaking the law, blame the US Corporations.

Then point out that we are all lucky to be here, and it's not really their fault, etc.



There is no one stupid enough to think this country is actually trying to stop illegal immigration. Hell, if it wasn't for the drug war I doubt there would even BE any border agents.

That has nothing to do with right and wrong

[zoony]

Does it save lives Zoony? Yes or no works fine.


Not as many as deterring crossing would

[techboy]

You know, I would think "I just want to make it safer if they're going to do it anyway" would be applied similarly in arguments about abstinence only education and illegal immigration...


And as we all know, plastic bottles are worse for the environment then dead bodies.

Technically, plastic water bottles, which degrade much more slowly (if at all) are much worse for the environment.


Illegals immigrants are now equated to serial killers and mob doctor's?


I believe the comparison he was trying to draw was Dr. Mudd assisting John Wilkes Booth.


You know, the word "criminal" is much easier to type than "someone just trying to have a better life".

I suppose child molesters are "just trying to be happy", too. But that's not the way I refer to them.

Larry, it's obvious that you are using the word "criminal" because it packs rhetorical punch, not because it's the most accurate, because technically the most accurate would be the admittedly unwieldy "persons entering the country illegally", not "criminal".

I do have a couple of questions for you, though, for whenever you cool off and reenter the thread:

1. Would you be comfortable if, in the many gay rights threads you participate in, someone insisted on calling gays "criminals"? In most (if not all) states, they are.

2. When someone in one of those threads compares homosexuality to kleptomania, do you acknowledge that it is a valid comparison because each could be seen as a perhaps irresistable compulsion to commit an immoral act, or do you object to the comparison because kleptomania (or pedophilia, another common one) is much worse?

[hockeysc23]

They would if the US didn't allow US companies to employ them. If the US didn't assign them tax ID numbers so they can pay taxes while employed. If the US didn't leave the border open as hell.

I could go on.

If you put a bottle of water across the street from a man dying of thirst and tell him "do not touch this it's mine... but if you do I might, maybe, escort you back to your side of the street. Maybe... or I might give you a cup to help you enjoy it" You aren't seriously expecting him to stay over there thirsty.

That is what US immigration policy is. It exists entirely to make anti-immigration advocates feel like the government is on there side. There is no one stupid enough to think this country is actually trying to stop illegal immigration. Hell, if it wasn't for the drug war I doubt there would even BE any border agents.

Always someone else's fault eh?

Can I steal a ferrari ... I see them all the time in movies. I should be entitled to one because I want one and its better than my car.

Surely its illegal to go steal it but I am trying to better myself and my family ... so its ok right?

[techboy]

looking at Kohlberg's stages of moral development, it would appear that a lot of people are stuck on stage 4 (if that).

[AsburySkinsFan]

Nope.

But it isn't equal to "someone just trying to have a better life", either.

It is certainly closer to the above than to child molestation...by a country mile.

[DjTj]

illegalThe word illegal, in this context, does not mean criminal. It's like illegal file sharing or the illegal use of newspaper articles on a message board. If you want to get very technical, the right word for these activities is unlawful. These activities are against the law, but you can't go to jail for it.

Nobody ever seems to call them unlawful immigrants ... or unlawful copyright violations. I suppose that everyone that wants to be tough on immigration calls it illegal so they can lump the immigrants and downloaders in with child rapists. People on the other side use words like undocumented or file sharing ... that doesn't really work either. There isn't a lot of middle ground in these situations where illegal really means unlawful.

[PeterMP]

I suppose that everyone that wants to be tough on immigration calls it illegal so they can lump the immigrants and downloaders in with child rapists. People on the other side use words like undocumented or file sharing ... that doesn't really work either. There isn't a lot of middle ground in these situations where illegal really means unlawful.
Or maybe they just aren't lawyers and don't realize the legal distinction between illegal and unlawful?

[DjTj]

Or maybe they just aren't lawyers and don't realize the legal distinction between illegal and unlawful?Well, I don't know if there's really a clear legal distinction between illegal and unlawful. Maybe in the 1700's but that's gotten very muddled today even in the legal world. There is a distinction, however, in what a crime is. Crossing the border is not a crime. Using a fake ID to cross the border is a crime. Copying music is not a crime. Copying music and selling it is a crime. I think people slide too easily into thinking that mere presence in the country is illegal, and then the label "illegal" gets applied to the person rather than the act. There is a unique semantic game going on with illegal immigration that doesn't really apply elsewhere.

