The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.

- Leviticus 19:34 (NASB)

I love how people like to focus on other Laws of the Old Testament but totally ignore this one.

Posted by: Baumann | February 29, 2008 3:37 PM

I love how people like to focus on other Laws of the Old Testament but totally ignore this one.

I love how people focus on the OT and NT Laws and ignore the Law of the land.

Posted by: aaron | February 29, 2008 5:11 PM

I love how people like Aaron...

And Watcher/Mark/Don Quixote...

think we should ignore the second great commandment (Matthew 22:39) in deference to the "law of the land."

Peace,

Posted by: Don | February 29, 2008 5:22 PM

It still amazes me how my people continue to follow the sensationalized fear of immigrants and foreigners which supersedes their value as people. I would add that it is important to include the policies of Homeland Security in any discussion of immigration in the US.

Posted by: Scott Lenger | February 29, 2008 5:36 PM

Just because you mock the idea of illegals being bad, doesn't mean it's not true.

Illegals are, by definition, criminals in the first place, and many of them do desperate things to try to avoid getting caught, including other crimes. Yeah, mmost just want a job and money. That's not a crime. But breaking into the country is.

This is no "fear of immigrants and foreigners", as you'd like like to demagogue it, it is reality. We MUST stop up our borders and control who comes in and who doesn't. There ARE people who, if they could, would detonate a nuclear bomb in every large American city.

Fortunately, they tend to be stymied by a number of factors, but when these people DO commit some large act of malice and cause millions to suffer because of it... will you still demagoguing the issue for political purposes, or will you set that aside and realize that we were right in the first place?

Posted by: The Watcher | February 29, 2008 6:03 PM

Watchdog, or whatever you hide behind:

The Bible requires us to love our neighbors. That does come before any duties as citizens, but it has nothing to do with border control or what our nation chooses to do.

I don't ask my neighbors what their residency status is before I would help them.

I have argued these points before on this forum. If you want to know what I think, click here: http://blog.beliefnet.com/godspolitics/immigration/

I'm not going to repeat myself for you here, now. I'm not wasting any more of my time on you.

Peace,

Posted by: Don | February 29, 2008 6:12 PM

The man calls for an end to the intolerable rhetoric, and yet some of you still go on! This is supposed to be a Christian blog!

If we worked at making God's world a better place to live in, people wouldn't have to come sreaming into our country. To imply that all the people who are here illegally are just here for the money is also false. You are perpetuating what he is asking you to stop (negative comments about a group of people).

Posted by: Janee | February 29, 2008 6:51 PM

The man calls for an end to the intolerable rhetoric, and yet some of you still go on! This is supposed to be a Christian blog!

Janee, please pardon me for being less than charitable here. You are exactly right.

Unfortunately, some just don't want to understand what Pastor Danley and the others here are saying. The letter of the law is more important than the spirit of Christ, apparently, in some people's minds. And it frustrates me.

Pastor Jeff, I almost wrote in response to "Watcher" that the laws in question are NOT "right and good", because they refuse to recognize the human needs behind the migration. But like I said, I've argued all these points before and really can't take the time to type them over again.

Blessings,

Dpm

Posted by: Don | February 29, 2008 7:01 PM

How appropriate that the lectionary scriptures for this Sunday point to the different ways that God evaluates persons against the shallowness of man's judgments of ones seemingly less.

PJ

Posted by: Pastor Jeff Staples | February 29, 2008 7:15 PM

Don;
Yes, but the OT is the story of the annointing of David -"The Lord looks on the heart"

Peace
PJ

Posted by: Pastor Jeff | February 29, 2008 8:05 PM

It isn't NEARLY the simple problem you make it out to be. There are no simple solutions to this extremely complex situation. But in order to find any solution at all, we need leaders who think far more deeply about these issues.

Where did I say anything was "simple"? Nowhere, of course.

But the ENTIRE premise of the original entry, and everything that follows is based on platitudes and simplistic moralizing.

Why? It's real easy to rip into "those right wingers" and call them names and so on. It's real easy to just say "love your neighbors", and have no answers, just criticism of everyone else.

Will people find their families torn apart if they sneak across the border, and some get caught and some not? Yes.

Will that cause hardship, pain, agony? yes.

Did they know that before they chose to break the law? Yes. Do I think we should reward these people with letting them stay here? Nope.

I think the whole family should be rounded up and sent back, together.

If you want to discuss conditions in Mexico, and central and south America, then fine. But these are separate issues, and you can't just say that it is immoral to have control over our borders.

You want to address why Mexico has so much poverty? Fine. Then do so. Suggest ideas about how to change it.

Same with all the other places that people come from to seek opportunity here. If you want to discuss what we can or should do there, great, let's do so.

I simply won't accept the fuzzy thinking that leads us to do nothing about why they come here, why we can't have national security, and then pretend we have spiritual superiority to the "other" political side.

