I agree with you. In fact, as far back as the early 70s I attended school with many who were born in this country but whose parents were here illegally. It was the most common means of staying here. I never heard of any 'parent' of a citizen born in this country (and who is a minor) being deported until recently. That was actually the first time I even heard of such a thing.


>>>>What kind of fluff is that?
>I suppose you really needed to add this. It makes me feel like it doesn’t matter to you what I may answer, but here I go anyway.
>
>>>>Contradictory? How?
>
>It contradicts the spirit of the U.N. Universal Declaration Of Humans Rights and violates Article 6 which states: "Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law" http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm .
>
>In my opinion, unauthorized migrant is the correct wording.
>
>Immigration laws are very different from the laws that come to mind when we think of breaking the law, an idea typically associated with crimes such as murders, thefts, rapes, drugs, etc.
>Immigration laws create unequal rights, people who break immigration laws don’t cause harm as in drunk driving for example. As a matter of fact, people by break immigration laws are doing things that are perfectly legal for other plain-vanilla citizens, like crossing a border.
>
>Murder, rape, stealing, drug crimes, drunk driving etc., etc. don’t have the same parallel.
>
>When you call someone “illegal”, you are putting first the tag “guilty” before the “person” or “rights”.
>
>Bear with me on this:
>Many households in the US include people who are citizens by birth, naturalized, on immigrant visas and/or undocumented/unauthorized.
>
>According to the U.S Declaration of Independence
>"...all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. "
>
>“Unalienable rights” may be defined also as natural rights or human rights. There is a link between both Declarations then.
>
>So let’s analyze the following case: If an unauthorized migrant in the U.S. gives birth, she still can be deported with or without her child according to the law, despite being the mother of a U.S. citizen. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/aug/21/usa.edpilkington
>The “unalienable rights” of the child are clearly violated, because the child is deprived of the right to be raised by his parents in the country he was born and take full advantage of the benefits of being a citizen.
>
>I realize you think different and I am not trying to change that, I was interested on a particular question that you have answered in a way that helps me understand better your point of view; I hope you just take mine the same way.
>
>Ah,just in case, the links are relevant this time as well.