Principles matter and when a person uses their`s to justify the unjustifiable, thats just wrong-and its justice,not social justice,code word for socialism. As I have said on other amnesty threads, what part of illegal do you not understand? More "useful idiots" for the progressives,what a shame.
Let me say first that as an active participant in Free Republic since 1998, my monthly donation ought to be some evidence that I am in general agreement with the principles on which FR is built. On the other hand that does not mean that I am going to be in 100 % agreement with Jim Robinson on every single question ever asked and, as far as I can tell, he has never required that of me, or of you. And that certainly does not mean that I am required to be in 100% agreement with you.
You snarkily imply that I am unable to follow a logical thread and then you proceed to ‘argue’ that because of my position on immigration I must, therefore, be a socialist, in favor of wealth redistribution. That is your idea of logic?
So, to your supposedly logical question. What part of illegal do I not understand? My position is not that we are to overlook illegal immigrants. As I read it, that is not Newts position either. (And I have frequently stated that Newt's plan is not perfect, but it does give us a good starting point to resolve the problem.)
I will even stipulate the illegality. But every criminal has an opportunity to present a case for ameliorating their punishment during the sentencing phase of a trial. And I believe there are situations where ‘justice’ is not served by simply showing someone the border by cattle car, bus, forced march or first class plane ticket, without considering their whole story.
My faith teaches me that justice must be tempered with mercy. So I would, in fact take a number of things into account, such as how long someone has been here as well as what their life looks like. In our system of justice we do have a statute of limitations on some crimes. Unless you equate illegal immigration in every case with murder it is not unreasonable to ask how long the statute of limitations ought to be for such a heinous crime. Especially when that criminal may be someone who works for a living, is a productive member of the community, pays taxes, sits on the school board, and attends the same church you do. Or maybe that criminal is someone who was brought here by their parents at the age of two and who very sincerely wants to stay and to become a citizen.
I am also opposed to blanket amnesty, in favor of shutting down the borders by whatever means necessary, immediate deportation for those who have been here only a short time and are only here for the bennies, and I completely agree with the self-deportation folks that if you get rid of the magnets people will leave on their own.
But I am very much in favor of a more humane approach to the disposition of those who remain after the magnets are gone and the freeloaders are gone. It does not follow that my position is progressive or un-conservative.
You may disagree with my approach but it is neither reasonable or logical to accuse me of socialism simply because I advocate a different solution than you do. If the America you believe in requires that everyone adopt your positions then I would suggest you re-read the constitution. Perhaps I should ask what part of the first amendment do you not understand..