The New York Post tells an awful story:
Hours after a hit-and-run van in Queens killed his mother, little Alex Chimbo lay in Elmhurst Hospital, his short life ebbing away.
He only had one wish.
“Daddy, where is Mommy? Let’s go home. I want to go home,” the toddler said, according to a family pal.
Soon after, Alex ? just a few weeks shy of his third birthday ? joined his mother in heaven, leaving his emotionally shattered father behind to pick up the pieces….
Both Alex and his mother were rushed to Elmhurst Hospital, where she died upon arrival. He was admitted with a collapsed lung, a damaged liver, a broken leg and head lacerations. He finally succumbed to his injuries at 6:30 a.m. yesterday.
Here’s the awful twist:
[The boy's father Franklin] Chimbo is left struggling to raise the estimated $5,000 it will cost to return his loved ones’ remains to the tiny town of Cuenca, in Ecuador.
With the help of City Councilman Hiram Monseratte, a trust fund for the burials has been set up at the North Fork Savings Bank.
In another agonizing development, Chimbo could run into difficulty if he tries to attend the funeral himself. He is not in the United States legally and may not be allowed to return if he leaves the country.
As hard-line as I am on immigration issues, I just don’t know what to think.
Are we at war with illegal immigrants? Can we justify an “any means necessary” approach to keeping them from our borders?
For the love of humanity, and assuming this story is true, send the poor child’s remains home.
What’s your stance on immigration, then, and what do we do with illegals?
There are two issues, really. One issue is immigration and the other is illegal immigration. I think the immigration laws are too restrictive. I have yet to hear a compelling argument as to how immigrants are bad for the U.S. We can’t assume that immigrants are “stealing” jobs from American citizens. This is not what you said, but it is a common argument. Those who can afford to come to the U.S. legally add to the country in terms of ideas. They contribute to our work, our lives, our intellect, and our technological know how because many are well educated and have a different perspective on life. As for political refugees and relatives of immigrants, who vary considerably in terms of education and occupational credentials, it’s a tougher issue. I strongly believe that it’s our moral duty to adhere to the ideals of what makes America great. Accepting the tired, the poor, and the oppressed can only strengthen the moral base of our country. There is plenty of room and resources for immigrants and while we must have some level of caution in a post 9/11 world, we do ourselves a disservice by creating too tight of restrictions. The vast majority of immigrants want a better life in the U.S. A small fraction want to do us harm and there are better ways, I’m sure of keeping those people from our shores.
Illegal immigrants are more of a problem. We need control over immigration because of the element in the world that wants to harm people. However, a poor Mexican who wants a better life in the U.S. is not going to compete for most people’s jobs. More likely, they compete for the bad jobs in terms of low pay, low benefits, and low status work, and compete with other illegal immigrants for those jobs. We can recognize that we need control over immigration without going to extremes. We can do the humane thing and help these people transition into American citizens. Our welfare budget is small in comparison to all other Western industrialized nations. We have the resources to absorb them, to help them. We have to make illegal immigrants declare their status. Like immigrants of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, they will start poor and will need help. But, as we’ve seen with those ethnicities and from the growth of Latino/a populations, the longer they are here, the better equipped their sons and daughters will move up and be productive members of society. I don’t think illegal immigrants are the problem. The problem is balancing control over immigration with security issues. 9/11 taught us to be mindful, but it should not teach us to go to extremes. We must continually work to bring a balance between humanity and national security. It is a goal, an ideal, to strive for.
“Our welfare budget is small in comparison to all other Western industrialized nations. We have the resources to absorb them, to help them.”
That might have something to do with capitalism, but the smallness of our welfare budget is a subjective concept bound only by one’s wish to have money forcibly taken from earners and given to non-earners. You might have the resources to help them and absorb them, but I don’t.
It’s my understanding that we’re still at war with people who have used our lax immigration laws to help murder 3,000 Americans. In light of this, I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to throttle back on free passage into this country until we’re sure that the people coming into it don’t do so in order to kill innocent civilians.
As in other threads, you cannot lament a state of affairs without offering a reasonable solution. How do you reconcile a moral imperative to let the “poor, tired, huddled masses” into this country who “yearn to breathe free” with protecting the vast millions of them who were born here and are trying to live without fear?