Posted by: The Watcher | February 29, 2008 8:28 PM

It is not my opinion that there are people who wish to do this. The people who say they wish to do it are the ones you don't believe.

BTW, have you checked on the the fact that terrorists HAVE attempted to get through Mexico to the US?

Of course, none of this really matters to you, does it? You want to proclaim it "immoral" to enforce immigration law for some political purpose. To what end, I cannot understand. Certainly, you're not upholding law. Certainly, you offer no solutions. Certainly, you cannot believe we actually benefit from being flooded with people who do not speak our language, do not know the laws, lack the basic skills needed to be functional in our society, but yet make use of our charity and our public services more heavily than any other group of people.

The borders need to be controlled. Of this, there CAN BE NO DISAGREEMENT AMONG INTELLIGENT PEOPLE.

Now, if your argument is made from the standpoitn of dealing with the situation they seek to leave... Perhaps you should ADDRESS THAT, instead of making absolute absurd arguments about how we should run our country.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 1, 2008 1:48 AM

From a distance - half a globe away (12 hour time shift), it would seem that the so called illegal immigrant seems to be a key component of the economic system. A means of suppling labour at very low cost. To do all of those lousy jobs no one else will do. If you need the labour, treat it properly.

In some respects, slavery was better for people. If not fed, housed and looked after, slaves are useless. Yet today do not have to buy, they just come.

Hash – I am. We have had similar stuff going on here with our last government exploiting it politically. Cost was disproportional to the size of the problem, and caused huge suffering to children and innocent adults caught up in the system. Many of us were shamed deeply. Not easy, not nice

If you don't need the labour, send it home rapidly and humanely. However consider why so many want to come. Serious questions need answering re the consequences of the long term management of that part of the world. Globalization bites both ways.

There have been stories here of the hazards and hardships of children / teenagers attempting to travel North into US to be reunited with their families. Not a good picture. Reminds me of the White Russian refugees my father met in Shanghai in the late 1940’s who had walked across China during WW2 to find some where better.

What would 25% of the monies invested in war this year do to improve the economies from where your immigrants are coming from? Would it be a poorer investment in security?

Posted by: John, Aust. | March 1, 2008 5:30 AM

What did I say that you didn't hear, or read? Secure the border. Verify all who enter.
It is your call for all to go home that is the problem. That you ignore this leaves you looking like just a mean spirited xenophobe.
If labor is legal the lower wages they earn will rise. It is the keeping of these folks in the dark and treating them as John said like slaves that frustrates all solutions. Their illegality is part of the problem. Making them "more illegal" will not solve it.
NONE of your solutions are going to happen. ALL current attempts to implement such strategies do so at the expense of our national character.
If these statement seem to you to somehow be politically agended and not just a call for the honest and humane treatment of people I feel sorry for you.

Posted by: wayne | March 1, 2008 9:42 AM

Wayne...

Your contention is that we should pretend to have border security, and everyone who gets here gets to stay? How absurd!

I don't actually CARE if you think I "look" some particular way for saying that we should physically close off our borders and start deporting ALL illegals. Sometimes you actually have to do the proper thing, not just feel wishy washy.

You see, the problem I have with the weasel words used by the original article, and further by other posters about "treating everyone with dignity". It's just a way of NOT saying "let everyone stay" while wanting that reality.

Why? Because the first person you go to return, they will object (and EVERY other person as well) that the "with dignity" means you can't send them back to (insert favorite mental image words here), so we have to keep them. I understand dishonesty, I've seen it all before. You want to SAY you are for "controlling the border" and "immigration control", but just have weasel word policies so that in reality, we're just open to all.

I just happen to believe in "truth in reality", where yes, I think we should close the borders, and start the process of finding and removing EVERY illegal. Period. Those breaking the law might just reconsider and leave on their own terms.

Where's my free pass for committing crimes and getting rewarded by the country for it? What, you won't give it to me, but you'll give it to someone who deliberately does? Forget that nonsense. They GO HOME.

And once Mexico realizes that it cannot simply have an unofficial policy of exporting it's poor to the US, perhaps Mexico might actually start acting responsibly. However, as it is now, Mexico behaves as if the poor are OUR responsibility, and all they have to do is look the other way.

Seriously, Mexico is a country full of possibility. It has oil wealth, massive human capital, and LOTS of investment attraction.

So why so many poor?

Why will NOBODY answer that question, and just argue they're supposed to wreak havoc here?

Our sheriff once publicly stated that most arrests, most crimes, most jailed people were illegals. He got excoriated for doing so. But it's true. Our legal and law enforcement systems here are taxed beyond their capacity, mostly due to criminal acts committed by illegals. Yet, here you are, saying we gotta let them in, and keep them all.

