| OCR Text |
Show 6 Monday, February 11,2008 VOICES www. dailyutahchronicle. com Utah children's future can be bright ecent public comments in the local press on the issue of in-state tuition for children of undocumented immigrants and the issue of immigration in general have often been hateful, racist and even violent in their tenor. It is important to dispel some of the myths and unpack some of the rhetoric that these commentators seem to thrive on in their attack on undocumented immigrants and anyone who speaks with compassion for children of undocumented workers and their parents. Many of the comments of those who attack in-state tuition for children of undocumented workers use the "false hope" argument. This argument tends to come in the guise of compassionate concern, but actually can be even more insidious and harmful in some ways than obviously xenophobic rants. In this argument, those who support repealing in-state tuition argue that they feel "just terrible" that children of undocumented workers—in their words, "illegals"—receive a college education and then cannot find employment. This argument is disingenuous for several reasons. Those who make this argument fail to point out that the children in question are thriving in Utah schools despite the odds and are already showing the promise they would undoubtedly demonstrate if we allowed them to reach their full educational and career potential. Also, a college education is not only about obtaining a job, but about developing critical thinking skills and so much more that contributes to the development of a human being. In addition, we are investing in the education of children of undocumented workers for several years before they attend college, and it makes no sense to abandon the child at that point in their trajectory. Finally, there is no reason that such barriers to future careers need exist in the first place. We can choose to change existing law. This raises another important argument that is frequently used— the "rule of law" argument. This argument labels children of undocumented workers and their parents as "illegal" and illegitimate. One problem with this argument R critical juncture—they no longer make sense in today's economic climate. This is especially true when we consider that it is AmeriTHERESA can citizens who benefit from the MARTINEZ goods and services made possible by the labor of undocumented immigrants, and that some of those same Americans want to deny the children of immigrants an educais that those who make it speak of tion and deny civil rights to their the "rule of law" as if our laws are parents. always and everywhere manifestly Such an arrangement is obviously just and above suspicion. Howimmoral and smacks of the worst ever, the truth is that laws can be manipulated for reasons of political kind of hypocrisy, hearkening back to something like feudalism, or at expediency. Laws can be illegitithe very least indentured servitude. mate and completely unjust. Our nation enforced laws that en- All of this is to say that existing immigration laws can no longer speak abled the genocide and disenfranfor the common good, nor do they chisement of American Indians, speak for the dignity of human life. enslaved Africans, denied women In the end, a nation is often the right to vote and own property, judged not by how it has treated provided for the rights of factory ownerjs at the expense of immigrant its most privileged and powerful members, but by how it has treated laborers and child labor, aided and its most vulnerable and disenfranabetted laws supporting violent chised members. In many ways, this religious persecution of Catholics, ethic was shaped by age-old provJewish Americans, and Latter-day Saints and, of course, enforced infa- erbs such as "love thy neighbor," "do not oppress the widow or the mous Jim Crow laws in the Ameriorphan, the stranger or the poor" can South and similar unjust laws and "whatsoever you do to the least in the American Southwest. of my brothers (and sisters), that Clearly, the rule of law leaves you do unto me"—all of these from something to be desired unless the Old and New Testaments. wise and thoughtful citizens keep In this country, one of the most a watchful eye over the political vulnerable populations is children. nature of the law as well as the power and privilege involved in the They depend so much on the world we, their elders, shape for them. crafting of the law. In the 2008 session of the Utah In addition, this argument runs . State Legislature, our lawmakstraight into another obvious ers are again debating, in essence, logical wall, for laws must reflect whether children have the right to the needs and understanding of an education. It can be dressed up, a populace over time. When laws masked or veiled, but that is the do not reflect current economic heart of the matter. realities, then laws begin to make no common sense. More than that, Adopting a bill that would deny when laws fail to uphold human so many children an education and dignity and human life—the needs hope for a better future for themof children and their parents— selves and their families seems they become cynical, harmful and a mockery of the "rule of law." I destructive. would hope that no one would want to leave a legacy that denies It seems the rightful place of any children the right to reach their full freethinking human