So why do you have a problem with "Amnesty"?
 

So if Congress decided to pass those same laws again to create a path to legalization for these people, I guess you wouldn't have a problem with that, right? If that happened, illegal aliens would be pursuing the process thats available - the same process used by all those "honorable" illegal aliens in the past to become legal.

...yeah, and somebody always wants something for nothing...

That's what I think about all this. I don't mind legal immigrants. They paid their dues and reap the rewards. But to give citizenship to illegal aliens for free and just because "they are already here" is just wrong. Period.

Yup.
 

That's why "my betrothed" in my example entered the country illegally.;)

Actually, overstays who marry U.S. citizens don't even need a "pardon"; they can just apply for residency. No fines, no request for "forgiveness", no penalties of any kind. For the life of me, I can't figure out the difference between someone who stays illegally and someone who enters illegally, but apparantly Congress thinks there is one. :rolleyes:

That's not what they are asking for fwiw
 

You might want to read the actual legislation they are supporting instead of just reading/listening to what various commentators say about it.

Why would anyone pay taxes when they don't have to? For example, an undocumented immigrant. Because they are hoping to get amnesty in the future by establishing their alibi. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...home-headlines

Yeah, and I might want to pretend those are American flags they're waving.

Frank,
Difference between overstay illegals and border jumpers would be that the overstays at least try to follow the legal procedures to begin with, however, the border jumpers never consider doing so to begin with.

The problem with Amnesty is that it excuses a crime. But if Congress decided to pass those same laws again to create a path to legalization for these people then I may have a problem with it and I may not like it but it would be the law. And yes illegal aliens would be pursuing the process thats available but it would not be the same process that LEGAL aliens followed and there in lies the rub. Rewarding people for commiting a crime when others have busted their buns to do it right dosen't sit well with me, and there are a lot of others who feel the same way. But let me add that it appears that on this subject it appears that we agree to disagree and so I will leave it at that. I appreciate discussing the pros and cons. Thanks

Apples and oranges

The demonstrations in Montgomery Alabama after the Rosa Parks incident in 1955 that you refer to were laws that were inacted against AMERICAN CITIZEN WHO ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION deserved the rights they were being denied. ILLIGAL ALIENS do not have these rights and so the example you use does not apply. Many have tried to use the civil right movements to justify their actions and to be honest many find it an insult.

A distinction without a difference
 

That's not much of a difference, imo. They both decided not to follow U.S. immigration laws, they just made the decision at different points in time.

Actually, the real reason why this distinction exists is simply because the Immigration and Nationality Act has become such a convoluted patchwork job over the years that every time Congress tries to "fix" something, they just end up "breaking" something else. However, by the time Congress realizes they've broken something, it's usually not politically expedient to fix it.