Last year I lived in a Catholic Worker house that offers hospitality to immigrants without first inquiring about their legal status. One day, a woman called the house on behalf of two young boys who had come home to an empty apartment; their parents had been taken in a raid, and the boys had no other relatives or friends in the country. They had been born in the U.S., but their parents were undocumented workers; the raid had traumatized and temporarily orphaned them. They were afraid to leave their home and had no idea how to locate their parents.
Unfortunately, these boys' story is not unique. Over the past year, throughout the country the Department of Homeland Security has conducted increasingly numerous worksite enforcement raids that target employers who hire unauthorized workers. During these raids, large numbers of workers who have often worked in difficult and appalling conditions are arrested. Children are separated from their working parents for days at a time, and community life is disrupted.
Last week, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement urging Homeland Security to discontinue worksite enforcement raids until several "humanitarian safeguards" are put into place. The statement says, "The humanitarian costs of these raids are immeasurable and unacceptable in a civilized society" and reminds us that "many families never recover, others never reunite."
Catholic social teaching states that the family is the "fundamental institution upon which society and government itself depends" and that the family "must be supported and strengthened." May Christians follow the lead of these courageous bishops tospeak with one voice, urging the government to support families and put an end to the inhumane practices of worksite enforcement raids.
Jennifer Svetlik is a policy and organizing assistant at Sojourners.
Wednesday's New York Times gives a shocking description of the death of Hiu Liu Ng, also known as Jason Ng. Cause of death? Untreated cancer after nearly a year in an ICE detention center. Ng was a 34 year old computer programmer who worked at the Empire State Building and the father of two young sons. He was married to a U.S. citizen and was seeking his green card. Originally from Hong Kong, he had lived over half of his life in the United States. Not your typical or convenient description of an "illegal alien."
Would this have happened to a U.S. citizen? No. Did Jesus say in Matthew 25, "For I was sick and you questioned my documentation status, I was in prison and you reminded me that I was an illegal in the first place?" No. Shouldn't we as Christians be outraged at the mistreatment of vulnerable people, regardless of their origin or status?
I implore you to read this article about Ng's death and the response of our government, which denied him medical treatment, access to a wheelchair, and visits from family members and attorneys because he was too weak to enter the visitor's area. This is a real story of loss and suffering at the hands of a broken system. Even when people enter our country the "right way," nothing is guaranteed and nothing is certain. Our current ailing system, riddled with mistakes, loopholes and extended processes led to broken dreams and broken lives in the case of Hiu Lui Ng and his entire family.
Allison Johnson is the policy and organizing assistant for Sojourners.
Kosher law forbids you from boiling a calf in its mother's milk. But how are human mothers who work in slaughterhouses being treated? In the wake of revelations about the working conditions at kosher slaughterhouses, some rabbis are demanding a higher standard of worker treatment -- and they're willing to lay down the law. It is estimated that more than 350,000 U.S. households keep kosher, or follow the strict set of dietary laws outlined by the Hebrew Bible. Before the May immigration raids in Postville, Iowa, the Agriprocessors plant there run by an Orthodox family supplied 60 percent of the nation's kosher beef and 40 percent of the kosher poultry.
Stories are pouring out of Postville about the inhumane treatment of the immigrant workers. Underage workers were arrested in the raids, some as young as 13. Many workers were forced to put in overtime without extra pay or breaks. Vulnerable people were exploited by religious business owners who systematically violated immigration and workplace laws. Rabbi Morris Allen had firsthand experience with the workers and their conditions in Postville and decided a moral response was necessary.
His alternative certification philosophy is rising in popularity and has been endorsed by several progressive Jewish groups. Hekhsher Tzedek, which means "certificate of righteousness" in Hebrew, goes a step beyond current kosher guidelines. An additional seal of approval on existing kosher meat products would mean it was processed and packaged in compliance with a set of social justice criteria in keeping with the teachings of the Jewish faith, including wages and benefits, workplace safety, environmental impact, and corporate transparency.
Many people may not have known about the worker injustices at a meat plant in a small Iowa town, but the raid has sent aftershocks felt by those who keep kosher at the dinner table. The Boston Globe published an article about the differing opinions of Orthodox and Conservative Jews on the issue and responses to Rabbi Allen's proposed certification. If anything, the Postville raid has opened up conversations about how people of faith look at the products they consume and the value we place on the treatment of those who prepare it. We should not allow this issue to focus on just the kosher meat industry. Rather, we should be compelled to look at where all our food comes from and explore ways to spend our dollars that support businesses that treat their employees with dignity and value justice in the workplace.
Allison Johnson is the policy and organizing assistant for Sojourners.
Catholic social teaching tells us the dignity of the human person is the foundation and measure of a moral society. If the U.S. were put to this test based on our treatment of immigrants, how would we fare? If the recently released evidence from the heartland of Postville, Iowa is any indicator, I'd venture to say we're in danger of flunking.
In an exclusive New York Times interview and 14-page essay, federal court interpreter Erik Camayd-Freixas recounts the ICE raid at the Agriprocessors plant in Postville this past May in disturbing detail. In what is considered a groundbreaking departure from the code of silence observed by court translators, Dr. Camayd-Freixas' eyewitness account exposes the flaws in the "fast track" legal proceedings which took place in temporary trailers on the grounds of the National Cattle Congress. The majority of workers detained, mostly Guatemalans and many illiterate, did not fully understand the criminal charges brought against them.
As stories like this come pouring in, I am deeply saddened and angered by the flaws in our current immigration system that allows such traumatic enforcement tactics and hasty legal processing in the first place. I also give thanks for Erik Camayd-Freixas who spoke the truth so that all may know the full story. It's now up to us, based on the facts we know, to do something about it. If we are to live into the vision of a moral society, we need more people willing to stand up for the sake of those on the margins.
Last week, I blogged about Dr. Alfredo Quiñones Hinojosa, a former migrant worker and now world-class brain surgeon. This man and the topic of immigration have sparked some heated conversations in our blog community. I invite you to find out more about Dr. Quiñones in Hopkins, a new miniseries on ABC that features Dr. Q and his colleagues inside and outside the operating room. Check out the clip below where he talks with his kids and the camera about being "illegal" and his path to citizenship. Hopkins airs tonight at 10 p.m./ 9 p.m. central.
Allison Johnson is the policy and organizing assistant for Sojourners.
I was touched recently to hear Dr. Alfredo Quinoñes-Hinojosa, honored by the Merage Foundation for the American Dream for his contributions in the field of medicine, tell his exceptional story. Dr. Quiñones' journey began at age 19, just as it has for millions of his Mexican paisanos - hopping the U.S.-Mexico border's perilous chain-link fence. Unable to provide for his family, he remained firm in his decision to head north, even after he was initially caught by the border patrol and deported back to Mexico. He eventually succeeded and labored as an undocumented migrant farm worker in the San Joaquin Valley. The same hands that picked tomatoes in the hot California sun now perform neurosurgery on brain tumors in the halls of Johns Hopkins University. Educated at the University of California at Berkeley and Harvard, he has reaped great rewards from his determination to succeed and his optimistic attitude towards life. Many would say he has realized "the American Dream."
While hearing the story of Dr. Quiñones, I thought of the millions of hardworking and goal-driven students whose dreams to attend college in the U.S. have been put on hold because of their documentation status. The failure of the DREAM Act in Congress last fall halted the aspirations of high school graduates who would otherwise qualify for in-state tuition to public colleges and universities. If we continue to punish these students for decisions made by their parents years ago to bring them to the "Land of Opportunity," we are squashing their aspirations to become world-class brain surgeons, business professionals, teachers, and contributors to the fabric of America.
