Read the excerpt from Immigrant Kids by Russell Freedman, and then answer the question.

The great majority of immigrants landed in New York City, at America’s busiest port. They never forgot their first glimpse of the Statue of Liberty.

Edward Corsi, who later became United States Commissioner of Immigration, was a ten-year-old Italian immigrant when he sailed into New York harbor in 1907:

My first impressions of the New World will always remain etched in my memory, particularly that hazy October morning when I first saw Ellis Island. The steamer Florida, fourteen days out of Naples, filled to capacity with 1600 natives of Italy, had weathered one of the worst storms in our captain’s memory; and glad we were, both children and grown-ups, to leave the open sea and come at last through the Narrows into the Bay . . .

Giuseppe and I held tightly to Stepfather’s hands, while Liberta and Helvetia clung to Mother. Passengers all about us were crowding against the rail. Jabbered conversations, sharp cries, laughs and cheers – a steadily rising din filled the air. Mothers and fathers lifted up babies so that they too could see, off to the left, the Statue of Liberty.

no,

explanation:

because they are likely to use their corrupted thought process to get what they want. not what is better for the another reason they shouldn't is since they abused their rights as a us citizen they should have certain rights stripped away from them as punishment, such as the right to vote. due to the lack of proper behavior exemplified   from their actions , it would be hard for people to trust them because of their criminal record.   either directly (in the case of a referendum or ballot initiative) or indirectly (by choosing lawmakers and law enforcers). in fact, we do have certain minimum, objective standards of responsibility and commitment to our laws that we require people to meet before they are given a role in the solemn enterprise of self-government. people who have committed serious crimes against their fellow citizens don’t meet those standards. and those crimes can include such “non-violent felonies” as, say, treason and espionage, or voter fraud and public corruption, white-collar crime and felonies merely “concerning drugs” — like trafficking in fentanyl-laced heroin and selling it to minors, for example. if you’re not willing to follow the law, then you should not have a role in making the law for everyone else.

11-32. the main character in the parable, the forgiving father, whose character remains constant throughout the story, is a picture of god. in telling the story, jesus identifies himself with god in his loving attitude to the lost. the younger son symbolizes the lost (the tax collectors and sinners of that day, luke 15: 1), and the elder brother represents the self-righteous (the pharisees and teachers of the law of that day, luke 15: 2). the major theme of this parable seems not to be so much the conversion of the sinner, as in the previous two parables of luke 15, but rather the restoration of a believer into fellowship with the father. in the first two parables, the owner went out to look for what was lost (luke 15: 1-10), whereas in this story the father waits and watches eagerly for his son's return. we see a progression through the three parables from the relationship of one in a hundred (luke 15: 1-7), to one in ten (luke 15: 8-10), to one in one (luke 15: 11-32), demonstrating god’s love for each individual and his personal attentiveness towards all humanity. we see in this story the graciousness of the father overshadowing the sinfulness of the son, as it is the memory of the father’s goodness that brings the prodigal son to repentance (romans 2: 4).

two factors or characteristics of a chapter that might make it difficult to read would be words i don't understand, or if i don't fully understand what's going on in the chapter. strategies i can use to get through the difficult material would be a dictionary, and re-reading previous chapters to get a better grasp of what the author is trying to say.