[Destino]

Oh I'm sure you could, however I doubt personal responsibility and accountability would ever be a part of your rap. Don't blame the people breaking the law, blame the US Corporations.
Personal responsibility and accountability take center stage Zoony. The difference is you want to focus on poor immigrants and I want to focus on those hiring them. I'm not interested in the company hiring them as you claim... I want to know what person in that company hired them. I want to put that person in prison. You want to cloud the water and talk about corporations and focus on an individuals crossing the border instead of any of the individuals creating the motivation for his crossing and making money off them.

Keep one thing in mind though. Your approach of focusing on the immigrant has been the status quo. How has that worked out? Maybe it's time to try something a little smarter. Maybe it's time to take human nature more seriously, and risk versus reward equations more seriously, and spend less time on idealistic unrealistic rants about personal responsibilty we want to slap on poor people. Just maybe we might see some success.

[Destino]

Always someone else's fault eh?

Surely its illegal to go steal it but I am trying to better myself and my family ... so its ok right?
So if someone hired you to steal the car, you should go to jail and they should pay a $50 fine? What if cars start to get stolen all over town and you notice that there are signs asking for car thieves looking for work all over the place. What if they start busing car theives in from poor neighborhoods?

At what point do you pull your head out of your ass and think "you know maybe we should stop these guys from hiring all these theives?"

[Larry]

Larry, it's obvious that you are using the word "criminal" because it packs rhetorical punch, not because it's the most accurate, because technically the most accurate would be the admittedly unwieldy "persons entering the country illegally", not "criminal".

Funny, I see lots of people pointing out that (according to their opinion) "criminal" is an inaccurate term being used for the purpose of pushing an agenda.

Not one of those people has a problem with "people trying to have a better life" or "people who are just trying to feed their children".


1. Would you be comfortable if, in the many gay rights threads you participate in, someone insisted on calling gays "criminals"? In most (if not all) states, they are.

Actually, no, they aren't. And haven't been ever since the SC ruled that legislating apartheid was unconstitutional. :)

However, I'll ignore that, since otherwise this will turn into a merry-go-round of "well, just because a law's unconstitutional, and therefore, legally, never existed in the first place, doesn't mean that it isn't still written down on a piece of paper somewhere".

Back in the days when it was illegal, yes, the term was accurate.

See, I'm willing to admit that "yes, it's illegal, and the law is morally wrong". (Just as I do in the threads about drug users.) (In fact, I'd go one step further and point out that the laws against Sodomy were not just morally wrong, but were unconstitutional, because they were passed for the specific purpose of being selectively enforced against a minority group who's sole offense against society was being disliked.)

How many of y'all spouting "people trying for a better life" are willing to say "yeah, it's illegal, but I think that sneaking into the US should be made legal" out loud, instead if simply trying to imply it by using deceptive terms?


2. When someone in one of those threads compares homosexuality to kleptomania, do you acknowledge that it is a valid comparison because each could be seen as a perhaps irresistable compulsion to commit an immoral act, or do you object to the comparison because kleptomania (or pedophilia, another common one) is much worse?

Homosexuality is not an immoral act. (In my opinion, which counts just as much as anybody else's.) It's a disliked one.

[Larry]

It is certainly closer to the above than to child molestation...by a country mile.

And if anyone had compared trespass to child molestation, then that would be a really great point.

Unfortunately, what I did was compare "trying to excuse a criminal behavior by using flowery language to try to claim that the criminal had a good motive" with "trying to excuse a criminal behavior by using flowery language to try to claim that the criminal had a good motive".

Drug dealers are "just trying to have a better life". So are armed robbers, carjackers, home invaders, and corporate CEOs who cook the books.

Does the fact that they're only committing a crime because they want the money excuse their behavior?

[Larry]

So if someone hired you to steal the car, you should go to jail and they should pay a $50 fine? What if cars start to get stolen all over town and you notice that there are signs asking for car thieves looking for work all over the place. What if they start busing car theives in from poor neighborhoods?

At what point do you pull your head out of your ass and think "you know maybe we should stop these guys from hiring all these theives?"

Or, how about you find one person in this thread who's claiming that people dying isn't important, or that illegal immigrants aren't human, or that hiring illegals isn't a crime, or any of the other things you've tried to claim that people disagreeing with you have said?

And I'll find a post from someone who's trying to explain away the fact that illegal immigrants are committing a crime, by talking about their children, or how poor they are, or how well, the government doesn't prosecute them in this courthouse, they use this other courthouse, over there.

Not one person in this thread is trying to excuse hiring illegals.

(They don't have to, even if they wanted to. Because this isn't a thread about hiring illegals.)

Lots of people are trying to excuse being illegal.

[techboy]

Funny, I see lots of people pointing out that (according to their opinion) "criminal" is an inaccurate term being used for the purpose of pushing an agenda.

Not one of those people has a problem with "people trying to have a better life" or "people who are just trying to feed their children".