I heard Dr. Quiñones speak at the National Leadership Awards banquet at which the Merage Foundation for the American Dream was honoring several first-generation immigrants who have made outstanding contributions in the U.S. (Several of us from Sojourners had been invited in recognition of the work of Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform). But who knows how many (or how few) awards will be handed out in the future, if our country's immigration policies continue to deflate immigrants' hopes and dreams on a daily basis?
Allison Johnson is the policy and organizing assistant for Sojourners.
I have heard that the Chinese symbol for crisis means both danger and opportunity. The political and economic crisis in Zimbabwe and the crisis brought by xenophobic violence in South Africa present both danger and opportunity.
For many citizens from both countries, the crisis has become an opportunity to express their values of compassion and generosity. In the past week, there has been an outpouring of aid from many local citizens in the form of provision of clothing, food, and shelter for people displaced by the recent spate of xenophobic violence. Faith-based organisations, communities, and individuals have joined forces to give a different message to victims of violence. There are reports of some communities making a stand against xenophobic violence. The crisis has created opportunities to express one’s values.
In Zimbabwe, individuals, communities, and faith-based organisations continue their efforts at addressing practical needs and struggling for justice. Further, there are cross-border support groups. So opportunities exist and are being taken up by many.
However, real danger exists. If the root causes of xenophobic violence are not addressed, the danger of more violence is real. The humanitarian crisis created by the violence continues and requires immediate and long-term solutions. There is already a health crisis in the temporary shelters. Similarly, if violence continues in Zimbabwe and elections are not free and fair, the danger of a political collapse and escalating violence is real.
The prominence of violence in these interrelated crises is disturbing. The "weapons" that are needed to counter violence are unlike military weapons. These "weapons" of wisdom, knowledge, justice, and visionary leadership translate into practical strategies that address short- and long-term political, economic, and social needs -- particularly those of the poor.
Prayer is one of the primary sources for these "weapons," and the starting point that will inevitably lead to creative action, support, and partnerships, etc. Thank you, too, for your prayers – the incidents of xenophobic violence have gone down, but the humanitarian crisis has grown to unmanageable proportions. The political and economic situation in Zimbabwe continues to cause hardship and suffering. Please continue to pray for this region.
Nontando Hadebe, a former Sojourners intern, is originally from Zimbabwe and is now pursuing graduate studies in theology in South Africa.
The Coalition of Immokalee Workers announced Friday that after a prolonged and often heated campaign, Burger King has agreed to award tomato pickers 1.5 cents per pound of tomatoes picked, the equivalent of a 71 percent increase in wages.
Sojourners has been involved with the campaign since June 2007, and in little less than a year, more than 25,000 of our activists sent more than 125,000 letters to the fast-food chain and its supporters. Given the slavery indictments in regions of south Florida, the agreement also includes zero tolerance guidelines for unlawful activities of any grower from the Burger King supply chain.
While Burger King’s agreement is a long-awaited victory, their stalling and obstructing other companies from coming on board over the past year is unconscionable. In the end, the second-largest burger chain estimated that the agreement will cost it $300,000 annually, yet last year the company made $2.23 billion in profits.
We must continue to demand justice for workers at all levels of our economy, and we applaud the Coalition of Immokalee Workers for this victory on that path.
Please check out this moving video shot and edited by our own on-the-ground correspondent, Sojourners Web assistant Matt Hildreth. Matt researched, made calls, and then stopped through Postville, Iowa, last Friday and got some great footage. It features Sister Mary of St. Bridget’s, who has been ministering to immigrant families affected by the raid.
Our allies have been spreading this video around among activists all over the country and they’re thrilled to have some interviews with real people telling their stories. Watch it:
Patty Kupfer is the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform campaign coordinator at Sojourners.
However, we must put pressure on the government to address this matter of xenophobia. President Mbeki needs to speak out against it, without delay of or need for investigation. The news reports are definitive enough and cannot be denied, so our president must stand up and condemn these acts of violence.
The complexity of South Africans acting out in frustration of their own circumstances, as people who are agitated by the non-delivery of democratic promises, can and must be understood, but not to the extent that we take out our frustration on our fellow African brothers and sisters who are need of our support, understanding, and love.
It is my hope that businesses, nonprofits, churches, mosques, temples, and any form of organized religion in the townships, suburbs, and all over South Africa make a stand for justice and play a major role in bringing these acts of violence to an end. It is my hope that government will quicken its steps and intervene. It is not enough to say this xenophobia must stop; we must see action by way of a national state of emergency to stop this nonsense immediately!
Let us do whatever it is we can to stop these human rights abuses in South Africa, where our own history does not allow us to forget the days when our comrades were being housed in exile by countries such as Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Kenya. The collective memory of our people must be reminded of those days within apartheid and that this violence must stop!
We need not grow weary in this time. Neither must we grow less Afrocentric or become pessimistic about our continent, our people, our motherland, our beloved South Africa. Instead we should call for peace, and stand for justice. The "I am African-ness" of our people, our continent, and our South African nation must be called upon to remember that we are African.
I am disturbed but I am African.
I am discouraged but I am African.
I am perplexed but I am African.
Our collective memory as an African people must rise again with a consciousness that reminds us of our centeredness in "I am because we are."
Seth Naicker is an activist for justice and reconciliation from South Africa. He is currently studying and working at Bethel University, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the program and projects director for the Office of Reconciliation Studies. He can be reached at: seth-naicker@bethel.edu or smnaick@hotmail.com
This week has been marred by xenophobic violence in AlexandraTownship, Johannesburg, South Africa. The violent attacks targeted foreign nationals whom locals accuse of being responsible for crime, job loss, "taking their girlfriends," and other social problems. The violence meted on foreigners included murder, robbery, looting, rape, and violent assault. Most of the victims are Zimbabweans. One reason for this could be the high number of Zimbabwean refugees in South Africa.
Currently many foreigners are being sheltered at police camps and the Red Cross is providing food and blankets. The timing could not have been worse because it parallels the ongoing post-election violence in Zimbabwe that has caused many Zimbabweans to flee to neighbouring countries.
An issue that is being raised is whether there is a "third force" behind the violence or whether the violence is an unintended coincidence -- i.e., it would have happened anyway and is unrelated to the political situation in Zimbabwe. In a survey done by one of the leading local newspapers, The Sowetan, readers were divided on this issue with just over 50% disagreeing that a third force was behind the attacks.
Despite the condemnation of the violence by politicians, the situation is deteriorating and the violence against foreigners is spreading to other areas. It is an experience of double trauma for many Zimbabweans.
I am struggling to come to terms with the violence around me and to respond to the issues that are being raised. However, I believe there is a prophetic Christian response informed by justice and compassion that can address the concerns of both foreigners and South Africans in the spirit of common humanity. Pray for us that as Christians we would find this prophetic response and be part of the healing and restoration of common humanity.
Nontando Hadebe, a former Sojourners intern, is originally from Zimbabwe and is now pursuing graduate studies in theology in South Africa.
When I first decided to spend this semester of my college career in Washington, D.C., I did not expect to work for the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CCIR) campaign here at Sojourners. Sadly, I must admit that though I am Latina and the daughter of immigrants, immigration did not make my long list of worthy causes to fight for. Like many, I was ignorant about the plight of immigrants, and mistakenly saw deportation or enforcement-only policies as ideal solutions. Through her dedication, patience, and passion, Patty Kupfer, the CCIR campaign coordinator, taught me to embrace the struggle of the millions of undocumented immigrants and understand the complexities of a broken immigration system.
