Thanks for explaining. Yours is one of the first articulations I've been able to understand regarding (a) == (b). Here's why I still see (b) as a sensible posi

Thanks for explaining. Yours is one of the first articulations I've been able to understand regarding (a) == (b). Here's why I still see (b) as a sensible position. (I'm sure some of my reasoning only seems valid if you share certain core ideological beliefs about virtue) : - Civic virtue in a democratic nation. It seems to me that a democracy relies on people accepting laws that they don't agree with, at least in most circumstances. The alternative (AFAICT) is that laws are merely suggestions for those inclined to act that way anyway. Or perhaps, laws are for other people, not oneself. (I'd agree that it's morally imperative to break certain laws, but I don't usually hear this distinction made regarding illegal immigration.) - Fairness to persons who aren't willing to break the law. By ignoring illegal immigration, we're basically rewarding people who ignore the law over those who are willing to await legal entry/residence. This includes would-be immigrants, legal employers, and legal job-seekers. - Communicable diseases. To the extent that the spread of communicable diseases can be reduced by imposing screening, vaccination, etc. at border crossings, illegal immigration burdens current residents with greater risk.