My generation faces an interesting conundrum. It consists of passionate young people not afraid of dying for a cause, but rather afraid of not finding a cause worth dying for. The causes and dreams I believe in are not so different from those of my fellow youth, some of who happen to reside in this country illegally. They are just as American as I am. They have grown up in the same country that I have and should be allowed access to the full rights of an American citizen. In 2001, a revolution took place when the DREAM Act first appeared in the hallowed halls of Congress. The passing of the DREAM Act would allow illegal immigrant youth of moral candor and intellectual excellence to gain citizenship in a country whose principles should compel its people to recognize such valuable members of society. The egregious response that some display toward this necessary and prudent legislation should be cast aside, along with the anachronistic and often immoral arguments that often accompany dissent toward the DREAM Act.

A syncretic synthesis of the basic principles of the DREAM Act serve as a conduit for understanding why the proposed law is at once a reasonable and rational measure that will reap great benefits for this country and its people. The facts of the matter alone serve to explain that the DREAM Act is based in the interest of addressing and solving part of the problem that immigration has come to represent in this country, an issue that has far too long been allowed to rest on the back burner in a society satisfied by inaction and intolerance. The DREAM Act would apply to illegal immigrants who came to the United States before the age of 16, who have lived here for five or more years, who are of "good moral standing" (a term defined under Federal law that essentially denotes a lack of criminal record), and who either serve two years in the military or attend college for a minimum of two years. The immigration issue must be addressed, and I see no better way to do so than through the rewarding of talent and commitment to the country.

It must be reiterated that the DREAM Act would remunerate some of the best and the brightest Americans. It would not reward skulking offenders living on the fringes of the law or society. That incorrect interpretation of the DREAM Act can be put to rest with immediacy. I would not support a bill that was not discerning, that did not take into account myriad facets of the argument surrounding it, including the dissent. But the DREAM Act does. It is a proposal characterized by the patina of honor and integrity that it strives to protect for the immigrants who would stand to gain and in turn contribute to this great country.

The immigrants who stand to gain from the DREAM Act represent a vital part of the fabric of American society. Still, many of my peers are quick to point out that, "real" American citizens could stand to lose. But the accident of birth does not justify the harsh sanctions of my peers and their fears are unfounded regardless. In one case of misunderstanding, it must be known that the DREAM Act would not allow for qualifying immigrants to receive federal aid for college tuition or reduced on-state tuition rates. As a result, taxpayer dollars would be affected, but on a far more peripheral level than many realize. The greatest effects of the DREAM Act would have their greatest visible manifestations in the form of the promotion social good through the honorable practices of military service and college attendance.

The passing of the DREAM Act, which will soon be presented in a modified derivation in the California State legislature, and which will likely crop up once more on the Federal stage, does not represent the apotheosis of illegal immigrant law. My generation has much further to go, but the recent repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is a good sign for the future. I hope that a considerable part of my generation's legacy will include the promotion of the dreams of all, regardless of race, financial background or place of birth.