In these past months, I have seen appalling cases of how immigrants are blamed for the societal ills that afflict us. The scare tactics of anti-immigrant groups have been successful at instilling anti-Latino sentiment among the American populace. The media has painted a gruesome picture of Latinos, and made us all culpable.
Perhaps the worst example I've seen is the idea that undocumented immigrants are wholly responsible for lowering the wages of low-skilled and poor African Americans. In one particular briefing I attended, the low wages and high unemployment rates of poor African Americans were correlated with Latino immigration.
These scholars based their findings on research and data sets, but it left me questioning their motives and analysis. This "research" paves the way for the scapegoating of the other. Are Latinos and African Americans not working toward the same goal - that is, overcoming structural forces that prohibit social advancement? Thus, why are we not working together? My mind cannot conceive how powerful it would be - both spiritually and socially - if Latinos and African-American communities united around immigration. Instead of concentrating our powers against one another, we must unite. We will remain powerless or disempowered until we are able to fight alongside one another.
Currently, immigration is the hot issue and is therefore being used to widen the gap between these two groups of people who share a common history, struggle, and legacy. Why do we fight each other for the crumbs? The entire time I sat during this briefing, I wanted to scream, "Those brown people you condemn are my people, and we are not the root cause of poverty." As seekers of truth and justice, we must acknowledge that massive deportation will not solve some poverty or its root causes.
Let us stop finding scapegoats for complex issues and instead seek unity. Power is in the hands of those who want to make us believe lies about ourselves and others. We must begin to unite around issues like immigration. Imagine how powerful it would be if Latinos and African Americans, two of the largest minority groups in the U.S., would challenge the broken systems that afflict us both. Let us find common ground and redirect our energies toward the real struggles that will truly empower our communities.
Carolyn Delossantos is a junior at Gordon College. She just completed a semester internship at Sojourners.
There was a raid at a meat-packing plant in Postville, Iowa, yesterday, in which about 300 people were detained. Please keep them in your prayers. The Des Moines Register ran a moving article about the role of a local church in helping the community deal with this crisis:
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid at the Agriprocessors Inc. plant scattered the Hispanics of Postville. About 400 found their way to St. Bridget's Catholic Church, waiting for information. Some filled out G-28 forms that allow a lawyer to represent their detained children or minors in their care.
A woman who would identify herself only as Judy said she and her husband work at Agriprocessors. The last time she saw him was before his shift Monday, about 5:30 a.m.
"No, I don't know where he is," she said in Spanish.
Judy said she and her husband came from Mexico illegally. Like many others at St. Bridget's, they regard the church as a haven from law enforcement.
Asked whether the church would indeed be a safe place, Sister Mary McCauley of St. Bridget's said, "That is our belief and hope."
...
Standing outside the Agriprocessors plant, Adolfo Calderon said he tried to put himself in the shoes of someone here illegally.
He has friends who work at the plant, he said, most of whom are in America legally, but he feared for the families who might be separated.
"They shouldn't do this," Calderon said. "I understand it's a legal (issue) and they're trying to do their job, but what happens to these poor families?"
Adolfo Calderon, 15, said his father manages apartments in the town. With the raid, those apartments could be cleared out and his father could be put out of business.
Hidie Roach, a teller at Citizens State Bank in Postville, said the raid gives the town a bad name.
The town needs the packing plant, Roach said. "I think a lot of people will leave."
At St. Bridget's on Monday night, Real, the lay pastor, fielded calls, answered questions and handed out pamphlets advising immigrants of their rights while trying to keep about 400 people clothed, sheltered and fed.
His wife, holding the phone to her ear, said a caller was offering food. Did they need it?
Real, without looking up from his desk, answered quickly.
UPDATE: Bishop Gregory V. Palmer of the Iowa Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church has released a statement in support of the workers and their families. You can download the full statement as a PDF or listen to an audio verion. Here's an excerpt:
We are called to stand in solidarity with our sisters and brothers whose lives were disrupted today at the Agriprocessors, Inc. plant and who are facing unknown challenges and likely separation from their families, friends, and loved ones. As Iowa United Methodists we want to stand in partnership and community with the workers in Postville who are experiencing hardships of unknown proportion. It is our belief that we are all deeply connected to one another through Christ without regard to one’s nationality or legal status. I believe today’s raids create fear and chaos that is detrimental and harmful to communities here in Iowa and around this nation. We cannot allow the pattern of history to repeat itself where the newest migrants to our nation become criminalized and become the target of our animosity, fear, racism, and anger.
Patty Kupfer is the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform campaign coordinator at Sojourners.
Thank God for The Wall Street Journal editorial board. Now that's a phrase I never imagined uttering. Then again, who would have thought they'd be the institution to jump so eloquently to the defense of the pope from the likes of Lou Dobbs and Tom Tancredo?
During his visit last week, Pope Benedict XVI gave a consistent and prophetic call to U.S. Catholics:
I want to encourage you and your communities to continue to welcome the immigrants who join your ranks today, to share their joys and hopes, to support them in their sorrow and trials, and to help them flourish in their new home. This, indeed, is what your fellow countrymen have done for generations. From the beginning, they have opened their doors to the tired, the poor, the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free." These are the people whom America has made her own.
Somehow this beautiful pastoral call prompted Lou Dobbs to claim the pope was "insulting our country," and Tom Tancredo to accuse him of "faith-based marketing." As if a global spiritual leader shouldn't have the right to offer guidance on how we view and treat our fellow human beings? It's not as if he was laying out policy prescriptions. If anything, the pope's words were a simple and powerful reminder of precisely the pastoral role Jesus calls us to. Not to mention our past as a nation of immigrants.
Today's WSJ said it better than I ever could have:
The pope welcomes immigrants because he's Catholic, not because they are. He isn't "marketing" his faith. He's practicing it.
Patty Kupfer is the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform campaign coordinator at Sojourners.
The "Haters" know how to use the Internet effectively, or at least that's what recent research by the Opportunity Agenda has shown in relation to immigration reform.
As an immigrant rights advocate, I was bothered by the recent results of a scan the New-York-based organization did of the immigration debate on the "Social Web" (i.e. social networks, YouTube, and the blogosphere). While I believe that many Americans "welcome strangers in their midst," the researchers at the Opportunity Agenda found that on the Web, anti-immigrant supporters and rhetoric outnumbered pro-immigrant activity by a ratio of two-to-one. This also found that most keyword searches produced more results for anti-immigrant than pro-immigrant activism.
You may have seen this in action: those making the most noise in the current national discussion about immigration often sound angry, indignant and outraged. Check out CNN or Fox News almost any day of the week and you'll see what I mean. So when the Opportunity Agenda and then the National Council of La Raza confirmed what I've seen in action on a daily basis, I knew I had to do my part.
