Here we go again. It seems like every year the ivory tower dwellers on the Editorial board decide to attack Rep. Donnelson for his efforts to represent his constituents.

I would ask the esteemed board members: What part of illegal don't you understand? By encouraging these young illegal immigrants to remain illegally inside the United States to attend college here, you are setting them up for legal problems.

Because the DREAM act failed to pass, there is no legal means for an illegal alien to adjust their status once they reach the age of 18. Because of this, the higher education will go to waste, or worse, these students will have to choose to steal someone's identity in order to land a job.

It would be much better for the state to help these students return to their country of origin, giving them a chance to apply for a legal student visa and begin their higher education as honest adults on the correct side of the law. If the illegal doesn't have relatives to stay with, perhaps individuals or organizations could setup a location where these students to stay temporarily, perhaps volunteering in their homeland while they wait.

Neoconservatives focus on a civilized society requiring orders and classes. They simply cannot stand for the immigrant class coming in to their neighborhoods. It's just not civilized.

I am incredulous of Darren's comment that "the higher education will go to waste". If the institution is receiving tuition payments and if that student has achieved the academic standing to be admitted into that instituion, can it be a waste of time? Darren is assuming that a 22 or 23 year old might not decide to go back to his/her home country and make use of that education. Which, in the long run, would benefit all. It is true that a person brought here at a very young age, whose grasp of his parents language may be less than fluent, will not have the desire to return to the home country, but some children come here at older ages where their own tie to the parent country may be just as strong.
Regardless, I don't believe that an education can be a waste of anyone's time.

Compassion??? What about a US Citizen in another state who wants to attend college in Utah. Why should he/she pay more for their tuition than an illegal alien, that isn't compassionate either.

There's no doubt that the experience of completing higher education can be beneficial to an individual. If however, the primary purpose of higher education is to give the recipient training so they can qualify for a higher-paying job in the United States, then it would be a waste of resources for an illegal alien who is prohibited from working in any job.

The must have a different concept of a mom/pop store when they claim the total # of illegal aliens utilizing this benefit is small enough to fit inside of one. Records show there are currently 280 illegal aliens receiving tax-payer funded education for about $1.6 Million each semester. This number is dramatically higher than the 10..20 mentioned in the original House debate, and will continue to grow.

If Utah insists on continuing this policy, they should at least conform to Federal law and allow all students to pay in-state tuition, regardless of which state they're from. According to illegal alien proponents, the state makes money from the reduced illegal alien tuition, so why not open it up to everyone if it's truly a money maker?

Time to re-examine Christ's meaning of brothers and sisters.

Why don't the Catholics and the Mormons divy up the cost for their education and the other expenses of illegal aliens for jails and health care? That would show real compassion.

So Jesus got to pay in-state tuition at the University of Alexandria? What exactly is His Grace trying to say with his analogy?

Sounds like he's taking an opposite POV from the nasty conservative mindset Thomas and attempting to do the right thing.

Jesus NEVER broke the law or encouraged anyone else to do so. That is part of the irony of the crucifixion. Perhaps it is time for the Deseret Morning News, the Catholic, and LDS Churches to stand up and say, "We are in favor of illegal Immigration." As it is, they are primary enablers, along with the state and Federal Governments that have created this situation. Enablers always justify their actions in terms of "sympathy and compassion." Utah is in need of an "intervention" by the people.

The citizens don't need to feel guilty for opposing their church on this issue. They have a right to defend themselves from the taxes and other problems that the churches are not concerned with. This is not a moral issue, it is a law and order, as well as a sovereignty issue.

Glenn Donnelson does NOT represent everyone in his district!

Getting a job is NOT the primary reason to get a college education.

If a US citizen wants to move to Utah, spend 3 years at and graduate from a Utah high school, then they CAN qualify for in-state tuition.

Which is better--providing a college education at the cost of any other Utah student, not free, resulting in another intelligent, productive member of any society --- or denying education, thus creating someone who is not as equipped to be an asset to any country?

Get a clue, people!

An illegal alien gets this benefit in perpetuity regardless of their residency status. As long as they graduated from a Utah High school and remain illegal this in-state tuition benefit is theirs for the taking.

Here are some examples of other people who do NOT get this same benefit:

1) A Native Utahn who spent his entire life in the state, graduating from a Utah High school and then leaves for a certain amount of time (as little as two years) loses residency in the state and therefore has to pay out-of-state tuition until Utah residency is re-established. This could include people who leave the state for Missionary or Military service.

2) A legal immigrant comes to Utah through the International exchange program and spends 3 years here and graduates from High School. Because of her LEGAL status, they don't have a right to in-state tuition.

3) An American citizen living along the border in Idaho, attends and graduates from a Utah high school. Because of his Idaho state residency, he is barred from receiving in-state tuition benefits.

Besides the inability to work and direct violation of Federal low, this policy grants illegals rights above those of citizens.

Stewart claims Jesus never broke the law. Stewart's claim is misguided. The very reason the Jewish chief priests and elders feared Jesus and sought his crucifixion was because Jesus was a rebel rouser, a threat to Jewish civility and law. But Jesus, offered in his defense, "My kingdom is not of this world." In other words, the laws to which Jesus adhered were not the laws of civil Jewish society, but the laws of godliness, which laws are governed by love, compassion and charity. Why else would Paul write, "And now bideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity"?

If Stewart wants to cite Jesus to corroborate his or her uncharitable approach to our Mexican brothers and sisters in the United States, I fear he or she does so out of vitriol, not charity. And let us not forget, Utah was once Mexico until the United States waged a campaign of blood and war to take this land for its own "manifest destiny." In my mind, the European-Americans living in much of the West are the ones who are here illegally according to the laws of heaven and the law of charity.