Sure, deport them. That's fine. I don't care about that. I'm talking about in the situation, like the natural disaster. It's one thing to say they shouldn't be here, but it's another to not help them in times of suffering, even if they have broken the rules. It's humane to help them, and then deport them. No, we shouldn't give them federal monies to do with as they please. That would be a horrible system. I'm talking about aide for suffering people, no matter what their national affiliation or whether or not they've broken the rules. It doesn't matter when we're talking about lives.

Well, the U.S. isn't our property, so the analogy is defunct. We should help them, as human beings to relieve their suffering for say, natural disasters. We are under no obligation to keep them here. We should deport them and give them a chance to enter our country legally, but we shouldn't deport them while they are suffering. We don't live in a black and white world. Humanity comes before country, IMO.

"G"

George-

There are citizens that aren't getting any assistance from Fema, I know a few of them myself who have lost their homes who couldn't afford insurance due to living in the floodplain. I believe our citizens should be addressed first, that is the way any other country would handle it. Free hand outs are one reason why the GOOD OL USA in deep debt! Deport them, allow their government to take care of them, they should haven't had been here illegally in the first place! Now I'm not surprised as to why you were cheering for OBAMA.

Who said that I value anyone over anyone? Why do you? I never said that our citizens should go without so that we could help illegal aliens when crisis hits. Why would your thought processes lead you to believe that I or anyone would or should support that? I'm talking about what is just and what could be considered virtuous action. You don't have to piss on anyone just to see that our citizens are taken care of. Why do we have to set priority on aide? We should have plenty of money for disaster aide. Hand outs are hardly the reason for the deep debt of the USA. What about a 7 year war that we shovel billions off to, where we have seen no real progress? What about politicians who support big corporate interests and funnel off millions in tax subsidies and breaks for the wealthy?

I think your priorities are maligned.

"G"

This post was last modified: Oct 14, 2008 12:23 PM by ggeorge2814.

I think the citizens of the US should come first in aid as well. You can't sneak into a country illegally and then expect help when your very presense in that country is breaking their law.

Try sneaking into Mexico and then demand that their government help you and see what happens.

I don't think it's that anyone expects help. If you are injured, or you're going to starve from the impact of a natural disaster, it shouldn't matter what your nationality is, or how you got there, you should receive help, especially from one of the wealthiest nations on the planet.

And just because Mexico's government might not help one of us if the shoe were on the other foot, does not mean that we should stoop that low and consider it justified.

"G"

I still think US citizens should be first in line. It would be a shame to see legal citizens of our country suffering while we help those who are, by law, not supposed to be here in the first place.

America is the only country you can enter illegally and then just set up camp and stay. Any other country would throw you out. By deporting the illegals we would not be stooping to anyone's level, we would be enforcing our laws just as everyone else does. But if we do that, we'll be "mean" and we'll trample their "civil rights" and it won't be "politically correct". We wouldn't want to offend the criminals or hurt their feelings.

US citizens first, criminal tresspassers to the back of the line.