The sequester has taken front seat in recent discourse, but with its passage, I’m sure we’ll see a renewal of the discussion about “immigration reform.” Mixed in among the arguments for closing the border, more patrols, and more funding for immigration personnel, are those pushing for amnesty, a portion of whom think borders are stupid anyway. These “Open Borders” advocates support a completely unchecked movement of people and product across any border, effectively making borders merely a gesture.<\/p>\n
Open borders might be ok if 100% of the human race were benevolent, desiring only to do good things. But we all know that’s a ridiculous notion. Besides, what’s “good” to you might not be “good” to me, so even if 100% of the human race had good intentions, things just wouldn’t work out “all good.”<\/p>\n
So I propose the following exercise when confronted by an Open Borders advocate (or some variation thereof):<\/p>\n
Approach the Open Borders advocate area<\/p>\n
Find an unattended backpack (purse, duffel, etc)<\/p>\n
Proceed to rifle through the contents until someone notices and says something like,<\/p>\n
“Hey! That’s my backpack!”<\/p>\n
To which you respond,<\/p>\n
“No it’s not.”<\/p>\n
“Yes it is! That’s my backpack!”<\/p>\n
Hand the backpack over and respond, “No, it’s not! It’s a border<\/strong>. It’s a boundary<\/strong> around things you want to keep safe, and private, and together. It’s a border<\/strong> around things that are important to you.”<\/p>\n And watch as their Open Borders foundation falls out from under their feet.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The sequester has taken front seat in recent discourse, but with its passage, I’m sure we’ll see a renewal of the discussion about “immigration reform.” Mixed in among the arguments for closing the border, more patrols, and more funding for … Continue reading