Transcript Child Immigrants/Refugees from Central America

Child Immigrants/Refugees from
Central America
• Over 50,000 kids have come across the border
since October
• Why are these kids coming?
– 58% motivated by safety concerns
– Countries “racked with gang violence fueled by
drug trade”
– Smugglers tell families children will be reunited
with relatives living in the U.S.
– NPR – “What’s causing this immigration crisis?” 7/09/14
Exigence
• 50,000 kids since October, hundreds more
each day
• Dire conditions in Central America
Position 1: We have a duty to help
these children
• They are not “illegal immigrants,” they are refugees
• The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act
(2008) says that children from Central America must be
given a court hearing before action is taken; may take
up to 3 years but that’s “3 years with a long-lost
relative or three years away from extreme poverty and
violence.”
• U.S. Conference of Bishops and UN High Commissioner
for Refugees call for children to be treated as refugees.
Language choices
• Refugees
– A sympathetic term, appeal to pathos
• Protection from murder capital of the world
– Urgency, seriousness of problem; logos and pathos
• Fleeing persecution; Kids looking for a better life
– Implies/commonplace: “land of opportunity”
• We have a responsibility
– Ideology/commonplace that America is an immigrant
nation; we are one of the wealthiest nations in the world.
• U.S. Conference of Bishops, UN High Commissioner for
refugees
– Use of Christian ethos/professional ethos
Ideology
• Argued primarily from liberal/social justice
ideology
• Generally pro-immigration reform
Position 2: These people are both a danger
and an illegal burden and should be sent
home.
• They are not refugees; they are illegal
immigrants gaming the system
• This is an “invasion”
• They have been encouraged by Obama’s “lax
immigration policies” (Rep. Robert Goodlatte,
VA)
• We can’t afford them
• They are bringing diseases
Language choices
• Illegal immigrants
– Unsympathetic term; criminalizes people; pathos
• Diseases
– Appeal to fear/pathos
• Invasion
– Appeal to fear/pathos
• Lead to demise of country
– Appeal to fear/pathos
Language choice, cont’d.
• Obama can’t control the southern border
– Ad hominem attack; attack on Obama’s ethos/leadership
• It’s not our responsibility to solve everyone’s problems;
we can’t afford it; American taxpayers are already
under siege
– Appeal to logos; use of commonplace (the stressed, overtaxed American)
• They can’t speak English, are unskilled, and won’t be
able to compete in the marketplace
– Appeal to logos; appeal to pathos
– Implied commonplace: English is the language of the U.S.
Ideology
• Argued from primarily socially/fiscally
conservative ideology
• Appeal to anti-immigration reform
constituents
Ethical Frameworks
• Position 1:
– From Virtue-based; this is what a person of good
moral character would do
– From ethics of care; adults have a responsibility to
care for children
– Justice as fairness; these children are coming from
terrible circumstances, not their fault
Ethical Frameworks
• Position 2 - Applies ethical frameworks as they apply
to Americans, not the children. In this context they
see a primary responsibility to American citizens,
thus:
– From Utilitarian; rejecting child immigrants
protects Americans (economically, culturally, in
health terms)
– Duty-based; in a rejection of 2008 law and the
notion of term “refugee,” adherence to other
immigration laws becomes justification