What about those who wait?

By Kyra-lin Hom

I'm a second generation, half-Chinese, teenage girl. My grandfather and great-grandfather were immigrants from rural China. My grandmother's father immigrated to Canada to become a railroad worker, making a pittance for the privilege of doing life-threatening coolie labor. I should obviously be in favor of all immigration and despise all anti-immigration laws, but I'm not and I don't.

Millions of people from all over the world are striving to gain U.S. citizenship every year - people fleeing starvation, poverty, and persecution; and people just wanting a better or different life. Mexico conveniently butts up against the United State's southern border. Therefore giving explicit opportunity to Latinos willing to enter the country illegally. A huge percentage of the currently 11 million illegal immigrants within the U.S. are Latinos from Mexico. If China or Nigeria or any other nation bordered the U.S. instead of Mexico the only difference would be the ethnicities involved.

However, it can not be changed that the vast majority of illegal aliens within this country are from one border, one country, and one race. Vouchers against illegal immigration thus often target the Latino race, taking a stand uncomfortably close to racism for some. It should be made perfectly clear that race and country, in my mind, are not subversive factors in this issue. The races are being equalized by the U.S. crack down on its southern border, giving equal opportunities to all regardless of geography.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist Robert L. Jamieson Jr. made a very good point in his April 11th column, "The truth is the 11 million people - many from Mexico - who are in this country without permission are here illegally. Period."

It doesn't matter how much of a touching story the immigration issue is because the argument of those in favor of the aliens already living in the U.S. is based on the assumption that the individual precedes the law. Millions of other people are anxiously awaiting their turn in the immigration line so that they may enter the country legally. Why should Latinos be able to come to the U.S. and reap the "benefits" of our country ahead of those people?

I'm not saying the world should be fair, or that laws should always be followed. I can think of many instances in history where following the rules was definitely not the right way to go. Defying evil dictators or syndicates is one of the most popular romantic stories this country has. Being American has allowed us as a people to develop a love of fighting the good fight no matter the means or the collateral.

This is not a war over the oppression of foreigners in this country. It is a debate over upholding the law and order of this nation. We as individual human beings can break any law we so choose. We as a people within a nation must then also understand and face the consequences under the law.

So where do we draw the lines between lawful, practical, and humane?

It becomes an important question when dealing with the presence of illegal aliens already in America. It is utterly impractical to deport every single illegal alien in the United States and it wouldn't be worth the effort required to implement the project. It is also equally impossible for the U.S. to allow every single illegal alien to remain here. Not only would both scenarios be economically harmful, but they would also be inhumane and reflect poorly on the U.S. politically.

Established persons (excluding felons and those socially undesireable, of course) should be allowed to stay - feasible because of their positive affect on the U.S. - along with people who would be facing religious, racial, or political persecution if deported. Those not established, extremely ill-paid laborers taking jobs from U.S. citizens, actually hinder society. I do not make light of uprooting people from their homes, but these would be the logical people for the U.S. to deport.

It is easy to prevent the future problem by fortifying the U.S. borders. Solving the problems of the present is much more difficult. These are people with friends, relations, and investments that must be dealt with on a personal level. It is ridiculous and nearsighted to be absolute in law and practice, but bearing one's heart to every pitiable situation is equally so. Establishing that middle line is the job of Congress. I hope they do it right.

Kyra-lin Hom is a high school junior and can be reached at kl_hom@yahoo.com