You are the only one asserting that you are choosing your words because they are the most precise.

I have given you a more precise formulation.

DjTj, an attorney, has been even more specific.

Are you going to switch to more precise terminology, since your only goal is precision?



Back in the days when it was illegal, yes, the term was accurate.

And yet I doubt that you'd appreciate someone insisting that the most precise term for a gay person in the military, for example (to bring us into the present day, post Lawrence v. Texas), is "criminal", despite the fact that the UCMJ is very clear on the point.

You have demonstrated so by insisting on language like "yes, it's illegal, and the law is morally wrong".



How many of y'all spouting "people trying for a better life" are willing to say "yeah, it's illegal, but I think that sneaking into the US should be made legal" out loud, instead if simply trying to imply it by using deceptive terms?


Well, that's actually an interesting question, for two reasons.

1. I'm not sure I've ever used that phrase, so you lumping me in with that group of "spout"ers is a little odd.

2. I have never made it a secret that I am in favor of a much more open immigration policy. Of course, I've never really announced it, either. I don't generally participate in political threads, except on the margins.

[techboy]

Not one person in this thread is trying to excuse hiring illegals.

(They don't have to, even if they wanted to. Because this isn't a thread about hiring illegals.)

It's not really a thread about illegal immigration at all, if you want to be technical.

It's about giving water to a person dying of thirst, and littering.

[IHOPSkins]

It's not really a thread about illegal immigration at all, if you want to be technical.

It's about giving water to a person dying of thirst, and littering.Really?

Are we leaving Water for US Citizens that just find themselves lost in the dessert?

Please

Open Borders and Illegal Alien Traffic is central to this debate.......

In a sentencing memo, the federal prosecutors wrote that Staton's "actions are not about humanitarian efforts, but about protesting the immigration (http://topics.cnn.com/topics/Immigration) policies of the United States, and aiding those that enter illegally into the United States."

[Larry]

You are the only one asserting that you are choosing your words because they are the most precise.

Wrong again.


You know, the word "criminal" is much easier to type than "someone just trying to have a better life".

I suppose child molesters are "just trying to be happy", too. But that's not the way I refer to them.


But far less accurate not to mention irrelevant.

I'm defending myself from people claiming that their spin-laden phrase is more accurate.

Remember how this debate started?

Probably a dozen posts insist on referring to people in the act of breaking the law using glowing, flowery euphemisms, praising the nobility of the brave, yet downtrodden souls who commit these acts.

I point out that a person who breaks the law because he wants the money is still a person who breaks the law. That doing it because you want the money doesn't excuse breaking the law.

Dozens of people who did not and do not object to the flowery euphemisms, rise up to tell me that well, the word "criminal" isn't technically accurate, because the law that they're breaking is from a different section of the law than these other laws.


And yet I doubt that you'd appreciate someone insisting that the most precise term for a gay person in the military, for example (to bring us into the present day, post Lawrence v. Texas), is "criminal", despite the fact that the UCMJ is very clear on the point.

You have demonstrated so by insisting on language like "yes, it's illegal, and the law is morally wrong".

1) I've already answered your question.

2) As long as we're arguing over what we claim the other person would say in a hypothetical situation, would it be fair for me to assert that no doubt your reaction in that case would be to assert that


a) Well, technically, being gay isn't prohibited, only permitting people to find out that you're gay is.

b) And besides, the UCMJ isn't technically part of US criminal law, because it isn't enforced by the FBI, nor is it tried in the criminal court system.

Or would you rather reserve the right to actually tell me what your opinion is, instead of having me tell you?


Well, that's actually an interesting question, for two reasons.

1. I'm not sure I've ever used that phrase, so you lumping me in with that group of "spout"ers is a little odd.

But let somebody point out that that phrase is nothing more than spin, and you'll sure rush to nitpick the person pointing it out.

But I also admit, I knew when I typed that phrase that it could be interpreted as saying that you, personally, had used that phrase. And I knew that I at least didn't know that you had. I was hoping that the "y'all" in there would make it clear that it was a general question to the people addressed, rather than to you, personally.

I should have made that clearer. (Although I'm not sure how I could have, without being even more long-winded than usual.)


2. I have never made it a secret that I am in favor of a much more open immigration policy. Of course, I've never really announced it, either. I don't generally participate in political threads, except on the margins.

Funny, so have I. (Advocated much more legal immigration.) (And advocated much more prosecution of the people who hire illegals.)

(I've long expressed my conspiracy theory feeling that the reason we have the current system is because a lot of powerful (and criminal) interests want for there to be a large pool of unskilled labor, and they want that labor to be illegal. That the same people who hire illegals would fight tooth and nail against making them legal.)

