(January 26, 2017 at 3:07 pm)A Theist Wrote:

(January 26, 2017 at 1:28 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: For those who support the wall...

This isn't a liberal vs conservative, Trump vs Anti Trump, anti immigration vs pro immigration thing. Just answer objectively with no biases for any particular "side" you feel you need to be on:

Do you really think spending all this money building this wall is a good, effective idea, all things considered?

The wall is part of a layered plan to secure our borders along Mexico. In addition to the wall 5000 more border patrol agents will be hired plus new surveillance and other equipment. Although it's the central focus, there's more to securing our borders than just that.

(January 26, 2017 at 3:07 pm)scoobysnack Wrote:

(January 26, 2017 at 2:52 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I genuinely want to hear a reasonable response to my question.

I feel like a lot of conservatives are putting reason aside for the sake of sticking to "their side." A lot of liberals are guilty of the same thing for some of their own issues. Both need to be called out when warranted.

Quote:Not only are the new barriers longer than in the past, but many are built along peaceful borders. The significant characteristic that most of these borders share is that they mark a sharp wealth discontinuity.5 For example, the average annual per capita GDP (in 2010 U.S. dollars) of the countries that have built barriers since the fall of the Berlin Wall is $14,067; the average for the countries on the other side of these barriers is $2,801. The U.S. barrier on the Mexican border fits this pattern. Although the Canadian border is longer and certainly more porous (the Border Patrol estimated in 2009 that it had effective control over less than 1% of the Canadian border versus 35% of the Mexican border), the debates about fencing the border focused only on Mexico.6 The United States’ per capita GDP in 2010 was $47,000, Canada’s was $39,000, and Mexico’s was $14,000.

The final internal factor that plays a role in the decision to build a fence or wall on a political border is the fear that population movements will irreversibly change the way of life inside the state. In the United States, concerns about the threat that immigrant values pose are as old as the country itself. At different points in history, the Irish, the Chinese, and the Italians were all described as posing a grave threat to a particular version of what it meant to be an “American.” Today, these debates revolve around both Muslims and Latino immigrants who, anti-immigrant activists argue, bring alternative social codes and do not assimilate into the mainstream of U.S. society. The fence on the border symbolizes the hardened and fixed borderline that marks a clear distinction between the territories where particular people belong.

The construction of a barrier on the border simultaneously legitimates and intensifies the internal exclusionary practices of the sovereign state. It legitimates exclusion by providing a material manifestation of the abstract idea of sovereignty, which brings the claim of territorial difference into being. The barrier also intensifies these exclusionary practices, because once the boundary is marked and “the container” of the state takes form, the perception of the difference between the two places becomes stronger. This process is evident in new restrictive immigration laws at the state level in Alabama and Arizona as well as in the protests and vandalism directed toward proposed Islamic cultural centers in New York and Tennessee. By demonstrating sovereign control, the state simultaneously reifies authority over that territory and defines the limits of the people that belong there. These perceived differences then fuel more passionate feelings of belonging to the in-group and distinction from the other on the outside.

The U.S. fence on the Mexican border should be understood both in terms of the enhanced enforcement capabilities of the government and in the assertion of where the state has authority and who should be allowed in the state’s territory. The United States built the barrier on the U.S.-Mexico border to define its sovereign authority over its territory, to protect the economic privileges of its population, and to protect a particular way of life from other people who are perceived to have different value systems. Rather than a barrier against terrorism and cartel violence, it is a performance of the United States’ territory and boundaries.

https://nacla.org/article/why-build-border-wall

(January 26, 2017 at 3:23 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: When I ask a genuine question, I would appreciate being given the respect of a response coming from you, in your words, and in the form of a human to human discussion. Not a copy pasta. But alright, I'll roll with it. 

This sounds like it's saying it would be purely a symbolic thing... for the sake of principle. The principle being to make a clear, physical distinction between "our culture" and "their culture". Are you admitting then that the wall will probably not physically keep illegals from getting in?

As an immigrant myself, I believe in controlling our borders as every country does. But not for the reason of some sort of "culture preservation."

(January 26, 2017 at 3:23 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: When I ask a genuine question, I would appreciate being given the respect of a response coming from you, in your words, and in the form of a human to human discussion. Not a copy pasta. But alright, I'll roll with it. 

This sounds like it's saying it would be purely a symbolic thing... for the sake of principle. The principle being to make a clear, physical distinction between "our culture" and "their culture". Are you admitting then that the wall will probably not physically keep illegals from getting in?

As an immigrant myself, I believe in controlling our borders as every country does. But not for the reason of some sort of "culture preservation."

(January 26, 2017 at 3:07 pm)A Theist Wrote:

(January 26, 2017 at 1:28 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: For those who support the wall...

This isn't a liberal vs conservative, Trump vs Anti Trump, anti immigration vs pro immigration thing. Just answer objectively with no biases for any particular "side" you feel you need to be on:

Do you really think spending all this money building this wall is a good, effective idea, all things considered?

The wall is part of a layered plan to secure our borders along Mexico. In addition to the wall 5000 more border patrol agents will be hired plus new surveillance and other equipment. Although it's the central focus, there's more to securing our borders than just that.

(January 26, 2017 at 3:27 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:

(January 26, 2017 at 3:23 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: When I ask a genuine question, I would appreciate being given the respect of a response coming from you, in your words, and in the form of a human to human discussion. Not a copy pasta. But alright, I'll roll with it. 

This sounds like it's saying it would be purely a symbolic thing... for the sake of principle. The principle being to make a clear, physical distinction between "our culture" and "their culture". Are you admitting then that the wall will probably not physically keep illegals from getting in?

As an immigrant myself, I believe in controlling our borders as every country does. But not for the reason of some sort of "culture preservation."

Yeah, I was actually a little confused at that copy/paste.  For me, that excerpt is a great argument against building the wall, because it's not about terrorism or violence or crime...it's about saying who "belongs" in America.  It literally uses the Irish, Chinese, etc examples...which are certainly not a positive thing to which our actions would want to be compared.

Quote:"A nation without borders is not a nation," he said. "Beginning today the United States gets back control of its borders."