Cultural deviance theories for immigrants exist because they feel breaking laws instead of conforming to laws are their only hope to survive. If surviving means stealing, prostitution, or illegal immigration, immigrants will take this risk to rise above social stigmas. Prostitution among Immigrant Routes According to the Electronic Reading Reserve, University of Phoenix, immigrants are willing to do whatever it takes to cross the border and start a new live. For
It said that “Vargas is incredibly brave to risk everything he has accomplished in this country in order tell the truth and to shine yet another but still much needed light on the pressing need for comprehensive immigration reform in this country” (O’Connor 388-389). This quote mean that because he is an immigrant doesn’t mean he stop reaching his American dream striving to what he want to become that’s why without people like him our country will be poorer. Esther Cepeda believes that Jose Vargas is in wrong doing for being an undocumented. It say in her essay “it’s almost impossible to not be deeply disturbed by self-promotion disguised as sacrifice, the blatant criminal activity and distasteful comparison to the experiences of African American in their struggle for equality” (Cepeda 391). This quote is trying to say is that there are Americans with the struggle that José Vargas has that didn’t get the same equality that he has.
Smokers Get a Raw Deal by Stanley S. Scott addresses the issue of whether there is discrimination against smokers in the United States. Scott believes that there is negative discrimination in the U.S. that infringes the rights of the citizens. One can find that although the writer believes he presents a secure case, he fails to understand the definition of “discrimination.” In the article, Scott essentially asks the readers to heed the ways in which laws, especially antismoking laws, are established. This could have been a good argument were it not for the bombardment of fallacies and incidents taken out of context. He only presents one premise, that laws facilitate the segregation between smokers and nonsmokers, and consequently allow organized crimes harassing smokers to occur.
Yet through further comparison, one can also find subtle differences between the two author’s views about assimilation. World War I caused a “nationalization of politics and economic life [which] served to heighten awareness of ethnic and racial difference and spurred demands for “Americanization”” . After President Wilson declared that some Americans born in foreign countries were guilty of “disloyalty”, the government “demanded that immigrants demonstrate their unwavering devotion to the United States”. Following this, many different immigrant groups, sometimes even despite being refused citizenship, encouraged members to register for the draft. This, in turn, resulted in a demand for a method of integration known as the ‘melting pot’ or “the process by which newcomers were supposed to merge their identity into existing American nationality”.
Unless you are going to offer a sort of “reward” for coming forward, this just wouldn’t work. So, after extensive research and going through many politicians ideas, but coming up with one “superpower” if you must, the solution is actually quite simple. Instead of amnesty, the deporting of all illegal immigrants, or making them all “legal”, why not offer a different view on immigration? To “adopt” immigration, without making them United States citizens. To have all of the illegal immigrants come forward, with incentive along with it.
By denying immigrants the means to arrive in the country legally, conservative immigration policies have created unmonitored channels of travel that are open not only to immigrants, but terrorists as well. Smuggling people across the border for a fee is a lucrative business, and the punishment if caught is less harsh than that for smuggling drugs. Ironically, this problem of their own making has only increased hatred for illegal immigrants, who are blamed for compromising border security. Typically, the conservative response has been to advocate for policies that would only treat the symptoms of the problem rather than solving it, by funneling money into increasing border patrols and constructing a wall along the border with Mexico. Somehow, this costly and wholly unnecessary program is preferable to the simple solution of allowing immigrants to come in legally, allowing us to better monitor and control who enters the
It is sometimes easier to have general categories rather trying to understand the complexities of the human life. This however goes against the ethos and ethical framework which professional counselling works within. The newspapers often stereotype for example illegal immigrants are made out to be bad people and that they should be sent home. I believe they should be seen as individual’s cases and their stories should be told as if the truth was seen and why they do what they do, it would be hard pushed to want to sent them home. Stereotyping is a very narrow minded
What we see and hear can really deceive us all. The immigrants came to America for a chance at a better life. They came to America to escape the harsh conditions of their native countries. To there surprise, immigrants got the exact opposite of what they thought America was going to be like. Politicians and entrepreneurs did what ever it took to better their lives.
According to the text, the USA has been trying to protect their territory against new terrorism attacks. Their methods were not supported by various business people such as Bill Gates as migration officers were “strip-searching” Indian engineers as part of their methods to protect against terrorism. The collocation “strip-search” does not exists in Spanish. It is necessary to replace the meaning of this collocation by translating it on a way to render the exact contextual meaning of the original, in such a way that both content and language are readily acceptable and comprehensible to the target readership. It would be a more natural and stylistic way and will give sense and flow to the text in general.
The ones that are against racial profiling have thought of an alternative solution, which is behavioral profiling. Behavioral profiling, hence the name, means to base the law enforcers' suspicion according to that person’s behavior instead of race. With this more effective system, it balances our protection from both terrorism and violating someone’s civil rights. One reasonable example on why we shouldn’t racial profile is the popular bomber in United Kingdom, Richard Reid, who doesn’t fit the profile that they have created for terrorists. Individuals have also made good arguments about the negative outcome that racial profiling might bring to our society.