OTOH, I'm not at all certain that it's good for the country to have as much immigration as we do. Again, I think there are too many powerful special interests who think that the biggest problem with the US economy is that the bottom 99% of Americans make too much money.

But, I'm absolutely certain that the ideal amount of immigration isn't zero, either. And as I understand it, right now, unless you're a Doctor or an Engineer, then the quota is zero.

[Metskins]

We will just have to differ here

You gonna give them a ride next?...a place to stay,a job?

Where does it end or have limits?

Haven't read the whole thread, but it is ILLEGAL to give people a ride in your car that are perceived to have entered the United States by illegal means.

Giving them water is not. I can see this one going to the Supreme Court.

[Larry]

Haven't read the whole thread, but it is ILLEGAL to give people a ride in your car that are perceived to have entered the United States by illegal means.

Giving them water is not. I can see this one going to the Supreme Court.

Littering is.

What's his Supreme Court argument going to be? "Plaintiff claims that littering is a Constitutional Right"?

[Thiebear]

Penalties for illegal immigrants: l Unlawful entry: A criminal misdemeanor subject to six months in prison. Up to two years in prison for subsequent offenses.
-------------------------------------------------

We normally shouldn't allow them to die over the misdemeanor.
Put Potable water in water buffalo's in the same locations... More risk of being caught, less risk of dying.

[twa]

Penalties for illegal immigrants: l Unlawful entry: A criminal misdemeanor subject to six months in prison. Up to two years in prison for subsequent offenses.
-------------------------------------------------

We normally shouldn't allow them to die over the misdemeanor.
Put Potable water in water buffalo's in the same locations... More risk of being caught, less risk of dying.

As long as Mexico pays for the buffalo's I'm fine with it,least they could do after allowing their citizens to endanger their lives while escaping;)

Allow assumes we have a responsibility to provide for their welfare despite their ignoring our law.

[Larry]

We normally shouldn't allow them to die over the misdemeanor.

First response:


But, should we help them commit it?

Second response:


If I don't pre-position water in the places where people are likely to be breaking the law, and they die, it's not my fault. I didn't kill them, they killed themselves. (Well, I suppose you could call it natural causes. But they died as a result of the predictable risks which they voluntarily chose to run.)

If, OTOH, I do put out water for them, then I have assisted them in breaking the law.

(Fictional) Analogy:


A lot of people have been climbing over my neighbor's fence and using his swimming pool. Some of them have drowned in it.

If I fail to put flotation devices into my neighbor's pool, and another one of them drowns, then that's not my fault. I am under no obligation to serve as a volunteer lifeguard on my neighbor's pool, just in case a trespasser who doesn't know how to swim becomes endangered.


(In fact, legally, as I understand it, I can stand there and watch him drown. But a) that's a rather nit-picky analogy, and b) I'm not advocating standing around gloatingly and watching paople die.)

However, if I do put flotation devices in my neighbor's pool, for the specific purpose of them being available just in case a trespasser should need them, then I am assisting those trespassers.

[Hubbs]

Question for Larry et al.:

If a medically-trained person happened to be a Border Patrol agent and saw a person who had just crossed the border collapse and start seizing, would you support helping that person or ignoring him?

[techboy]

Are we leaving Water for US Citizens that just find themselves lost in the dessert?


If enough U.S. citizens were getting lost in the desert, I'm pretty sure we would.



Open Borders and Illegal Alien Traffic is central to this debate.......


I don't think so.



I'm defending myself from people claiming that their spin-laden phrase is more accurate.

Oh, I see. They're spinning, so you're spinning too?

I'd suggest, then, that you stop spinning, use the most accurate terminology, and then call the other guys on their spinning.

Let's be honest, though. Half of your style in argument is to settle on a meaning-laden word that you feel you can pin on the discussion, then use it as often as possible because you feel it packs rhetorical punch. "BIGOT", "DISCRIMINATION", "CRIMINAL".



As long as we're arguing over what we claim the other person would say in a hypothetical situation,


a) Well, technically, being gay isn't prohibited, only permitting people to find out that you're gay is.
[/quote]

No, because the UCMJ also bans homosexual acts (and a lot of others, actually) specifically. Check article 125, if you care.




Or would you rather reserve the right to actually tell me what your opinion is, instead of having me tell you?


I thought I asked you, but I'll do so again. [i]Would you object to the use of the word "criminal" as a one word replacement for "person who has committed homosexual acts in the military", or would you argue against that as a value-laden term used only for rhetorical punch, perhaps insisting on the longer "technically illegal but the law is wrong" qualifier?



But let somebody point out that that phrase is nothing more than spin, and you'll sure rush to nitpick the person pointing it out.


if you had stopped at pointing out that "people seeking a better life" is spin, I might not have agreed, but I doubt I would have made a rare appearance in a political thread.

