What do u guys think about this NEWS!!!!!

[Sheriff Uling 3]

why do those of you who think only USC's should have the privilege to sponsor relatives feel that way?

My simple answer is because we live in the US, and not the country of the PR.

Permanant residency is not US Citizenship. Being a PR is a form of restricted citizenship. Voting rights are restricted, certain jobs are restricted, and PRs may be deported (based upon certain criteria and this alone should be why sponsorship should not be granted). It does not seem logical to extend the priveledge of sponsorship to PRs. That priveledge should also be restricted. Of course, this is just my opinion and I'm not a legal guru, immigration lawyer, or scholar. Just a USC...

Cheers!!!

Sheriff Uling

***shrugs***

[AnneiyAndJacky 0]

yes I agree, if this happen. worst comes to worst. illegal immigrants will increased.

[homesick_american 1]

I think it's weird that PRs can sponsor relatives at all. PRs in the UK can't. I don't see that it's 'draconian' at all.

Thank you, I felt as though if I said that i would be seen as being insensitive. I agree

I also agree. Only USCs should be able to sponsor relatives. If a PR naturalizes into a USC, then they should be permitted to sponsor relatives. What do you think?

I don't agree with all the categories of relatives that are allowed to be sponsored by a USC; I think it's bizarre that you can come into the US, be naturalized, then apply for basically your ENTIRE IMMEDIATE FAMILY. Where else lets you do that?

why do those of you who think only USC's should have the privilege to sponsor relatives feel that way?

Same reason only USCs should get to vote.

yes I agree, if this happen. worst comes to worst. illegal immigrants will increased.

Oh, so we shouldn't do it because people might break the law? Pfffft. Maybe we should make murder legal too.

[Sheriff Uling 3]

...I think it's bizarre that you can come into the US, be naturalized, then apply for basically your ENTIRE IMMEDIATE FAMILY. Where else lets you do that?

Let me piggy-back on that. I also agree with you two exceptions. The first as I stated earlier that only USCs should be able to sponsor relatives. If a PR naturalizes into a USC, then they should be permitted to sponsor immediate relatives. The second is that PRs that naturalize into USCs should only be permitted to sponsor immediate relatives being spouses and children only.

Off topic but same subject with immigration. I also feel as that only educated or skilled laborers should be permitted to migrate to the US or at least put a cap on the number of non-skilled or uneducated immigrants that migrate here. The US is no longer a developing nation full of factory and/or labor entense employment during the boom of migration to the States. As a nation, we should have adjusted the immigration laws as the focus of our economic and labor structure evolved.

I agree that allowing PRs to migrate their entire families just does not settle well with me either. No matter how protracted the time is before relatives can migrate here through sponsorship.

Cheers!!!

Sheriff Uling

[LaL 418]

I don't agree with all the categories of relatives that are allowed to be sponsored by a USC; I think it's bizarre that you can come into the US, be naturalized, then apply for basically your ENTIRE IMMEDIATE FAMILY. Where else lets you do that?

but the topic is whether PR's should be allowed to petition for immediate families. Now you also think its bizarre for a NATURALIZED citizen to petition?

(btw Canada for one does allow PR's to sponsor their immediate relatives)

Edited April 21, 2007 by lal_brandow

[Fandango 1,439]

why do those of you who think only USC's should have the privilege to sponsor relatives feel that way?

My simple answer is because we live in the US, and not the country of the PR.

Permanant residency is not US Citizenship. Being a PR is a form of restricted citizenship. Voting rights are restricted, certain jobs are restricted, and PRs may be deported (based upon certain criteria and this alone should be why sponsorship should not be granted). It does not seem logical to extend the priveledge of sponsorship to PRs. That priveledge should also be restricted. Of course, this is just my opinion and I'm not a legal guru, immigration lawyer, or scholar. Just a USC...

Cheers!!!

Sheriff Uling

***shrugs***

agreed

yes I agree, if this happen. worst comes to worst. illegal immigrants will increased.

Oh, so we shouldn't do it because people might break the law? Pfffft. Maybe we should make murder legal too.