It serves the good of nobody. Especially NOT legal immigrants, who find their good name besmirched by the illegals.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 1, 2008 10:54 AM

Doyle, please keep in mind that the laws in question are civil--not criminal--laws. People get bent out of shape over the term "illegal," which is one reason why I don't use it, but undocumented immigrants by and large aren't criminals. They are desperately poor people trying to feed their families.

The immigration authorities themselves don't use "illegal." They uses the term "undocumented," which is more accurate and less pejorative. It's the media (through the Associated Press style guide) that insists on using the term "illegal."

At any rate, Doyle, I would rather be an "aider and abetter" than disobey Christ's command to have compassion on my neighbor in need. Remember how Jesus answered the question, "Who is my neighbor?" (Luke 10:25-37, emphasis on the last two verses).

Peace,

Posted by: Don | March 1, 2008 12:00 PM

At any rate, Doyle, I would rather be an "aider and abetter" than disobey Christ's command to have compassion on my neighbor in need. Remember how Jesus answered the question, "Who is my neighbor?" (Luke 10:25-37, emphasis on the last two verses).Peace, Posted by: Don

Don, I appreciate your defense of undocumented immigrants. Unfortunately, those who harbor hatred and bigotry in their hearts will never be convinced no matter what reasoned arguments you put forth.

Jim

Posted by: JamesMartin | March 1, 2008 12:29 PM

think we should ignore the second great commandment (Matthew 22:39) in deference to the "law of the land."

Peace,

Posted by: Don

Only when you are giving the translation for how we should obey it. Or is this another Karl Rove trick ?

Posted by: Mick | March 1, 2008 1:16 PM

"But maybe if we start with some compassion and understanding of their situation, maybe then we could find solutions that are viable"

Posted by: squeaky

squeaky it is you I find not examing all aspects of this . Because some of what you are saying is all so true , but you neglect why the law is in place . Some call it an unjust law .

Should not people who move in to this country be screened ? I find that at least one reason not to have immigration allowed to sneak in .

How about the people families who are waiting legally , their loved ones are in other countries in Africa , middle east , Europe , Asia , and can not come here because they are on a waiting list . Why are those people not spoken up for ? You believe in only help the suffering in front of you ? That you have a weight and balance measurement that says , those on our border get in illegally , those in Turkey wait. Why is it fair they wait and defend those who sneak in .
I am asking what is hard to answer , if you can let me know , there is so much in this world that appears unfair to me .

What about the ones who do sneak in to do evil , steal , drugs , etc . When you have illegal immigration , that is more boundto happen . In fact some neigborhoods have been taken over by gangs .

And to make myself a hypocrit , I have and will most likely again help an illegal immigrint , because need and suffering is something I detest and hate .

But unlike Saint Don ,
the wisdom of Christ are things that have been given to me by Grace , not something to use in a debate like this . To say that that immigration laws should be broken , means anyone can brake them , not just the ones Don considers worthy .
Unless you think your Talking for God here .

I do know one thing , we need to make sure the people coming here are law abiding citizens , have an income and able to contribute to our society . Becasue the immigrints who come here deserve to have neigbborhoods like that , say that again because its very important , immigration policy needs to be enforced so the immigrints living here are safer and live in safer neigborhoods.

I believe in strong and safe neigborhoods . ButI am a conservative Christian , so I am sure their is racial hatred and a misunderstanding of scriptures involved ?

Posted by: Mick | March 1, 2008 1:51 PM

Being a conserative christian does not give us a heart of stone,like our worldly counter-parts. I believe the border should be closed,and the illegels who are here would apply for citizenship. For many years Americans reaped the benefit of cheap labor. Our new homes,lawn care ,maid service,farming etc. Today corporations are stiil making billions from cheap labors. Yes I believes all laws should be kept,including human rights.

Posted by: LJ | March 1, 2008 2:32 PM

Only when you are giving the translation for how we should obey it. Or is this another Karl Rove trick ?\

But unlike Saint Don , ... To say that that immigration laws should be broken , means anyone can brake them , not just the ones Don considers worthy . Unless you think your Talking for God here .

Mick--

You are starting to sound like Mark/Watcher--you're putting words in my mouth. You are also becoming quite insulting.

When did I the laws should be broken? I never said that! I only said I wouldn't ask anyone about his/her legal status before treating him/her as a neighbor. That's what Christ commanded, isn't it?

Let me say it again. I'm not for breaking laws! I believe the borders should be protected. I just don't believe any of that should be done at the expense of families. And I think the immigration laws need to be reformed so the border can be secured.

And another thing--undocumented immigrants don't want to "sneak in." They would prefer to enter legally. And they would prefer to do all that they do above board, not in secret. But they are trapped. Our immigration laws won't let them "stand in line." For most of them, there is no line they can stand in. Most have no legal avenue to apply for residency here.