As an aside, I'm wondering... Have you reconciled your position that condoms don't encourage sexual activity, but water does encourage illegal border crossings in your own mind, yet?

If so, how?

[techboy]

(Fictional) Analogy:


That analogy's pretty close (closer than most used on this board, anyway), but I think you might find that for many people, it cuts against you.



However, if I do put flotation devices in my neighbor's pool, for the specific purpose of them being available just in case a trespasser should need them, then I am assisting those trespassers.[/INDENT]

What if the neighbor himself is tired of seeing kids drown in his pool, and puts out the floatation devices so they won't?

[Major Harris]

Let's be honest, though. Half of your style in argument is to settle on a meaning-laden word that you feel you can pin on the discussion, then use it as often as possible because you feel it packs rhetorical punch. "BIGOT", "DISCRIMINATION", "CRIMINAL".




half....you're such a nice guy.

[Special K]

This story sucks. I understand illegal immigration is a massive problem here in America and a hot-button issue, but I don't agree with the penalty they gave this man.

Even though they are breaking the law and crossing illegally doesn't mean they aren't human. I don't like illegal immigration and I wish our lawmakers would grow some balls and address this issue effectively, but that doesn't mean I've lost all sense of humanity and don't give a crap that desperate people who are trying to survive and make a better life for themselves and their families are dying.

I know it's a fine line, and I find myself having a hard time drawing my own moral line between facilitating illegal behavior and trying to be compassionate and help others. I can definitely see both sides to the argument here, but I just don't think I could impose a punishment like that on someone trying to help...although I'll readily admit we don't know how much he was truly trying to help and how much he was making a political statement and thumbing his nose at the government.

[skinfan13]

Question for Larry et al.:

If a medically-trained person happened to be a Border Patrol agent and saw a person who had just crossed the border collapse and start seizing, would you support helping that person or ignoring him? save his life, then put him in cuffs. No different than a criminal shot by an officer. The officer calls an ambulance, he doesn't stroll over a pop two more rounds in his head or just watch him die. Same could be said for warfare. Those that surrender are given medical care and food. It's called being civilized.

[Larry]

Let's be honest, though. Half of your style in argument is to settle on a meaning-laden word that you feel you can pin on the discussion, then use it as often as possible because you feel it packs rhetorical punch. "BIGOT", "DISCRIMINATION", "CRIMINAL".

It seems to be the most effective technique when arguing with people who are denying the reality of the situation.


I thought I asked you, but I'll do so again. Would you object to the use of the word "criminal" as a one word replacement for "person who has committed homosexual acts in the military", or would you argue against that as a value-laden term used only for rhetorical punch, perhaps insisting on the longer "technically illegal but the law is wrong" qualifier?

And I've already answered you. The term is accurate, and I would argue to have the law changed.

Funny, no one has answered my question: Do the people who refuse to admit that illegal immigration is illegal believe that the US should make it legal for anybody who wants to, to enter this country, and remain here as long as they want?

I have no problem admitting that being gay in the military is illegal, and arguing that the law is immoral and should be changed.

Do the folks glossing over illegal immigration with phrases like "just trying for a better life" support repealing that law?


As an aside, I'm wondering... Have you reconciled your position that condoms don't encourage sexual activity, but water does encourage illegal border crossings in your own mind, yet?

If so, how?

Actually, I'm leaning towards the belief that:


1) That's a pretty good analogy. (The guy who came up with it must be pretty smart.) :)

2) That one reason the analogy fits is because of the "they're going to do it, anyway" factor. That, frankly, it isn't rational to expect people to stop the behavior simply because it's more or less risky. (Or at least, that the potential penalty (death for the border crosser, pregnancy/STD/whatever for the horny teen) happens to so few people that everybody will rationalize it into "it won't happen to me".)

3) I suspect that I may be in a rather unique position. I haven't checked, but I strongly suspect that, out of all the people in Tailgate who insist on pointing out that illegal immigration is illegal, I may be the only one who supports the distribution of condoms to teens.

And, I'll also admit, I found the "Jesus would do it" arguments pretty persuasive. Which is kind of surprising for me, since usually when somebody invokes that argument I assume that what they're doing is simply stating their own opinion, and trying to claim that they're speaking for God. But in this case, that argument seemed to work on me. It "feels" right.

[techboy]

And I've already answered you. The term is accurate, and I would argue to have the law changed.


Okay, then.



Funny, no one has answered my question: Do the people who refuse to admit that illegal immigration is illegal believe that the US should make it legal for anybody who wants to, to enter this country, and remain here as long as they want?


I'm pretty sure I already answered this, in that I'd be a heck of a lot closer to this policy than current policy.



