Week 2 Post 2

Arguing both sides of contentious topics is proving to be more difficult than I had originally believed. Especially when there exits more supporting evidence for the side of the argument that I disagree with. For my second paper I'm attempting to prove that the United States government should provide roughly ten million undocumented immigrants with a path to citizenship by ratifying immigrant amnesty legislation. This is something I believe to be true -- mainly because the idea that immigration authorities can somehow locate, detain, and deport millions of individuals seems totally ludicrous. For a number of reasons such action strikes me as a serious waste of time and money. However, a number of arguments for why we should not provide amnesty are quite convincing on paper. Because of this I have been thinking about switching up my statement and arguing against immigrant amnesty legislation. This weekend I have to go to Austin to help someone move. Revising and finishing this second paper by the deadline just became more of a challenge. The research paper due at the end of this five-week summer session has been floating around in the back of my mind. Immigration in the United States sounds like an appropriate subject. My only concern is that it may prove to be too broad an issue to adequately address within the page limitations of the assignment.