One of the wonders of today's Social Web (or "Web 2.0 technology") is the infinite opportunity for collaboration. Through social networking online and off, I was able to gather talented folks with script-writing, filmmaking and acting skills and voila we pulled together a video. (Living in Los Angeles, where creative endeavor is in the air, didn't hurt either.) The result, "Thru the Plexiglass," is a humorous video short that follows a fictional documentary filmmaker/reporter on a visit to a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office where he encounters a world lost in time. We chose the 1980s since that was the last time that the bulk of pro-immigrant reforms took place. By making it funny, I hoped that viewers would like it enough to share it with their friends and give it wings (or make it "viral" as they say). Now, more than 11,000 views later, it looks like we may be on to something:
We submitted the video to the Movement Vision Lab for their video contest on immigration and community values. They selected "Thru the Plexiglass" as their "breakthrough video." The overall winner of the contest "Arivaca: Life on the Border" shows a community that appreciates and values their immigrant neighbors. Perhaps the most touching part of the video is how one interviewee challenges us to ask, "What would Jesus do?" when meeting people crossing the desert from Mexico:
We encourage you to check out the videos, share them, and then make your own. As people of faith who respect the rights our immigrant neighbors, it's time to make our voices heard!
Will Coley is the founder of Aquifer Media, and has been an advocate and organizer with immigrants and refugees.
A few of us around Sojourners have been reading award-winning Haitian-born writer Edwidge Danticat since she published her first novel Breath, Eyes, Memory in 1994. Ten years later we were thrilled when she sent us a lovely vignette, Indigo Girl, which wepublished in December 2004. It might be the only short story Sojourners has ever published.
When we heard that her newest book, Brother I'm Dying, dealt with the death of Danticat's 81-year-old uncle, the Reverend Joseph Dantica, who died in the custody of U.S. immigration officials while seeking political asylum, we knew we wanted her to tell Sojourners that story—and what it says about the deadly debacle that is our immigration policy today.
In March, Brother I'm Dying won the National Book Critics Circle award for best autobiography. "I only hope my dad and uncle are proud," Edwidge told me. "The book, I feel, was written with them and for them so the award too is for them."
From her home in Miami, Danticat graciously responded to our interview questions:
BERGER: As an artist you are able to witness against injustice through the crafting of story and word as you have done in Brother, I'm Dying. Does the book vindicate the indignity and death your uncle suffered? How has the experience of writing the book changed you spiritually?
DANTICAT: People sometimes think, or say, that you should have closure now, Edwidge. You've written this book. Writing the book was part of a spiritual process which does not end with the book being published though. I was changed a great deal by this process, of course. I lost two very important people to me, my father and my uncle. They both suffered so much at the end, in part so we—my family here—can thrive. The gift I ended up with at the end was my daughter, who was born as these men were dying. I wouldn't say that the book vindicates the death or deaths completely. It's certainly the only vindication we've had, so I am glad I wrote it.
Read the whole interview ("Death By Asylum," Sojourners April 2008) here.
Rose Marie Berger is an associate editor at Sojourners.
The United States prides itself on being a country of laws. There is the settled conviction that here citizens obey the laws of the land and that those who do not are duly punished according to the nature of the violation. Christians who oppose the presence of undocumented immigrants turn to Romans 13 to emphasize that these people are breaking local and national laws and that the appropriate penalties should be applied. This passage is a quandary, too, for some of those who are more sympathetic to the plight of immigrants. They are torn between the harshness and contradictions of the laws and this biblical mandate to submit to the authorities.
Several observations can help put this passage into proper perspective. To begin with, Christians must recognize that their agenda is set in the previous chapter of Paul's letter. Chapter 12 tells believers not to be molded by the "pattern of this world" (12:2). Their lives should be characterized by service to others, love, and compassion—even toward enemies (12:3-21).
The authorities, however, have a different purpose and a different way of doing things, and this is spelled out in Romans 13. Christians are called to respect the government, says the apostle, but this does not mean sanctifying everything that it might legislate or do. Citizens of the U.S. have the right to disagree with the government, and, motivated by their principles, Christians do this in multiple ways: at the ballot box, through publications, by organizing educational, legal, and civic organizations that defend other points of view, by participating in peaceful protests of many kinds for a host of causes, and the like. Each of these actions in its own way expresses reservations about the state of affairs and the things that the government is mandating. Immigration is an example of an area where many believers diverge from the goals and enforcement of current legislation.
What is more, the U.S. government itself admits that legislation on immigration must be changed. Leaders from across the political spectrum recognize that what is in place now is not working. Recent efforts to craft a comprehensive immigration policy are clear evidence of the need for new immigration laws.
Therefore, to point to Romans 13 and adherence to the law in debates on immigration, without nuance or biblical and historical depth, simply will not do. Christians should search all of the scriptures for guidance in evaluating the development of immigration policy and engaging its challenges. From that foundation, Christians can begin to move forward to the legal issues. In other words, discussion on legality cannot be limited just to questions about complying with current laws, laws that all know are impractical and will soon be replaced. If these laws are problematic—theologically, humanely, and pragmatically—and if all sides agree that reform is needful, the call to submit to the authorities in Romans 13 should be rethought in fresh and constructive ways. Respect for the nation's present laws can be coupled with and informed by the move toward a new set of laws. Ideally, laws should embody the best moral principles of a nation. Clearly, immigration legislation does not measure up.
But what of immigrants who are Christians? How do they respond to Romans 13? They know that they are violating the law by living and working here. But, they also have experienced personally the law's inequities. For example, the government turns a blind eye to many employers because the country needs cheap labor, but then it makes access to social services increasingly difficult for these same workers. Hispanic immigrant believers admire the efficiency of the legal system of the U.S. and want to contribute to society, even as they work for a better life. Many do their best to obey the laws in every area that does not threaten their jobs, homes, and children's education and welfare. Many desire to be model 'citizens' as part of their Christian duty and in order to gain the respect of the majority culture in which they live. All fervently want a fair legal resolution of the situation.
Where can we go from here? If one evaluates immigration law in the U.S. as confused and unfair, and if one believes that these laws do not square with the teaching of the Bible and the ethical demands of the heart of God - let alone the historic openness of this country to foreigners - then these Christians will not say, "What is it about 'illegal' that you don't understand?" Instead, they might declare with the apostles, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God" (Acts 4:19).
Before this statement raises all kinds of alarm, let me make it very clear that I am not advocating civil disobedience on a large scale, just as most Christians who have strong misgivings about undocumented immigrants are not lobbying for a massive national deportation operation to rid the country of one and all. It is a narrow understanding of the nature of law and the Christian's relationship to human government that must be questioned. We need to move ahead towards constructive change with Christian humility and charity, with respect for those placed in authority over us but especially with an eye to the higher calling of the people of God to be a blessing to the world.
Dr. M. Daniel Carroll Rodas is a distinguished professor of Old Testament at Denver Seminary, and author of Christians at the Border: Immigration, the Church, and the Bible (Baker Academic Books), from which this post is adapted.
The Hebrew Scriptures clearly call for the children of Israel to make room for the alien. The Israelites are reminded that they, too, were once aliens in a strange and distant land.
[For the Lord your God] …Who loves the strangers, providing them food and clothing. You shall also love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.—Deuteronomy 10:18-19
The New Testament picked up this same admonition as Jesus explained to his disciples that they should treat the alien as they would treat him (Matthew 25:31-40).
St. Francis of Assisi taught his followers that Jesus is mystically present in the alien. They were told that when they look into the eyes of the stranger in their midst, they might see their Christ staring back at them.
Christians need to be reminded that in the only description that Jesus gave of judgment day, he specifically declares that God will inquire how we treated the alien. God will want to know, according to Matthew 25:35, whether or not we made room for "the stranger" to live among us.
Given such Biblical teachings, it is difficult to understand how so many Jews and Christians can call for harsh treatment of those 12 million illegal immigrants who presently reside within our national borders, and how they so often act as though U.S. citizens should not make them welcome.