Actually, I'm leaning towards the belief that:

[INDENT]1) That's a pretty good analogy. (The guy who came up with it must be pretty smart.) :)


I was actually a little put out when you wrote that, because I hadn't seen the thread in a while and it had occurred to me too, in the interim. You'll notice I introduced it the first time without referencing you at all. :D

Looking at the rest of your answers, though, I guess the answer is no, you haven't?

I don't think you're alone, though. I haven't searched through post histories, so I'm not sure enough to call anybody out, but I think I could identify at least one other person who supports condom distribution and opposes this.

[MurrayH81]

2 more items from me.

The case itself was about littering. The guy was warned, the group was warned. The park rangers explained their concerns and issues. This guy chose to continue to litter despite this (for his own purpose and convenience). He then refused to pay the posted littering fine.

Now he has a bigger problem.

He didn't encounter a person dying of thirst, he didn't have a time based moral dilemma, he chose to deliberately violate the posted and warned about laws multiple times.

And, as I have stated many times on immigration related threads, if these folks want a better life, they can change the country they live in now (via violent revolution if necessary) rather than bring themselves and families at great risk and in violation of our sovereignty and laws, over here. The difference between the the European influx and this influx is that the Europeans entered legally and according to the process we set up. The folks from down south are not.

[Hubbs]

This story sucks. I understand illegal immigration is a massive problem here in America and a hot-button issue, but I don't agree with the penalty they gave this man.

Even though they are breaking the law and crossing illegally doesn't mean they aren't human. I don't like illegal immigration and I wish our lawmakers would grow some balls and address this issue effectively, but that doesn't mean I've lost all sense of humanity and don't give a crap that desperate people who are trying to survive and make a better life for themselves and their families are dying.

I know it's a fine line, and I find myself having a hard time drawing my own moral line between facilitating illegal behavior and trying to be compassionate and help others. I can definitely see both sides to the argument here, but I just don't think I could impose a punishment like that on someone trying to help...although I'll readily admit we don't know how much he was truly trying to help and how much he was making a political statement and thumbing his nose at the government.

Ding ding ding.

We've found the correct answer, folks. Hope you enjoyed your veal, don't forget to tip your waitresses.

[AsburySkinsFan]

This story sucks. I understand illegal immigration is a massive problem here in America and a hot-button issue, but I don't agree with the penalty they gave this man.

Even though they are breaking the law and crossing illegally doesn't mean they aren't human. I don't like illegal immigration and I wish our lawmakers would grow some balls and address this issue effectively, but that doesn't mean I've lost all sense of humanity and don't give a crap that desperate people who are trying to survive and make a better life for themselves and their families are dying.

I know it's a fine line, and I find myself having a hard time drawing my own moral line between facilitating illegal behavior and trying to be compassionate and help others. I can definitely see both sides to the argument here, but I just don't think I could impose a punishment like that on someone trying to help...although I'll readily admit we don't know how much he was truly trying to help and how much he was making a political statement and thumbing his nose at the government.

All this and beauty too...HTTR!

[Kosher Ham]

I have no moral responsibility for people that I am financially responsible for...that are not in my immediate family. I don't owe them water, shelter, or even a buck for the bus. They have plenty just by coming here. I feel the same way about most homeless people.

[Thiebear]

I have no moral responsibility for people that I am financially responsible for...that are not in my immediate family. I don't owe them water, shelter, or even a buck for the bus. They have plenty just by coming here. I feel the same way about most homeless people.

That doesnt seem kosher?

The right thing to do is to CRACK down on the coyote smugglers dropping them off in dead zones.

The right thing to do is to put water and drones in the place where most people die.

The right thing to do is to crack down on the companies profiting from this crap.

But until then, we should try and save those that can be saved and send their ass back.

[Kosher Ham]

Problem is even sending them back is an absurd process and time period.

I just am so fed up with the justice system in general. "Right to a speedy trial". Let's get it over with already.

Why are we paying for people to live on death row for years on end ? Why are we waiting to deport people (especially the criminals) for months to years on end ?

It's just stupid.

EDIT: And I am in no way, shape, or form responsible for saving them. That is their own responsibility not mine.

[Larry]

Why are we paying for people to live on death row for years on end ?

Because we keep finding people who've been living on death row for 10 years, who turn out to be not guilty? :whoknows:

[techboy]

And I am in no way, shape, or form responsible for saving them.

Has anyone asked you to?

[sjinhan]

congratulations on being pointless.




Yay for coming up with completely irrelevant scenarios :applause:

ok i left work and i didnt have a chance to defend myself here...

i made the point because some one was giving crap for giving the dude water and some food... the person stated i should have reported to the border patrol to have the illegal get picked up since first he shouldnt be there in the first place and then to probably save the man from dying... Knowing the area I am in there was unlikely the border patrol would have found him in short period of time nor was it likely that the border patrol would even send someone out there pick this guy up...