I was thinking the SAME THING when I read that statement, also quoted in the original article too.

[homesick_american 1]

I don't agree with all the categories of relatives that are allowed to be sponsored by a USC; I think it's bizarre that you can come into the US, be naturalized, then apply for basically your ENTIRE IMMEDIATE FAMILY. Where else lets you do that?

but the topic is whether PR's should be allowed to petition for immediate families. Now you also think its bizarre for a NATURALIZED citizen to petition?

(btw Canada for one does allow PR's to sponsor their immediate relatives)

Well, I think some people only naturalize so they can sponsor more family members. I think you should only be able to petition for spouses and minor children, personally.

[LaL 418]

I don't agree with all the categories of relatives that are allowed to be sponsored by a USC; I think it's bizarre that you can come into the US, be naturalized, then apply for basically your ENTIRE IMMEDIATE FAMILY. Where else lets you do that?

but the topic is whether PR's should be allowed to petition for immediate families. Now you also think its bizarre for a NATURALIZED citizen to petition?

(btw Canada for one does allow PR's to sponsor their immediate relatives)

Well, I think some people only naturalize so they can sponsor more family members. I think you should only be able to petition for spouses and minor children, personally.

...and some people only naturalize so they can vote, and some so they can collect benefits (the horrors!) etc, etc.

fact of the matter is, PR's ARE allowed to petition immediate family members (and those pesky naturalized ones too!), albeit years down the road, and i dont see that changing!

Edited April 21, 2007 by lal_brandow

[LookyWhatIFound 38]

If it wasn't for PRs being allowed to petition immediate relatives/spouse half the brain power that came to America wouldn't have. If you can't petition for your spouse why would a talented person want to come here and leave their wife/husband and possibly kids behind for the time period it takes to Naturalize?

[homesick_american 1]

...and some people only naturalize so they can vote, and some so they can collect benefits (the horrors!) etc, etc.

fact of the matter is, PR's ARE allowed to petition immediate family members (and those pesky naturalized ones too!), albeit years down the road, and i dont see that changing!

Well, let's put it this way...if it did change, I wouldn't complain.

If it wasn't for PRs being allowed to petition immediate relatives/spouse half the brain power that came to America wouldn't have. If you can't petition for your spouse why would a talented person want to come here and leave their wife/husband and possibly kids behind for the time period it takes to Naturalize?

Spouses and minor children are fine. Parents, adult siblings, adult children...I think that's going too far.

Think about it this way; if they didn't have the burden of processing all those visas, they'd get through the immediate relative (spouse and minor children) applications a lot more quickly.

[Dr_LHA 3]

I also agree. Only USCs should be able to sponsor relatives. If a PR naturalizes into a USC, then they should be permitted to sponsor relatives. What do you think?

I don't agree with this, but however I think only very close relatives should be eligible for Green Cards. I don't believe that adult children or siblings and in most cases parents should be able to get green cards. The sibling thing particularly annoys me. Just because I become a US citizen why would that give my brother the right to get a Green Card?

[Dr_LHA 3]

Note, I hadn't read homesick's post before posting mine. I should add that I strongly believe that Green Card holders should be able to get a immediate visa number for their spouses, and not have to wait to become US citizens.

[homesick_american 1]

Note, I hadn't read homesick's post before posting mine. I should add that I strongly believe that Green Card holders should be able to get a immediate visa number for their spouses, and not have to wait to become US citizens.

Yes, I agree with that. Spouses and minor children = good, everyone else = T.S.

[John & Annie 0]

I totally agree.

[akdiver 3]

Seems reasonable to me. Other than visa benefits due to marriage, I don't think relatives should get special treatment. Why should my wife's brother or parents get some benefit that they would not be entitled to if she didn't happen to be married to me? Makes no sense to me. While I do think Bush is a complete ###### moron, I can't say I disagree with this.

why do those of you who think only USC's should have the privilege to sponsor relatives feel that way?

I dunno...same reason why only citizens can vote, be on a jury, get a U.S. passport, etc.? Citizenship has its perks ya know.