Live Thread - Senate vote on the immigration bill today?

C-span 2 ^ | April 7, 2006

[Mo1]

Click to watch on C-span 2

[clawrence3]

Then I guess it is useless arguing with you whether doubling or tripling our efforts are good enough, because then it would still only be 2/10,000ths or 3/10,000ths - the rest of us live in the real world where anything you do in life has risks and money doesn't grow on trees.

[BlueStateDepression]

making the current civil offense of being in the country a felony

Afraid they willnot be able to VOTE????

Or do you want a felon to vote?

potentially criminalizing charity work

What part about aiding a criminal do you think is right and proper?

[BlueStateDepression]

There is an awesome question!

[Bikers4Bush]

Assuming the natural risks of life is not the same as having your government willfully expose you to them.

I would hope you could see the difference.

[BlueStateDepression]

anything you do in life has risks and money doesn't grow on trees.

Tell the illegals that clawrence, and accept that yourself when they are found to be illegal and they become deported felons as a result of a risk they took trying to to gain illegal access to the USA money tree known as a functioning economy.

[clawrence3]

I, at the very least, believe offering Holy Communion to ANYONE (criminal or not) is right and proper. I thought we already had this debate? But, no, I don't want anyone who is not a U.S. citizen to vote.

[BlueStateDepression]

Byrd standing there trying to thumb through the book speaks volumes. Does this man really have what it takes to be among our top lawmakers when he has trouble turning a page ina book?

I am not begrudging his physical condition because he cannot help such a thing but I do offer that his time has passed and he should go on home.

[BlueStateDepression]

Sure he can offer communion so long as he reports their presence to the authorities. Sounds like a proper way forward right?

[clawrence3]

Nope - Holy Communion without fear of being turned into the authorities.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Did Ole Sheets for no?

That's right. Election year.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>I think I (and Cardinal Mahony) have adequately set forth our disagreements with the proposed House additions to existing law (making the current civil offense of being in the country a felony and potentially criminalizing charity work were my main 2 concerns).

It should be a felony. The criminalization of charity work should be made a misdemeanor. This is an invasion of America! We need conservative policy on immigration reform, not more liberal policy. Stop promoting liberalism!

[BlueStateDepression]

So then you are claiming a religion and religious process is aside from and indeed ABOVE the law? I am sure Osama and all his minions agree with you totally.

THINK MAN, about the positions you take and how they apply to ALL people.

[Reagan Man]

>>>>And I'd rather use those resourses to reduce terrorist attacks specifically, as opposed to all border crossings. It's called PRIORITIES.

US "PRIORITIES" are as follows. The best way to stop terrorists and criminals from entering the US is to secure the borders. The best way to secure our borders is to build a wall-fence barrier. Next, double the size of the Border Patrol short term. Frankly, the BP forces should be at least 50,000 strong. 100,000 would be right and proper.

Stop promoting liberalism on Free Republic.

[moehoward]

Like a Dane Double Mocha.

[clawrence3]

LOL - liberal?! Here's my "best way" to reduce terrorist attacks - kill them over there before they get here. As a back up, make sure anyone identified as a possible terrorist NEVER makes it through a LEGAL point of entry. After you do all that, then we can talk about a wall.

[clawrence3]

I could care less how they apply to all people. Muslims have the same freedom of religion in this country. Not jailing someone for allowing them to say their noon prayers is part of that too.

[Bikers4Bush]

The only problem with exempting religious organizations and aid groups from that whole "aiding" thing is that you in effect give them a free pass to attempt to smuggle people across the border and if they succeed then there's no penalty.

So the question now is, would you be in favor of limiting the type of aid they could give to illegals? In other words, if that part of the bill were changed to say that it wasn't criminal to give them holy communion or feed them etc. but it would be criminal to aid them in coming illegally or to knowingly transport illegals from place to place would you be o.k. with that?

And if not why? Why shouldn't churches or aid groups be forced to obey the same laws we have to obey?

I will say this, I am adamantly opposed to religous organizations and aid groups setting up water aid stations. I am not, however, opposed to them personally standing there and giving out water to illegals that they may come across who may need it. One is true humanitarian aid, the other is nothing more than enabling an invasion.

I would hazard to guess that the first time those giving aid were beaten, robbed or raped by those they were trying to help that they might have to reconsider their positions.

[BlueStateDepression]

For crying out loud clawrence a wall is one way to make sure people actually go thru a legal point of entry.


Unreal. You oppose that which will aid your own request.

[BlueStateDepression]

Why shouldn't churches or aid groups be forced to obey the same laws we have to obey?

I would love to know the answer to that myself.

[P-40]

then we can talk about a wall.

Making it a pointless exercise to come here would negate the need for a wall as far as illegals are concerned but I doubt it would do much for a determined terrorist...or a determined illegal. By pointless exercise I mean that if there were no jobs, no school, no welfare, no nothing for illegals over here, not many would come.