If you were one of them and your kids were starving, what would you do? Please try to imagine--TRY to imagine--what life is like for them before you go off pontificating about how they sneak in, how they displace those who are trying to enter by legal channels, how they're all gang members, how they're taking over neighborhoods, how they're not integrating, etc.

Empathy and compassion, not legalism, are what Jesus means by "love your neighbor." One doesn't have to be a saint or be able to talk for God to recognize this. It's right there in the Gospels for anyone to read.

Peace,

Posted by: Don | March 1, 2008 2:47 PM

I am on a laptop, which sometimes drops a few keystrokes now and then...

Above I started a sentence, and lost it and restarted, and in the end, it got garbled. It should say "Respect for the law does trump "good intentions"... and in my second writing, I seriously messed it over.

Ahh, as they say, the joys of a randonmly jumping cursor :)

I have three laptops, and they all do this from time to time, and I have no idea why or how to fix it.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 1, 2008 4:14 PM

One last thing. NOBODY has been "denied a voice".

There are more advocates for the illegals than we could possibly need. And they range from the "we must exploit their labor" to the "they are our salvation" mumbo jumbo. And even the "borders are immoral, and so is securiing them". I can't think of any viewpoint which is ignored in our public discussions.

The fact that they have chosen to put themselves at risk for serious family disruption, or personal loss is not lost on anyone, I hope. It seems to me we can hardly be blamed for those choices.

Men who are the providers, and commit a crime and go to jail... what of the people left behind? Do we run around moaning that criminal laws are unjust because it left the family destitute? No, we attempt to deal with them as best we can. This situation is no different. The risks were chosen, and when the consequences arrive, how can we declare the law immoral? All we can do is work to deal with the results in a compassionate way.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 1, 2008 5:10 PM

"The abject poverty in Mexico along the border was brought about by NAFTA. Free trade is not, of course, free."

The poverty existed before NAFTA. Let's be realistic. Further, the inequity and is brought about not by free trade, but by ridiculous farm subsidies and the like.

Farm policy in this country is guided by this antique notion of the wholesome family farmer, who is held up as the shining example of some paradigm that people wish existed. It is ludicrous, and I wish Sojo were a bit more vocal in speaking against it.

That said, the problem with withdrawing the subsidies is that you DO leave family farmers in the lurch. Farm and equipment prices are predicated on the inflated value derived, in part by subsidies. If you take away the subsidies, you leave existing farmers to take a loss when they never really experienced the gain.

This is all off topic, but it goes to show how complicated the scenario is.

Posted by: kevin s. | March 1, 2008 5:41 PM

It would take too much tax money to start deporting illegals?

Are you seriously saying this, or just some kind of rhetorical device? Because that doesn't hold water. That's one of the few things the federal government is SUPPOSED to do. And the budgets for immigration control are so small compared to the rest of what the federal government spends, that could quadruple it with NO statistical impact on our national budget.

Certainly, there's no reason we'd need to raise taxes to do this. The money is there. Washington DC has at least 3 times as much of our money as it ought to. Congress simply needs to reprioritize.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 1, 2008 6:19 PM

And not to mention the harm the deportations are causing to families, businesses, and local economies.

Or the harm illegals are putting on local economies.

Posted by: aaron | March 1, 2008 8:09 PM

Baumann... Not so fast. This isn't about justifying ignoring the nation's laws. Nor is it about finding a rhetorical defense for wholesale national destruction, by declaring that we must just open the floodgates and let everyone who wants in rush in and demand to be taken care of.

There's more to our laws than just a gray 'everyone is equal, therefore no laws may keep anyone out' bit of rhetorical gibberish. There IS also a very solidly written in standard about defending a free people from harm.

We can't just say "we love everyone, and if say it, they will all be nice". Won't happen. And we know already that lots of criminals ARE coming across the borders. Like our local sheriff said... MOST of the crimes now committed in my county are done by illegals. And our law enforcement are so busy that they can't properly respond to anything but the most grave of emergencies, and sometimes not even then.

These are people who should NOT be here. And being a Christian doesn't change that. It's just a fact.

We can and should debate the nature of who we allow entrance. Just as we should about who enters our schools, homes, property, etc. You don't post a sign at your home that says "Everyone welcome, for any purpose, any time. I give everyone eveyrthing they want." Your obligation to protect your family would soon be compromised by them being dead.

If you REALLY think we should have no borders, no controls, no limits on who can enter, then feel free to say it that way, without hiding behind sophistry. Let's see how that notion stacks up against reality. It would take no time at all for you to recognize the absurdity of your own feigned convictions. YOU would be the first to start moving into a gated, locked community.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 1, 2008 10:01 PM

Looking to the undocumented workers to be considerate to others, which I presume to mean, slink quietly away into the night, and leave the U.S. suggests that Wake Up! still doesn't understand why the undocumented workers come to the U.S. Remember that U.S. businesses WANT THEM! It's not the Mexican workers who cause the lack of jobs for Americans; it's the businesses who want the Mexicans because they will work under intolerable conditions.

