Featured Letter: Disingenuous advocacy toward immigration serves no purpose

What was the point of Diana Gordon’s article about embracing immigrants? Few people are unwelcoming to immigrants and fewer still oppose immigration. 

But then I realized what she was really saying but did not have the courage to write: Anyone who gets to this country by hook or by crook, legally or otherwise, should be welcome. Of course, this opinion would have turned off most readers so it would remain unsaid by her and other hypocritical liberals.

If Ms. Gordon is for open borders, let her have the nerve to say so. Millions, perhaps tens or hundreds of millions, would strive mightily to make that trip, not just those along the southern border, and for reasons just as desperate and genuine.

This nation and its people have big hearts and open arms, which is just the opposite of what cynical critics believe. But that doesn’t mean that most don’t want some process in place for those who wish to emigrate here. If that process is violated there has to be a consequence; otherwise, there is no process and we have defaulted to having open borders.

She obviously doesn’t agree with Sen. Charles Schumer’s statement that “we take people from every different place and welcome them.”

“Taking” means we are in control and is not the same as being forced to take.

I am an immigrant and I struggled to learn English and become assimilated. I didn’t need her disingenuous advocacy nor those of phony politicians and celebrities who strive for votes and guilt relief.

Ted Sarian, Flanders

Top photo: Hispanic worshippers prepare to run from Greenport to Riverhead in 2013 to deliver a holy flame honoring Our Lady of Guadalupe, a popular religious symbol. (Credit: Paul Squire, file)