There is little question that we need these men and women who have illegally entered our country. They are doing necessary work as farm laborers and in the manufacturing sectors of our economy. Elderly persons, like myself, should realize that millions of dollars taken out of these laborers' wages each week go into our depleting Social Security fund. The evidence is clear that overwhelming numbers of these undocumented workers are hardworking, decent neighbors who are contributing much to our nation's well-being.
Having made these points, we must go on to acknowledge that there are good people who justly point out that these illegal entrants have broken the law, and that granting them amnesty will only invite others to do the same. Furthermore, there are concerns about the possibility that criminals, drug pushers, and even terrorists, may be among those undocumented and illegal immigrants who daily come through our porous borders. There are fears that such undesirable persons pose a threat to our nation's security and to the safety of our fellow citizens.
As I reflect on the pros and cons of dealing with amnesty for these undocumented brothers and sisters, I have to start by asking why so many of them choose to enter our country illegally. Could it be that the U.S. has made it too difficult and too expensive for them to come in any other way?
Back in 1910, when my father emigrated to this country, he came as an impoverished Italian peasant. He liked to tell me that when he came through Ellis Island, he came with a few dollars in his pocket and little more than "the shirt on his back." He would go on to declare, in his broken English, that this country was, for him, a land of opportunity, and that he soon had a job and a future filled with hope.
The bad news is that today impoverished immigrants do not have the same opportunity that my father had. Nowadays, "the poor and huddled masses" who come to the U.S. have a much harder time, and the barriers that keep them living in our country usually appear insurmountable. If my father wanted to settle in the U.S. and get a job, given present requirements, he would have to get a "green card," if he wanted to be legal. Getting a green card would take somewhere around two years or more, and would likely cost him a couple thousand dollars in legal fees. (The legal language in the forms is so complicated that often it takes a lawyer to help applicants fill out the forms, costing up to $2000 in fees.) Not having enough money to support himself during the time he was waiting for his green card to be granted, he probably would have his hopes dashed to pieces. Not having the means to hire a lawyer, he probably would have to face the reality that what is required to enter into the American Dream is beyond his reach. In today's U.S., there would be little room for a poor man like my father. I have a sense that his desire for the better life that the U.S. could offer him just might tempt him to become an illegal immigrant.
What I propose is that our country should have a "high wall and a wide gate" at our borders. By a high wall, I mean that our borders should be secure. America should protect itself against drug pushers, criminals and possible terrorists. There should be a background check on every person who crosses into our country so that such undesirables would be kept out.
On the other hand, I believe that the gate should be wide. We U.S. citizens should make it fiscally possible for poor people who want to come and live among us. Green cards should be made available quickly and without the need to go through the kind of legal hoops that require lawyers. It seems to me that people in faith communities should work to create these conditions.
When it comes to dealing with those who are already here, I agree with those who claim that amnesty is not a good idea. These illegal immigrants did break the law, and amnesty would likely invite others to do the same. Law breakers should be dealt with seriously. Allow me to suggest some solutions to this predicament. I propose that undocumented entrants be granted green cards as soon as possible, but that they be required to pay a hefty fine for having broken the law. Also, they should be required to pay back taxes on their past earnings. But, knowing that it would be unlikely for them to have the money to cover these expenses all at once, I suggest that they have as much as 10 percent of their income deducted in the years that follow until such time as these fines and back taxes are paid off. Those who earn the higher salaries would pay off what they owe sooner, while those with lower salaries would have to take longer to fulfill their obligations.
The reality is that so many of these undocumented brothers and sisters are now being paid less than the minimum wage. With green cards in hand, they would be entitled to legal wages, which likely would be more than they are presently earning. Given this consideration, many, if not most, would come out with more money on pay days, in spite of the 10 percent that would be deducted by the government to cover their fines and back taxes.
To people with faith commitments who take the Bible as their guide for living, it seems as though this proposal could go a long way to treating undocumented entrants with God-ordained love and justice. I think that what I am proposing could satisfy those who want law breakers to pay their debt to society while, at the same time, satisfying those who are committed to showing God's grace to those who, full of hope, come to live among us.
In Arizona it is clear that the immigration issue is more than just a political debate; human lives hang in the balance. Families we have come to love are finding themselves in increasingly desperate circumstances. For us the question to the church seems clear: "Who will speak for those denied a voice?" Locally the rhetoric has become intolerable as families - families in our churches, ministries, and neighborhoods - are described in angry, hateful, even subhuman terms. As Christians, regardless of our position on the issue, we will not accept this type of language and we must call our political leaders to a higher standard whether during national presidential contests or inside of committee hearings in our state houses. That's why we're speaking out, as these Arizona pastors recently did:
As ministry leaders and pastors of churches in this county, we do not ask people of faith to prove their legal status before they can participate in fellowship.
In the process, we have watched the lives of immigrants become increasingly intertwined into the lives of our congregations.
This has given us an up-close and personal look at the human toll borne by the men, women and children caught in the crosshairs of politicians who use a broken immigration system as an opportunity to build personal political capital. Instead of solutions, we are offered slogans from soapboxes. Worse still, we are offered poor uses of our state and county's limited resources that cannot begin to solve this clearly federal issue.
Local posturing is sure to only drive families further into the shadows - families we care deeply about. When families in our fellowships are afraid to send their kids to school, go to the grocery store, talk to the police during an emergency or even answer a knock at the door, regardless of the nature of their immigration status, we must speak up.
The acidic level of fear created by a few opportunistic politicians is intolerable and putting all of us at greater risk. A divided, polarized and frightened community works in complete contrast to the message of love and reconciliation we strive to communicate to our world.
I encourage you to read their entire statement. Solutions not slogans are what is needed right now and above all a call to remembrance that at the center of this issue sit human beings - human beings that are very important to us.
Ian Danley is a youth pastor with Neighborhood Ministries in Phoenix, Arizona.
In the past year, political expediency, xenophobia, and extremism defeated reason, compromise, and reconciliation in the immigration debate. The level of animosity directed towards the immigrant community, particularly the Latino community, stands at an all time high. We cannot stay silent.
The world once again bears witness to the actions taken, not just by our Congress, but by the people of the U.S. Will apathy, nativism, and xenophobia silence the voices of reason, compromise, family values, Judeo-Christian ethos, and border protection? It is time for reasonable U.S. citizens and for the faith community to rise up and clearly state that while we all desire to protect our borders and apply the rule of law, we will not embrace the nativist and discriminatory rhetoric articulated under the guise of border protection. We can stop illegal immigration, protect our borders, protect our values, and simultaneously protect the American dream only if we work within the framework of our Judeo-Christian heritage and repudiate all discriminatory and bigoted threads.
On a personal note, I am a U.S. citizen born in New Jersey; a Generation X-er who never would of believed that in my lifetime I would see the resurrection of bigoted, nativist, and discriminatory elements in our society. We must understand that time is of the essence. The time has come for the U.S., and particularly the U.S. faith community, to comprehend that at the border and in our communities, we have the poor, suffering, seekers, Samaritans, and strangers. Yet, above all, in vast majority, what we have at the borders and in the field, in our cities and in our farms, are our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.
Rev. Samuel Rodriguez Jr. is president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, an organization of Hispanic evangelicals. Watch his recent conversation with Bill Moyers.