Part of the problem is that the U.S. acts as if it were still the richest country in the world. In fact, it's so deeply indebted to China, in order to pay the bills for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and providing arms to other countries, that if China called in the debt, we would have a situation much worse than a recession.

Posted by: bren | March 2, 2008 12:38 AM

At some point in time OUR ancestors came to the this piece of land. (That is with the exception of the original people of what we call the UNITED States of America.) Those people found it was very far away and took a great decision to come here. As a new nation we were very accepting of anyone. We were known as the "melting pot" of the world. As time passed, "Representives" in Congress decided that we needed to close the borders. WHY??

People world-wide want to come to the U.S. Why? Just look around you. Are you comfortable? Is your electicity on? Do you have clean "running water"? Do you know where you are going to sleep tonight? Can you express your opinion openly and without a concern of being arrested for your thoughts, your beliefs, YOUR sexuality? HUH? HUH? Do you know that in againest the law to be a homosexual? I mean, 10 years in prison if you live in Nigeria.

A great deal of people only dream at night to come here. They know they will never make it. They want to come here, but we, UM, CONGRESS, have put sanctions and limits for someone to immigrate here. Those sanctions were originally set to stop the Irish. That was when we first started imposing such laws. There was a potato famine in Ireland. We decided not to allow "those" people. Is your last name O'Conner? O'Reilly? Well, did your family stop at Ellis Island???

Now, you must must have a steady income. As a Mexican citizen you must be able to show at least $10,000 in the bank, and over a period of time. Meaning, I can not send a friend in Mexico $10,000 at once so he can come here. Allex is still saving. He wants to come here. But it will take him 2-3 years to save the money. Is that right? He is a very stable person. Speaks English fluently. Makes good money at his job, but it will take 3 years to save enough money to come here. Or should he sneek acoss the border?

Someone is crossing the border because they know they will never meet those standards, I say the bar is set too high. Would you pay $3000 or more to a "coyote" to be in the back of a truck to travel to the United States? (many years worth of wages) Would you try to cross the border into Arizona when it is 115 degrees? NO water that you know of? Scared to death that you are going to be caught? Many do. Would you try to "escape" to a new life? (I thank God that churches in the Southern part of AZ provide water and shelter to those who try.)

If do not want someone who was a criminal in Mexico, that has not not faced Mexican law coming to the U.S. Of course I agree, they should be deported to face the crimes they committed.

However, those who seek a better life for themselves and their families should be welcomed with open arms. Why do you want to make it so hard??

I need to address certain posts........

Watcher... If you would THINK about what you are saying before posting you would not "drop keystokes"... YOUR laptop is not to blame.. Sorry, it is "user error". Running 3 laptops at the same time???????? LOL Maybe you should concentrate one thing at a time, like God and Jesus' word, not how YOU have manipulated those words to fit your "belief". Take a break. Believe..

Peace, LOVE, Harmony as us being Human, HOPE, Prayers, and Forgiveness for our trespasses..

Bauman...

I try to have compassion to those who do not pick up the true meaning of the Cross. WE are in the Holy Season...

Love, Compassion, and the belief in the betterment of the the Common Good that is the goal of the human race. Our lives were meant to be just that. Yours, and my belief in God, Jesus, or any other thought, does not matter as long as we be we csre for each.

Posted by: Richard Rowe | March 2, 2008 1:52 AM

Being a conserative christian does not give us a heart of stone,like our worldly counter-parts. I believe the border should be closed,and the illegels who are here would apply for citizenship. For many years Americans reaped the benefit of cheap labor. Our new homes,lawn care ,maid service,farming etc. Today corporations are stiil making billions from cheap labors. Yes I believes all laws should be kept,including human rights. Posted by: LJ

Agreed. And some of the sterner posts are not in any way addressed to you. You possess something that is needed in the debate- compassion.

But when certain individuals here advocate mass deportation without any regard to the humanitarian disaster that that would entail, they are given short shrift- and rightfully so.

And what about those who don't harbor hatred and bigotry in their hearts and yet still disagree with you on the immigration issue, will no reasoned arguments reach your ears?Posted by: aaron

You have presented a hypothetical that in no way has happened. No need to further address it.

Posted by: JamesMartin | March 2, 2008 7:26 AM

The church should have no political view as it pertains to immigration. The only view that can be substantiated and guided by the Spirit must always be redemptive. That is God's heart, that is God's view.

Do not harvest the corners of your fields so the hungry stranger (immigrant) may eat.

Posted by: Rick Frueh | March 2, 2008 12:00 PM

As to "illegals" and the whole immigraion issue we might recall that our ancestors -- the Spanish, the Portuguese, the English, the Dutch, the French -- came to the Americas, uninvited, to a land where millions of inhabitants lived, and had lived, for countless ages, pretty much in harmony with their environment.