being to stand educational potential—something up against such damaging and that might have implications for unjust laws. I know that the Rev. us all should we lose the creativity Martin Luther King Jr. thought this way, and so did George Washington of children because of our lack of vision. and Thomas Jefferson. Wasn't it Washington and Jefferson, among Theresa Martinez is the assistant many others, who fought a revoluvice president for Academic Outtionary war against unjust laws? reach, co-chair ofUtahnsfor the American Dream and an associate It seems clear that our immiprofessor of sociology at the U. gration laws have reached this Carly Smith Freshman, Int'i Studies I Do you think undocumented students should still be able to get in-state tuition? Why or why not? Yes, if they have been living in Utah for the specified amount of time. 2. Should people have the right to protest in front of the homes of professors? No, that's an invasion of personal privacy. 3. ASUU elections are coming up. What are you looking forward to most about .them? 4, Did you vote in the presidential primaries? Why or why not? i 5. Ifyou had to •give something : up for Lent, what •-would it.be? 6. Doyou think alcoholic drinks such as Boone's Farm belong in liquor stores only? Why or why not? I don't know anything about the elections. No, \ am not a U.S. citizen. Phillip Tang Junior, Biochemistry Doug Petersen Junior, Economics and English On "Alaska will solve our oil problems" (Tiara C. Auxier, Feb. 6, 2008) Opinion 3 Mother Earth i posted 2/06/08 @ 10:36 AM MST :-j y *rj ) Wow, you are an idiot, aren't you? Here is another interesting concept about "the beauty of capitalism.".Supply and demand. 47% of the oil used in the world is for automobiles, 23% for heating and diesel, 18% for plastics and related items. How about you park your car, insulate your house and put on a sweater, then stop filling the landfills with petroleum based plastics? The effect would be lower oil prices, less dependence on the Middle East and a healthier environment. Isn't that a better goal than suggesting raping Alaska in order to sustain or increase the consumption thereby creating additional negative impacts on the world? Idiot. __ y*m .:-*w Ralph Wiggum posted 2/06/08 @ 2:44 PM MST Tiara, Thanks for a great article. It's too bad, though, that your readers are too busy concocting wordy-yet-childish epithets to throw at you to actually pay attention to your reasonable proposal. I've studied the issue myself and agree that it makes . great sense to drill in ANWR, and all of the arguments against it that I've seen are knee jerk, bleeding heart responses, devoid of anything but freshman-girl emotion. Keep up the good work, though. Take comfort in knowing that the idiots calling you names here will some day be competing with you on the job market... You'll own them someday. posted 2/06/08® 12:11 PM MST Is this suppose to be comedy? Or some sort of strange satire that I am missing? Or are you simply looking for a reaction because the activity on your Facebook and MySpace pages have slowed and this is an attempt to get responses to feed your attention needs? Seriously. Is this all.The Chronicle can come up with? How about crossword puzzles? Or expanded horoscopes. ~v-i»r $L&M&*i^xi£3&^^ Tim Vogeler Junior, English In an ideal world, everyone should have the opportunity to obtain an education. I don't think so. I sympathize with the situation on a personal basis, but I don't believe in subsidizing behavior or actions that are in conflict with the law. No. They should be able to keep their personal lives undisturbed. Yes, unless the protests become unruly, disturbing or threatening. Free shirts and free food. . Watching SPORK dominate. Of course, I'm a campaign manager. Of course. I never miss an election. My voice matters! My shoes. I think it's . timeforanewpair. Definitely my girlfriend's virginity...if I had one. Lauren Lewis Freshman, Nursing Cassie Forsling Freshman, Nursing I think that out-ofstate tuition should be abolished. I don't even know what that means. If they don't infringe on anyone else's rights and do it on public property. No, they shouldn't. No. I don't think the house is a business place, so why would you protest there? Definitely the SPORK party. I hear they're going to blow our socks off. Looking forward to the new goals and ideas students have to make for Improving the U. I'm looking forward to new, fresh ideas. Yes, because it's always important to get informed and vote. No, because I live off-campus and didn't make it home in time. Nope. I didn't have the time, and I haven't done a very good job of keeping track of who was in the running. French fries. Ice cream or running. But I don't think my coach would be very \>. happy. . 0 Gum. I seriously think I'm addicted to it. I don't know. I think all alcoholic drinks belong in liquor stores only because it would be easier to regulate. I think if you don't want to drink alcohol, then don't look at it or buy it when you see it in a convenience store. As long as cashiers are checking IDs, then alcohol isn't a big concern. • ';.'.i Soda. No, I don't think it's that big of a deal. What is Boone's Farm? Nah—I'm fine with alcohol being sold at Smith's.. -••#. Comedy?? • I'm not sure how I feel about that. I see definite cons on principle, but definite pros as well. No. I'm in a state of disparity. •3 ' |