There's no denying it. Immigration has become, and will continue to be, a hot-button issue in the presidential season. The question that remains is – what kind of conversation will we have around immigration? We're not off to such a good start. Thus far, the debate has looked more like a shouting match defined by scapegoating and xenophobia. One clear result has been a feeling among Hispanics across the country, not just undocumented immigrants, that their lives are more difficult, due to the failure of immigration reform and the increasing attention to the issue.
This cannot be the right kind of conversation. How, then, can we begin to change it?
Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform hosted a teleconference yesterday as part of an ongoing effort to do just that. The New York Times Politics Blog, The Caucus, highlighted the diversity of the speakers, calling for moral leadership on an issue that clearly affects us all:
A Catholic bishop, inner-city Baptist minister, megachurch pastor, and Latino religious activist convened on a conference call sponsored by the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform on Friday to say that the 2008 candidates' actions aren't very akin to W.W.J.D. (What would Jesus do?)
The Christian organization agrees that immigration is a top priority this election cycle, but it wants candidates to approach the nation's illegal immigration issue from a moral perspective. It wants to see policies proposed that are based on preserving a decent life for those folks instead of what's most likely to win votes.
And in promoting legislation based on good Christian values, the religious leaders said it's imperative to steer clear of spiteful campaigning.
"It is clear that the hard work of crafting legislation and statutes that lead us toward a path of earned citizenship and effective enforcement remains a priority for all Americans," said Rev. Derrick Harkins, senior pastor at the Nineteenth Street Baptist Church in Washington. "It is just as clear that hateful, inflammatory, and destructive speech serves no purpose. No matter where one stands on the political spectrum regarding this issue, as Christians, we never possess the option to speak or act in a way that lessens the worth of any human being."
"Unfortunately, our presidential candidates are allowing themselves to be co-opted into the divisiveness of the debate," said Bishop Thomas Wenski, adding that he doesn't yet see a leader emerging from the pack.
"Mr. Romney has bet his presidential run on the issue," said Rev. Luis Cortes Jr., president of Latino poverty relief organization Esperanza. That's led Mr. Huckabee to take "a step to the right." Rev. Cortes also worried that the country's rising anti-immigrant sentiment, fueled in part by talk radio, is creating an increase in hate crimes against Hispanics.
"This issue isn't going away; and it won't go away with a few 'Let's just make the border stronger' comments," said Rev. Joel Hunter, senior pastor of the Northland parish in Longwood, Fla.
And in the spirit of Christmas, Bishop Wenski pointed out that after the baby Jesus was born, Mary and Joseph took him and fled the oppressive reign of King Herod: "Certainly, they didn't have visas to cross into Egypt."
Patty Kupfer is the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform campaign coordinator at Sojourners.
It happened again. A presidential candidate's debate in two languages. Just as the Democratic presidential candidates had done before, the Republicans have followed suit - a presidential candidates debate on Spanish-language channel, Univision. (Tom Tancredo was the only candidate who did not attend the debate). I blogged on the earlier Democratic debate and thought it only equitable to do the same again.
I think what is critical here in both nationally-televised debates is a healthy model of dialogue that is necessary on the national scene. This dialogue says we respect your culture and language. Allowing for your thoughts and words to be translated into another language can be a metaphor for inclusion and welcoming. I am not arguing that English should not be spoken (All the candidates answered in English and most immigrants work hard to learn English, cf: Pew research, etc.) What I am saying is that as a country we are looking for is conversations and policies that respect the dignity of the other.
As a person of faith, pastor, and follower of Jesus Christ, I am desirous of respectful debate and dialogue. On blogs, radio-shows, and political advertisements ideological and theological differences have often reduced some to more base temptations of demonizing the other (be they Republican, Democrat, immigrant, citizen, male or female). Frankly, this is not consistent with the gospel and a call to love our neighbor and even our enemies. Jesus even said, "Love your enemies." As a people we need to move beyond the childish temptation to dehumanize those we disagree with.
Dignity means you both speak and listen. Dignity may help us see someone who is radically different from us and call them by their name. Dignity transcends political ideologies and racial, ethnic, and geographic boundaries. Dignity is a faithful witness to a faith that says, "Por que de tal manera amó Dios al mundo (For God so loved the world….)"
Speaking in Spanish, Korean, Mandarin, German, etc. is a linguistic affirmation that God loves the world. Presidential candidates need not speak these languages but simply affirm the humanity and dignity of those who do.
Rev. Gabriel Salguero is the pastor of the Lamb’s Church of the Nazarene in New York City, a Ph.D. candidate at Union Theological Seminary, and the director of the Hispanic Leadership Program at Princeton Theological Seminary. He is also a Sojourners board member.
There seems to be much concern lately over the people being referred to as "illegal immigrants." Let's define our terms: "Immigrant" - somebody who has come to a country and settled there. "Illegal" - forbidden by law. Concern about illegal immigrants has a familiar ring to us Native Americans. We have been empathizing with those concerns for over half a millennium.
Let's see ...Were the first immigrants to America illegal? By every definition - yes! But perhaps if they had a good reason it makes their trespass less offensive. What of their motives? The stated intent of some of the earliest European settlers in America was first to establish military superiority over the inhabitants and then "civilize" them by assimilating them into their form of government and converting them to a foreign religion. Such was the case in the earliest American colonies: From the First Charter of Virginia, April 10, 1606..."[we] may in time bring the Infidels and Savages, living in those parts, to human Civility, and to a settled and quiet Government."
And talk about attitude ... they even came expecting us to learn their language. For example, I always thought, if you come to Cherokee country, you should speak Cherokee.
Even though the European immigrants said they were fleeing totalitarianism and searching for economic freedom, they did not all come peaceably or with good intent. Attempted genocide, physical force, coercion, and the imposition of colonial structures in order to establish dominance over Native North Americans became their mode of operation. Even many early American Christians' values were evident to the indigene by the settlers' disregard for human life. This supposed Christian witness was evident in their reactions when they arrived on the eastern part of this continent and found that epidemics had wiped out several nations. Such was the case with William Bradford's infamous statement, "The good hand of God ... favored our beginnings ... sweeping away great multitudes of the natives ... that he might make room for us" (Mann, 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, page 56).
The devout Pilgrims did not weep for the lost Wampanoag, Patuxet, and Massachuset civilizations. Instead, one of their leaders, John Winthrop, made a "legal" declaration annulling any native claims to the land. "The Indians," he said, "had not 'subdued' the land, and therefore had only a 'natural' right to it, but not a 'civil right.' A 'natural right' did not have legal standing" (Zinn, A People's History of the United States, page 14).
Early American immigrants, now well established, may have conveniently forgotten that their ancestors did not come as law-abiding citizens, but were intent on making their own laws and disregarding any laws already established by the original Americans. They often justified the taking of innocent lives and the removal of the original inhabitants by their religion. I could go on ... believe me ... I could go on. Suffice it to say, when I look at the track record of the current immigrants compared to the first immigrants, I find much hope for the future of our country.
I also wonder if perhaps the earliest immigrants fear the current ones so much because they somehow understand that, historically, retribution often occurs. There is an old Indian adage that says, "whatever you do, comes back to you." I hope not ...
Instead, I would like to remind us of another old idea: "They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, "All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!" (John 8:7 NLT)
You say that your opposition is close to making Christian ministry illegal. Would you care to elaborate on this? What sorts of ministries are being made illegal? Where is this being done? What laws are being passed that would hinder ministry?
The best example is the law recently passed in Oklahoma which makes it a " felony for U.S. citizens to knowingly provide shelter, transportation, or employment to illegal immigrants." If a person comes to the door of a church-run homeless shelter, saying he is illegal and needs a place to sleep, it is a felony to offer him a bed. And churches in Oklahoma across the board have spoken against this new law.