These newcomers with their "advanced" technology and their European notions of land and its economy ignored, displaced, enslaved, and killed the natives while in the whole process ravaging and dispoiling the land and its resources.

These "Christian" European forbears of ours decided in the late 19th century that things were getting a bit crowded so they began enacting laws limiting immigration, first for undesirables, then turning to racial discrimination against the Chinese. Not until the early 20th century, however, were there in place large scale, serious restsrictions.

Whatever was "Christian" about those folks it had virtually nothing to do with treatment of their fellow man; instead it was a matter of self-interest with the "haves" closing the gates to the "have-nots". Nothing has changed.

Posted by: George De Vries, Jr. | March 2, 2008 4:42 PM

It is hard to prove that the undocumented caused someone to lose their job. Perhaps the job would have been lost anyway when the employer saw lower wage costs overseas. This could also be called a red herring Kevin.
History has always proved that immigration has helped this country. It has never, ever been proven by hindsight to have been in anyway something to be afraid of. There are some differences between the past and now, The first is that more people have been made criminal by our laws. The very same kinds of people came here in the past, in very much the same way, no paper work, no long lines, just the will to come and the determination to work hard. The other difference is that without all these laws half of those who came went back after finding that the USA wasn't their dream land and that they missed their homes and their culture. Today our laws insure that even those who have not been able to find their dream or who only needed to come for a short time, stay.

Calling for an end to the intolerable rhetoric and for answers that have a chance of working is the only way we can get around this problem.

The "bigotry card" is only bandied about because of the senseless spreading of hate and fear and the carelessness of those who do so. Stop talking hate, promoting hate, and defending hate and people will stop the thinking you are what you act like. History is on the side of those who are trying to get you to do so.
If twelve million are already here I fail to see the cost to us of allowing for those who have done no wrong to stay, especially if we make them pay fines for their coming without documentation.
Many places like New Jersey and Arizona are finding what the true costs are for their various xenophobic "legal" reactions to this problem. It is beginning to look like all those cities and states that are following this course have just cut their own noses off.

Posted by: wayne | March 2, 2008 7:34 PM

When we try and interject Christianity into the affairs of a fallen government we find ourselves caught in a conundrum. The unsaved portion of America will in the future take care of immigration, but in the meantime we must view it as God bringing the fields to us, nothing more and certainly nothing less.

We as followers of Christ cannot be defined in the "personally inconvenient" realm when it comes to sinners for whom Christ died. I am waiting for us as Christians who live in America to prove that because of these immigrants we couldn't go out to eat for one entire year!

When our pool pump breaks and we cannot afford to fix it we can murmer about those immigrants. Or when there is no money for cable television or going to a ball game or being deprived of a vacation. See, these immigrants are cramping our style.

Leave the politics to Satan and put on the redemptive eyes of the Spirit. I know illegal immigrants who have come to Christ here in America who perhaps would never known the gosple outside Catholicism otherwise. Redeeming the time for the days are evil.

Will we westernized believers ever be content? Not if we continue to listen to politicians and not the Spirit.

Posted by: Rick Frueh | March 2, 2008 7:57 PM

Anyone with a conscience, it seems to me, would know it is very hard to be in America and not be complicit, with human rights abuse- be it with paying taxes for the School of Americas to exist, etc.
So, we must let the dictates of our conscience be our rule. The law says keep ' em' out.
Well, if her/his ( watcher's) conscience is not an issue , she must be okay with complicity. I, for one, see the mandates to ' feed the hungry, love my neighbor'.. on and on.
The ' law of the land' in Jesus time was to kill all the first born. I am glad Joseph had a conscience. As a layperson, the lithmus ( sp) test asks me: does it fulfill the scriptural injunctions of isaiah 58, or does it just seem to be a partyproject.
The Minute men in chicago are definitely driven by confused individuals.
Per all, i trust all of us are in our own areas, trying to live our consciences, which might lead us where we might to be in the same uncomfort that these 'illegals' find themselves. ( ie. not living for ourselves but working to provide more just living for our neighbors).

trusting --- that picking up our cross sometimes takes us out of our heads and into the byways.( talking to myself).. not so eloquently. enjoyed reading this;thanks, as sometimes seems like pastors have to go with the tithers' viewpoints, so keep up the good faith,
=-)

Posted by: susan | March 2, 2008 11:50 PM

"The "bigotry card" is only bandied about because of the senseless spreading of hate and fear and the carelessness of those who do so."

No, it is a substitute for the demeanor that there can be reasonable differences of opinions regarding this issue. Even I seldom engage in the immigration debates here because it's always "Hitler" this and "racist" that. There is no discussion to be had.

Posted by: kevin s. | March 3, 2008 9:09 AM

"No, it is a substitute for the demeanor that there can be reasonable differences of opinions regarding this issue." Kevin S.

