Letters about illegals are not factual

Dear Editor,

Assumptions are made and presented as fact to support their position in each of the letters by Paula Sexton and S.A. Brasili printed in the Apr. 9 letters to the editor [section] regarding "No benefits for illegals."

If you want to argue against illegal immigration, all I ask is that you use facts. In the first letter, Ms. Sexton stated, "…learning the language of this country - English…" The only problem is that there is no official language in this country. Many attempts by the U.S. Congress to declare English as the official language of the U.S. have never passed. Therefore, take up the issue of learning the language with your congressperson.

She then goes on to say that we are "making things easier for them by not requiring them to learn the language." Exactly how is not requiring them to learn the language making it easier?

Lastly, she states, "You should not try to turn America into your native country." Who said anything about immigrants turning America into their native country? If anything, they are trying to turn America into their home country, not their native country.

In the second letter, S.A. Brasili makes even greater assertions with no basis in fact. Such as when he/she asks if you would want someone who violated an immigration law for neighbors. As if the violation of a victimless federal immigration law somehow means that they intend to victimize their neighbors. He/ she then states that immigrants are "adding to the massive overcrowding and expense of Chesterfield County schools," citing English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers are part of that expense. I (just like the school system) do not have statistics to indicate how many there are, but in my experience children of illegal immigrants are not the issue contributing to "massive overcrowding" in Chesterfield schools, particularly in the western area of the county which is more likely attributed to growth. With regard to the expense of ESL teachers, you consider teaching English an added expense, but it is ok to teach other languages, to include Spanish - now that is ironic.

The wildest of all assertions was his/her second to last bullet which alleged that "the rights of illegals trump those of hard-working Americans put out of jobs when emergency rooms go broke providing indigent care" is just plain ridiculous. This one sentence assumes (1) illegals are indigent (many citizens are indigent, and if gas prices keep rising, many more citizens will be indigent) (2) that indigent illegals will be in emergency rooms (3) that as a result, hospitals will go broke (4) that Americans will be put out of jobs at the broke hospital [and] (5) that all those put out of their jobs were hard-working. A chapter in Harry Potter is more realistic.

The scariest point made was the reference to a story about "two Virginia Beach teenage girls killed last spring in a car accident by drunk illegals," but what about the ones committed by citizens? Virginia had 347 deaths as a result of alcohol-related crashes in 2006. If you are going to have an issue, have an issue with drunk driving in general. Don't limit yourself to just the illegals.

By all means, if you want to be against illegal immigration, feel free (pun intended). Just be against it for legitimate reasons and not fictitious assumptions with no basis in fact, which are intended to use fear and manipulation to persuade others.

Guillermo B. Novo

Chesterfield