"While we do not intentionally harbor or employ illegal immigrants in our work, neither do we screen or profile individuals before we minister to them in the name of Jesus." Robert Wilson, chairman of the resolution committee, offered an example: "If someone comes to my office and needs a ride to the hospital, my higher obligation is, 'Man, I'll give you a ride to the hospital.' It's not to say, 'Let me see your green card first before I help you.'"
Previously, the Most Rev. Eusebius J. Beltran, archbishop of Oklahoma City, and 10 parish priests signed a pledge of resistance, saying, "we are standing together in opposition and defiance of this unjust and immoral law." The evening before the law went into effect, Bishop Edward J. Slattery and more than a dozen priests celebrated a special Mass dedicated to immigrants at St. Francis Xavier Church in Tulsa. "As baptized members of Christ, we cannot be silent or complicit with those who abuse the God-given dignity of the children of God," Bishop Slattery said in his homily at the Mass.
The Oklahoma Conference of Churches, representing 16 Oklahoma denominations, called the law a "disastrous effort" in its statement of opposition. The conference includes the Roman Catholic, United Methodist, Presbyterian Church USA, Episcopal, and Evangelical Lutheran Church of America denominations, among others.
The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 made it a crime for a citizen to harbor a runaway slave or to offer any assistance to slaves who had run away from their masters. … Many Northern clergymen had been offering assistance to runaway slaves through the underground railroad, and continued to do so after the law's enactment. … An analogy can be drawn between the Fugitive Slave Act and a recent enactment of the Oklahoma Legislature in the form of House Bill 1804. This law makes it a crime to harbor or transport illegal aliens in this state. That law serves to criminalize the work done by a variety of clergymen and women throughout the state of Oklahoma who minister to the needs, both spiritual and temporal, of undocumented workers and their families.
It's an appropriate analogy. Remember, the Fugitive Slave Act was federal law, runaway slaves in the North were illegal. But the church then, as now, answers to a higher law.
At its board meeting last month, the National Association of Evangelicals formally named Leith Anderson as its president. Anderson is senior pastor of Wooddale Church in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, and has been serving as interim president of the NAE for the past year.
I've had the opportunity to spend some time with Leith Anderson. I believe he is the kind of leader most needed these days, both for the NAE and for the wider evangelical community. He has both the heart of a pastor and the passion of a prophet, and he finds ways to be true to his convictions and be committed to bridge-building.
There is no shortage of evangelicals that have passion about every topic in contemporary life. The challenge here is not to find people who are interested. There are plenty of people who are interested. It's, How do we unite evangelicals in understanding what the issues are and having a moral perspective in how we approach them?
And, in developing that moral perspective, he noted
We have a document that is called "For the Health of the Nation." They are seven priorities that the NAE organizes around in terms of being a public voice.
[The document] relates to religious freedom, sanctity of human life, human rights, and creation care. It was first issued in 2003 and then reaffirmed by the NAE in March of this year. What we're doing is organizing many of the activities of the Washington office and the association around each one. These are big topics like justice and compassion for the poor and the vulnerable.
On immigration reform, one of the most controversial issues in America today, Anderson said,
I'm hoping that in the future we are also going to be able to engage more on the issue of immigration in America. It's a pressing issue that the country needs to unite around. We need to have a biblical voice. We need to recognize this is a high concern for the Hispanic community, which has a large numbers of evangelicals within it. Hispanic churches are the fastest growing in the nation and immigration is a top priority. Up to this point, NAE has not made any formal statements on it. I just anticipate this will be a growing priority and concern which fits under the topic of justice.
I congratulate Leigh Anderson on his new position, and look forward to working with him.
When I tell people that I work on immigration reform, they usually laugh or say, "way to pick an easy topic." Everyday it feels like there is more fear, more hate. Raids are picking up in Nevada, California, and New York. A number of senators who supported comprehensive reform only a few months ago have jumped on the bandwagon with their enforcement-only colleagues. Even a recent C-SPAN radio caller's biggest concern about the children's healthcare plan was: "Those illegal aliens better not have access to S-CHIP money." It saddens and exhausts me. I ask myself, "Why do I keep working for a cause that is so controversial, and often so negative?"
I recently had a very clear reminder of why I do. Four farm workers–Eduviges Gonzales, Silvia Huerta, Bautista Zamora, and Estela Ferrer–came to lobby Congress for a path to citizenship for their undocumented coworkers. Three are U.S. citizens and one is a legal permanent resident. They were part of an effort organized by numerous farm worker groups, including the United Farm Workers - the union founded by César Chávez.
Each of them spoke about shortages of workers creating big problems in the fruit and vegetable fields around the country. Then, they began to share their personal stories. Eduviges proudly held up her hand to show off a large callous on her palm below her middle finger and began her testimony:
This is proof of my hard work and dedication to this country. I have worked harvesting mushrooms in Salinas, California for 19 years. I am so proud of my work because I know that every mushroom I pick goes to the mouth of someone who needs to be nourished. I feel this very strongly in my heart.
At that point, tears began to roll down her cheeks, but her voice stayed remarkably strong. She went on:
I am here today because of our children. They see ICE detaining people on the evening news. My son asks me, "Why are they taking that person away? Did they pick bad lettuce or bad strawberries?" His fear weighs on my heart and I don't know what to tell him.
The congressional staffer was clearly moved. I explained that the bill we were supporting - AgJOBS - would put qualified farm workers on a path to permanent residency. It's just one piece of an incredibly complex issue facing this country. But for farm workers who have been slaving in our fields for years, it would be a tremendous step toward personal and economic security.
As we were going to dinner, Silvia asked me if I would be going back to live in California with my family. I told her that I lived in Washington, D.C., because I was working for comprehensive immigration reform, and it's important to have strong advocates here in the capital. "Oh, yes!" she responded, "in that case, we need you to stay right here. We need all the help we can get!"
Her words have been sinking in. Suddenly, my work in this long-term struggle for immigration reform seems like the obvious choice.
Patty Kupfer is the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform campaign coordinator at Sojourners.
I sat with Elvira Arellano at a press conference last weekend with representatives of our sanctuary families in Los Angeles. Several of the reporters asked her if she believed that she was the Rosa Parks of the immigrant rights movement. Her response was simple and clear – “I am Elvira Arrellano, just a mother who does not want to be separated from my child nor to take him away from his country.”
Of course, she is now deported and has to face the terrible choice of being apart from her son or keeping him from all of the benefits and opportunities that are his birthright as an American citizen.
Why did Elvira risk deportation by leaving sanctuary? Elvira’s stated purpose in risking deportation was to renew attention to the plight of the hundreds of thousands of families like hers – families that are facing the threat of being broken by a broken immigration system – and to issue an urgent call for comprehensive immigration reform.
We have been asked repeatedly about the impact of Elvira’s arrest on the New Sanctuary Movement. Across the country, the impact is consistent. We are saddened by her arrest, and we know that many immigrant families are experiencing greater trauma and fear as a result. However, her courage is also inspiring the families in sanctuary and their allies to strengthen our efforts to make visible the unjust suffering of children and their families.
We are committed to continue and to expand the New Sanctuary Movement because we believe that true immigration reform will require that many more native-born Americans and immigrants across the nation understand the contribution of immigrants to our society, the path to a humane and effective immigration system, and the current suffering of families.
