giving hard working illegal immigrants american citizenship

Again, my opponent avoids the topic and does not cover the topic at hand. My opponent has instead focused the entirety of this debate on semantics arguments. and off topic, pathos observations based on African-American slaves. First of I will again clarify this- The controversy with Rosa Parks was one where American citizens where being oppressed. When Rosa Parks broke the law, it was a right guaranteed to her to do so. The right to a peaceful protest. On the flip, ILLEGAL immigrants have no right to come to he U.S. with-out going through the proper means. And in doing so, lessen the opportunities for natural born, and naturalized citizens; Weaken the economy by not paying taxes; and promote an ease for human trafficking and Sex slavery for themselves. So with this now hopefully brazenly clarified, we can see my opponent's conclusion is baseless. As for my opponent's aboriginal argument, this was something we cannot change now. I admit my analysis on this point was off-base and inaccurate. for that I apologize, but through my opponent's example we see the awful effects of Illegal Immigration. Mass Genocide, and the loss of almost everything from the survivors of those left. As for your saying I've never traveled; first off that is incredibly irrelevant (I am very well traveled) and does nothing to further this contention. Most of these people who immigrate over here take a very long time to be naturalized, it doesn't happen overnight. They have the chance to study here in the states, where (just like every-one else) They make it, or break it based on their own effort. The quality of the foreign countries is not an issue, as they can (and do) get that information over here. Also being that much of my father's side is from Mexico, Spain, and Germany; I also understand this topic first hand. However it's really irrelevant in the scope of this kind of debate. After this point my opponent continues the trend of Pathos appeals, personal attacks and re-iteration of baseless claims. I feel at this point I've already refuted this so I won't waste any-one's time trying to re-has everything down here. Instead I just extend previous points. And so in closing I am sad to say there has been very little actual debate here. The first round has some good clash, but everything following consisted of baseless pathos claims from my opponent. Seeing that my opponent transformed this debate into an after school special on how hard illegal immigrants have it instead of providing us any kid of actual fodder to vote on; the debate must go the Con since I've actually carried the clash on in this debate. In the end, Illegal Immigrants are criminals who completely over-look the United state's immigration standards in order to do what is most expedient and beneficial to themselves. While they certainly mean no harm by it; innocent people do harbor this harm, and those who deserve no punishment are punished because of these people. Millions of people work hard to do many things every day. My opponent has not covered my arguments regarding a bank robber who works hard to rob a bank. Effort does not equate reason to make something legal, it's the lazy route to covering an issue. Vote Con. Promote justice, and protect the citizens of the United States.