In terms of human life aspect of this... how that so was that so much different than seeing an injured guy in a wreck who looks like he is about to die unless you help out?

Should I just stand by and call 911 and turn around and hope for the best or should I try my best to help the man out?

I guess if you want keep you nose "legally" clean you can call 911 and move on with your business but its not such a clear cut black and white issue like some of the posters here are making it out to be...

One thing to note.. I don't think a person should purposefully going out there and putting water bottles "just in case". As that was the case here, I think the person should be punished cause thats premediated...

I just shared my story cause I wanted to point out that its not always black and white in certain situations...

[Destino]

Or, how about you find one person in this thread who's claiming that people dying isn't important, or that illegal immigrants aren't human, or that hiring illegals isn't a crime, or any of the other things you've tried to claim that people disagreeing with you have said?
I haven't claimed any of those things... not how you've worded them here anyway.

What I have said is that saving lives if possible is MORE IMPORTANT than their immigration status. Other, including you have disagreed arguing that we aren't helping people but instead assisting criminals break the law. I've argued with those that disagreed. Are you going to claim that this thread didn't begin with people arguing for and against leaving bottles in the desert to help people dying there?

What I have said is that hiring illegals isn't just a crime (everyone knows that) but that it's the route to take if you actually want to solve the problem. I think those of you, and I include you, that focus on the poor immigrants the selves are partially to blame for the continued problem. There is no solution to be found there and because of your need to blame them we expend all of our energy chasing them around half heartedly and the situation continues.

I never said that anyone said illegals weren't humans. I did call you on your stupid little "i'll admit they are humans when...." as if it matters if you think they are human or not. Which you did say in post 102.

You were the one insisting on making this thread about immigration. I said it wasn't at all about immigration because no matter how this issue turned out immigration in the US would not change. I brought hiring into it because that is where the solution to the problem is found. The immigrants themselves aren't going to stop coming because you tell them that in your opinion they are taking responsibility for their own actions and that technically they are criminals.

[isle-hawg]

Seems to me this guys punishment fits his crime. I hope he picks up lots and lots of plastic out of the Park!

[81artmonk]

You tell me Christian, how much compassion should you give them?

Oh good one, pull the christian card. Like that hasn't been used before. :doh:

None. And being called out on my christianity by you is purely laughable!!

[Larry]

Or, how about you find one person in this thread who's claiming that people dying isn't important, or that illegal immigrants aren't human, or that hiring illegals isn't a crime, or any of the other things you've tried to claim that people disagreeing with you have said?


I haven't claimed any of those things... not how you've worded them here anyway.

1) I need to apologize. Going back through things, it seems that virtually all of the things I was referring to were somebody else

2) Although I did find this:


Interesting way of looking at things. They are trying to avoid people dying.... and you think that saving lives is a minor issue. Much more important to note that these people might be illegal immigrants. Great logic. You think ER doctors that treat illegals are "providing logistical support to a crime in progress" too Larry? I'm sure you do. Why focus on trivial things like life and death eh?

[Destino]

1) I need to apologize. Going back through things, it seems that virtually all of the things I was referring to were somebody else no worries larry.




2) Although I did find this:
Which is fair IMO. We each want to focus on a different aspect of the water easter egg hunt. :) Pesonally I think the biggest humanitarian action in all of this is to end the problem by sealing the border and removing the temptation. Until then I'm cool with water bottles.

[Destino]

Oh good one, pull the christian card. Like that hasn't been used before. :doh:

None. And being called out on my christianity by you is purely laughable!!
faith when it's convenient 81artmonk? can't say I'm surprised. I've pointed out your similarity to the Pharisee before. I'll do it again now. Compassion for those that agree with you "none" for the rest.

[81artmonk]

faith when it's convenient 81artmonk? can't say I'm surprised. I've pointed out your similarity to the Pharisee before. I'll do it again now. Compassion for those that agree with you "none" for the rest.

judge not lest ye be judged!!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha:doh:

[Destino]

judge not lest ye be judged!!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha:doh:Says the guy who decided for everyone who does and doesn't deserve compassion. hahahaha? fail.

[81artmonk]

Says the guy who decided for everyone who does and doesn't deserve compassion. hahahaha? fail.

Look, you have people trying to break our laws by crossing illegally. Not only are they stupid enough to try it over the desert, but obviously from the story stupid enough to try it without enough water to survive.