You have in the past advocated policies that would result in the separation of US citizen children from their undocumented parents or in the alternative, their forced exile from this country as they follow their parents' forced exit from the United States. As long as you advocate such inhumane policies, no dialog or compromise with you should or will be pursued. If it gets you angry that people call you out on your policies so be it. You play the innocent offended party when your position is both reprehensible and offensive.

Posted by: JamesMartinq | March 3, 2008 10:49 AM

"If it gets you angry that people call you out on your policies so be it. You play the innocent offended party when your position is both reprehensible and offensive."

It doesn't get me angry at all. I simply find myself surprised that, given that this is such a multi-layered issue, things are so black and white here. Even my most progressive friends (politically and theologically) don't reduce illegal immigration stances to a referendum on hate.

Posted by: kevin s. | March 3, 2008 11:22 AM

If memory serves, it was I who asked you for the justification of your allegation that the border laws are moral and just. I asked for your basis in Scripture that would support the assertion that the laws are just. You are the one who is setting the parameters and I am questioning your "platitudes". All just law is religious at it's core. The rest are administrative applications which are subject to the whim of the ruler(s). Our policies should be to invest more money in Immigration "services" and less in "enforcement" against "criminals". It is not my place to delineate the specifics of implementation. That would be presumptuous and arrogant on my part. I do feel that I should speak to the general direction and tenor of the conversation. We obviously disagree with whether we should be open to others coming to our nation. You seem to believe that immigrants need to wait in a 10 year line to get the honor to be US citizens. I think we are making a big mistake by not welcoming them with only minimal restrictions and partnering with those who want to join our nation.

"All just law is religius at its core."??? I could not disagree more. "Religious" implies doctrine, dogma, creed, philosophy, faith.

Those things are not necessarily "holy", nor right, nor true. Plenty of "religious" doctrine is wrong. It must be. Look at the vast disagreements among people and churches and denominations.

So, when I say that border control is just and good, I say so because it satisfies my conscience. I cannot, in good conscience, advocate as you do, uncontrolled border flow, or as someone else advocated, "the free flow of labor". I am my nation's keeper, I have a duty to it, as well. And it is not well served by such policies.

If tomorrow I were given the winning lottery ticket for what is now about 180 million dollar prize, and I cashed it, I would STILL not set my children up for life. I would not give them 'every good thing'. I would make them struggle and sweat and find their own way in the world. Why? Because that struggle is what builds character. And character is what makes them strong and resilient. And it gives them better judgement, too.

Why do I not believe in open immigration or open flow of labor? For one, WE DO NOT NEED IT. We don't need unlimited job seekers.

And, I don't believe in this "partnering" fallacy. There is no partnering going on. I dont' want people here unless they actualy WANT to be Americans. And that they want it bad enough to stand in line a while. Even a few years. For like my children, they will NOT value it if it's easy. Instead, they will come here to take a job... for the money...and not care about their community, their neighborhood, their schools, their state, city, county, or anything.

They are 'users' and they come here to use and to take.

I know, I see it consistently. I live in an area with a huge population of the very people we're discussing. We have sizeable influx of both Asian and Mexican immigrants. The ones that came here legally... tend to be good neighbors and citizens. They share common goals and interests with the rest of us. They are... my neighbors.

Those who come here illegally... Have no such interest. They steal, they commit crime, they are all about what they can get to take, and care not about what they do to the place they are in.

And yes, I DO think I have a duty to my neighbors - ALL OF THEM - be they recent immigrant or not (I'm only 2nd generation American born myself). I was the first generation of the family to learn english first.

So you ask me to justify this all from Scripture? I don't think it needs to be. Scripture recognizes these things extra-scripturally exist. They are not doctrine. Scripture recognizes who is a "neighbor" and who is not. Who is an alien, and who is not.

But more importantly, Scripture is to guide MY relationship and how I personally treat others I come in contact with.

Yet, I can say, with clear conscience, that I would, if I had to, resort to killing someone to save my family's lives or life.

Your assertion that Scripture requires us to be blind to judgement makes no sense to me. This naive "uniformity of acceptance" is not scriptural in any way. We were given judgement about how to do things, and how to protect ourselves, our family, our neighbors, our nation. Pretending we cannot do that is an insult.

I've been through this entire debate about how we recognize that everyone is a child of God, yet protect ourselves. We recently voted to adopt a policy in our church that we WOULD allow even convicted child molesters to worship with us. Most of the leadership in our church was opposed to this policy. I publicly stated that if this were not adopted, I would take my membership elsewhere.

We voted that we could accept that even a convicted child molester could worship with us. Given that a responsible adult was there to witness his or her every action from the moment of arrival on campus to the moment of departure. Even bathroom visits.

