What exactly is the argument for referring to illegal aliens as “undocumented” rather than “illegal”? I think I heard it once, and it seemed to make sense to me at the time, but I don’t remember it now.
I know this topic has been discussed before, but only as an adjunct to other threads, so the information is dilute and hard to find. Besides, it might be time to revisit the discussion, since the Bush administration is talking amnesty.
ICBWB, I always thought that “undocumented” was just a politically correct euphemism, sort of like ugly vs “aesthetically challenged”.
ShibbOleth pretty much nailed it. Pro-immigration groups object to the term “illegal alien” because it isn’t the aliens themselves who are illegal - merely their presence in the country. It seems to stigmatize the person more than “undocumented” does. The two terms do mean exactly the same thing and are used more or less interchangeably by the INS, although the latter is the more commonly used term.
what happened to “innocent until proven guilty”? The police arrest a guy who appears to be hispanic and has no documents to prove he is lawfully in this country. He may be “undocumented” but he is not “illegal” until a judge says so. He could well be legal and undocumented.
It’s the same as the police referring to “suspects” rather than criminals. The police can see you kill someone but you are still only a suspect until a court of law says you are a criminal.
Sailor ,
The groups that want people referred to as “undocumented” rather than “illegal” aren’t objecting because a particular person may not in fact be residing in the US illegally. They object to the phrase “illegal aliens” being used to describe a group that certainly exists,although it may not be certain whether a particular person belongs to the group.To use your example, the police are perfectly free to say there is a rapist in a particular area. Only when it gets to a specific person are words like “suspect” or “alleged” used.