I'm sorry but stupidity shouldn't be helped or rewarded. It's not about compassion, it's about aiding and abeding criminals.


alot of people, obviously including you, think that the proccess of coming to america LEGALLY is something that just doesn't matter. I don't.

Now let's talk about true compassion. If I was driving down the road and found someone regardless of need would I help?? Sure. But would I knowingly go out of my way to help people break a law and attempt something illegal. No, because no matter how you slice it, that's not compassion, that's stupid!!



For you to question my faith because you don't agree with my opinion is not only ignorant but very telling.

[Thiebear]

Oh good one, pull the christian card. Like that hasn't been used before. :doh:
None. And being called out on my christianity by you is purely laughable!!

"The good samaritan"
just sayin.

[luckydevil]

Open borders!

Who is with me? ( I suspect no one)

[IHOPSkins]

Open borders!

Who is with me? ( I suspect no one)Just Libertarians.......Thats why I am not one

[Bang]

For you to question my faith because you don't agree with my opinion is not only ignorant but very telling.
I tend to agree with Destino on this one.
What does God care for our man-made borders delineating one country from another? I never saw any passages about God creating the USA and Mexico, or any nation at all. Heaven and Earth I see, and as far as my non-believing eyes can see, "Earth" covers everywhere equally. What does he care for our laws that have nothing to do with his laws?

Human life is human life, and as far as this atheist can tell, all of these humans are just as much his children as you are, even our enemies. Isn't this the argument against abortion? All life is sacred? One could definitely get the impression that only applies to American life. How does this paradox work?
Advocating for allowing someone to die in the desert because they're trying to make a better life for themselves is pretty barbaric, if you ask me. I can't see how a religion that preaches Love thy Neighbor can abide by it. You don't have to assist them like this person did, but I'd be a little careful about how justified I think it is, especially if I firmly believe that I'm going to have to answer for it one day. Is it also believed that God isn't going to care about the malice in your heart towards his other kids, or is it believed He views American Christians as superior to Mexican Christians?

I don't want illegals in my country either. But I could not just let a person die for this crime.
And I'm going to Hell. Go figure.

~Bang

[MurrayH81]

Just Libertarians.......Thats why I am not one

I don't think Libertarians support the trampling of US National Sovereignty. I suspect they tend to follow the dictates of the US Constitution and the Framers thoughts (e.g. No entangling alliances, friendship for all, let's amend the Constitution or Laws when need requires rather than ignore it).

[Special K]

The right thing to do is to CRACK down on the coyote smugglers dropping them off in dead zones.

The right thing to do is to crack down on the companies profiting from this crap.
Definitely agree with this. We need to come down hard on these coyotes and the jerks knowingly employing illegals in this country, I don't care what state you're a governor, senator, representative of.

KH brings up a good point too though, that just throwing them back over the line is an exercise in futility b/c it can be an absurdly long process and they'll just come back over again and again and again.

We need to quash their incentive for coming over IMO...that's why I think it's so important to crack down on people at the top of the chain first.



Because we keep finding people who've been living on death row for 10 years, who turn out to be not guilty? :whoknows:
Okay, total sidenote not related to the subject of this thread, but I'm wondering how many people we put on death row these days with all the advances in forensics/DNA/etc. who are actually innocent as compared to the people we put away years ago on less scientific, more circumstantial evidence. I'd be willing to bet there are less innocent people put on death row these days... Anyway, not that that really has anything to do with the price of rice in China, but it's something I've been curious about lately...especially with a lighter load this summer enabling me to watch more of my favorite forensic shows...




Oh good one, pull the christian card. Like that hasn't been used before. :doh:

None. And being called out on my christianity by you is purely laughable!!

faith when it's convenient 81artmonk? can't say I'm surprised. I've pointed out your similarity to the Pharisee before. I'll do it again now. Compassion for those that agree with you "none" for the rest.

judge not lest ye be judged!!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah ha ha ha:doh:

Says the guy who decided for everyone who does and doesn't deserve compassion. hahahaha? fail.
By the way, thank-you for this exchange :hysterical: God love ES...and Pharisees!

[Hubbs]

I'll just throw in that I love Biblical references to the Pharisees... it's like reading about Jesus pwning everything that's wrong and corrupt with organized religion vs. everything that's right. If this turns into a Pharisees metaphor, I'm pretty sure I know which side is right.

[Larry]

I'll just throw in that I love Biblical references to the Pharisees... it's like reading about Jesus pwning everything that's wrong and corrupt with organized religion vs. everything that's right. If this turns into a Pharisees metaphor, I'm pretty sure I know which side is right.

Don't know why, (maybe the fact that I don't know :pooh: about the Pharisees), but I'm remembering the line from 2010

"[The President] invoked Lincoln. Whenever they're going to get us into some serious ***, they always use Lincoln."