To give security to those who may fear, to provide protection from false accusation by those less charitable. To provide motivation to not succumb to temptation. The percent of child molesters that slide into recividism... almost 100.

You see, I DO understand the "all are a child of God", but I also recognize in this world, sometimes I must protect my neighbor and the common good of all.

This requires cold, solid, thoughtful judgement, carefully applied reasoning and logic. Not just an emotional reaction to perceived hardship. And your reaction appears to be just that, which is why I called it "platitude driven".

Why? Because you mistake who wants to "join our nation". The vast majority who come here do not want to "join our nation". They want to have the blessings built by the blood, sweat, and tears of those patriots before us... but fly their own flag, speak their own language, and see themselves as something else first, and just living here for the monetary value of it.

If you want to come here and enjoy the fruits of this nation, I want you have to view it as YOUR nation, or go away. But if you want to come here and adopt it as your new home and your new country, as most of our forefathers did, then great. And you better have demonstrated some commitment to that beforehand.

As you see, it IS "all about my neighbor". And it has NOTHING to do with racism or xenophobia.

Those are just the rhetorical flourishes thought up to stifle the debate those wielding them know they would lose.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 3, 2008 12:12 PM

Wayne: The very notion that "failing" to "justify" deportation of illegals means that the only reason is racism is absurd... utterly absurd.

The reason I have not addressed it, is that the reasoning for controlling who gets in is precisely the same reasoning for deporting those who should not be here.

There is no difference. It is so obvious, that at least to me, and most I have talked to, that it needs no argument. It is, by definition, self-evident. We all, for instance, agree with the idea that one should not steal. Who here argues that once you manage to steal, that what you have stolen, is now yours and you get to keep?

If you're not supposed to come into the country, it is a no brainer that when you're found, you leave. Duhh, as Homer would say. Nothing mysterious or racist, or anything else-ist about it. It is just the obvious course of action.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 3, 2008 12:45 PM

I just noticed this:

There are two things people are forgetting about why there are now so many Mexicans coming to the U.S. for work. 1) The abject poverty in Mexico along the border was brought about by NAFTA.

No, we could not possibly "forget" what was never real in the first place. NAFTA took a lot of good paying jobs TO Mexico, not took them away.

But poverty has a very long tradition in Mexico. Maybe you should engage some time and energy into figuring out why and advocating some solutions for it, rather than supporting the export of poverty northward.

Posted by: The Watcher | March 3, 2008 12:53 PM

The Watcher ("Mark" my words) has told people he disagrees with - who aren't even illegal migrants, but American Indians - to leave "his" country and never come back.

So his get-the-hell-out attitudes to "immigrants" who also differ from him whether by skin color, language, culture, religion or other orientation are in character.
Occasionally it might be true that loathing immigrants isn't racist, but it always comes from the same ugly twisted part of the human heart.

The Bible doesn't make illegal immigration an issue anywhere in it except to approve of it. Christian Zionists take note. Whenever anyone's going to another country, they're never turned back. Israel itself was told to welcome the stranger and to have (unlike us who have a dual, inferior system even for legal residents) one set of laws for all people. The only time borders were being closed, it was to keep the Jews from leaving, because the masters of Egypt wanted to keep exploiting them.

If the Watcher's ilk had their way, Jesus' family fleeing Herod would have been no excuse for their aggravated felony of folloowing the Angel of God's instructions and Herod's "law and order" to kill such an illegal refugee would have been approved on his watch.

Some of our most accomplished liars make laws, and then let's attribute to them divine immutability, no matter the stupidity of their significantly lower origin? As the great writer Dickens wrote, sometimes "the law is an ass" and the great American jurist Holmes affirmed that.

I have to laugh when I hear about the concept of "freedom" extolled by Man and then have revealed to me how far it is from the natural world of rights.

When man defines "freedom," it's only so he can limit it for someone else, use it in the contrary manner of how Orwell warned, as in "freedom is slavery," "war is peace" and "ignorance is strength." We do those bigtime, too, and how.

I see the birds fly across the borders, freer than the jackbooted humans who control one another at the point of guns. ("All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.) And the animals who aren't Orwell's pigs freely migrate until the ecological balance is ruined by those pigs building walls that keep them out, too.

"Ich bin ein Berliner." East Berliner, that is. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face - forever.

Mr. Bush, tear down that wall!

Posted by: Sojourner Truth | March 3, 2008 1:36 PM

And that the only means of achieving salvation IS personal relationship with God. All other concerns are extraneous to this.

But what does "salvation" mean? (Hint: It's not just about the afterlife.)

I lost all respect for Jeff, when he proceeded to wax venonous and vindictive for the "sin" of disagreeing with him.

You can't lose something you never had in the first place. And it's not just a matter of disagreeing with him -- he's actually one of the more agreeable people who posts here.

Posted by: Rick Nowlin | March 3, 2008 1:55 PM