We believe that this understanding will only come when non-immigrants know immigrant families personally as members of the same human family, beloved by God.
We believe that by continuing to make visible the faces and stories of immigrant families facing deportation, in the light of spiritual principles and moral values, we will, in God’s time:
Change the hearts and minds of those who currently want to deport immigrant workers and their families.
Inspire supportive community members to active and ongoing civic participation.
Heal immigrant workers and their families who are traumatized by the current waves of hatred and rejection and enable them to participate actively in education and advocacy.
Rev. Alexia Salvatierra is the executive director of CLUE (Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice), an organization of religious leaders in Los Angeles county who support low-wage workers in their struggle for a living wage, health insurance, fair working conditions, and a voice in the decisions that affect them.
But for three hiatuses for school, I've lived my whole life in the Twin Cities, and my heritage and skin tone match the Lake Wobegon image of my city and state. I'm the descendant of German, Norwegian, Welsh, and British immigrants. I've even been known to utter "you betcha" on occasion. But the new faces of Minnesota have been on display in the wake of the I-35W bridge collapse on August 1.
Yesterday, nearly three weeks after the collapse, the remains of the final victim, Greg Jolstad, were recovered. The list of victims tells a tale of today's Minnesota. There's the very Scandinavian last name Engebretsen, which belonged to a middle-aged mom who worked for Thrivent Financial for Lutherans. But alongside the victims who were of Northern European descent (Hausmann, Holmes, Sathers, and Eickstadt) are surnames from around the globe: Trinidad-Mena (Mexican), Sacorafas (Greek), Sahal (Somalian), Peck and Chit (Asian), as well as Native American: Blackhawk (Winnebago).
They were white-collar and blue-collar, Protestant, Catholic, and Muslim, married dads, and single moms. The oldest was 60, the youngest was 2. One was pregnant. One had Down syndrome.
Pollsters tell us that our quaint land here in the Upper Midwest is changing, that immigration is reshaping Lake Wobegon. But in the information age, those macro-polls are often lost on us.
However, when a bridge collapses during rush hour, it takes a tragic snapshot of just who lives around us.
"Who is my neighbor?" a questioner asked Jesus.
The bridge collapse gave me a new answer to that question.
Elvira Arellano, the young mother who sparked the New Sanctuary Movement and appears prominently in the current issue of Sojourners magazine, was arrested Sunday afternoon in Los Angeles and was deported to Tijuana, Mexico, within hours of her arrest. Arellano left her physical sanctuary in a Chicago church last week in order to make a more public case against the raids and deportations that are threatening to separate undocumented immigrants from their citizen children.
Federal authorities Sunday arrested Elvira Arellano on a downtown city street, ending a yearlong standoff that intensified recently after the illegal Mexican immigrant began what was to be a nationwide campaign to push for new immigration reforms.
Patty Kupfer is the Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform campaign coordinator at Sojourners/Call to Renewal.
John Howard Yoder, a Mennonite theologian and significant influence on Sojourners, used to say that the world often helps the church remember what it means to be church. The observations of those outside often serve to return the church to its roots.
Recently, church leaders and faith based organizations have gotten a lot of flack over their outspoken support of comprehensive immigration reform. In light of Yoder, I've been mulling over the criticisms from Lou Dobbs and others, wondering if there are any lessons for us.
It took me awhile, but I think I found one. Dobbs loves to point out the "schism between the leadership of churches and religious organizations and their followers and members" over the issue of immigration. While the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Council of Churches, and even the National Association of Evangelicals call for compassionate policies, many Christians express support for harsh, enforcement-only measures like last year's Sensenbrenner bill. Dobbs is right: Our leaders call for inclusion, while the rest of us say "kick 'em out!"
Clearly there is a communication breakdown, one that I think runs much deeper than failing to educate the people in the pews about immigration polices. Rather, I think this gap demonstrates the failure of church leadership to instill in its people a deeper understanding of their Christian identity.
I recently sat in on a Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform strategy session. Krista Zimmerman, who works for the Mennonite Central Committee, often travels to churches to discuss immigration. She lamented how many white churches fail to see the crisis as their problem, and how the discussion often breaks down into "us" and "them," even when talking about members of the same church body. She said we have failed to help the church realize it is an "us."
Theologically, she is exactly right. The church is to be our first family and primary allegiance, and we are to find our identity together in Christ above everything else. Being part of the church is to be a more determinative identity than any of the other ones we carry with us: nationality, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, etc. It is "more real" than anything else about us. When we hold something about us to be more important than our Christian identity (i.e., our American citizenship), we are practicing idolatry and deceiving ourselves. It seems the church in the U.S. has largely forgotten this.
Sociologically, Zimmerman was spot-on as well. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, 78 percent of undocumented immigrants (around 9.4 million people) currently in the United States came from Mexico or Central America. In another survey, Pew found that 87 percent of Latinos self-identify as Catholic or Protestant. This means that there are over 8.1 million Christians in the U.S. who are undocumented immigrants. The body of Christ, it seems, does not have all its papers.
With the collapse of the comprehensive reform bill in the Senate, it now seems that it will have to wait a little longer to get those papers, and many of our brothers and sisters will suffer and be deported in the meantime. This is to be lamented. At the same time, the government's callous inaction provides us with a new opportunity to be the body of Christ. The New Sanctuary Movement is one way churches are siding with our undocumented sisters and brothers, and boldly challenging our nation's inhumane immigration laws.
Most of us aren't there yet, though, as Lou Dobbs pointed out. Later in the meeting, Bill Medford of the United Methodist Church said what most churches need isn't political organizers as much as we need party planners—people who will bring white and immigrant churches together for fellowship. Out of this sharing, eating, and singing will grow a sense of unity and shared calling. Then when the homes of our brothers and sisters are raided, or they are threatened with deportation, we won't hesitate to act on their behalf ... because it's really our behalf.
Ultimately, how the church in the United States responds to the immigration crisis is less a matter of legislation and more a question of Christian identity and test of our discipleship.
Will our actions legitimize false differences? Or will we stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters of faith, together as the undocumented body of Christ?
Tim Kumfer is the executive assistant at Sojourners/Call to Renewal.
Issues related to immigration are in the news this week. A new study finds that immigrants from Mexico and Central America are now "living under a dramatically increased sense of siege." A poll reported in the study found that "More than one-third of Central Americans and 30 percent of Mexicans said their biggest problem in the United States was discrimination, compared with single-digit responses for similar questions in 2004, and 83 percent of Mexicans and 79 percent of Central Americans said this year that discrimination was rising."
The McClatchy Newspapers report quoted Sergio Bendixen, founder of the Miami-based Bendixen & Associates, who conducted the study: "What I have found is both ugly and sad. There are millions of Latin American immigrants, especially those living in the deep South and the upper Midwest, whose lives have been made miserable by the anti-immigrant sentiment that is now so prevalent in so many geographic areas."
As a result of Congress' failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, that sentiment is now playing out with states and local jurisdictions passing harsh anti-immigrant legislation. The Los Angeles Times reports that nearly 200 state laws have been passed so far in 2007, with the trend being toward more restrictive measures. But, as Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute said: "The problem is these local measures are not going to deliver control. It's probably not going to work, but it will make life miserable for a lot of people." Not only have these restrictive measures been proven consistently unconstitutional, but the enforcement of such a patchwork of conflicting local ordinances would be unpractical and create increasingly divided communities.
Not to be outdone, the federal Department of Homeland Security is planning tough new rules on the hiring of illegal immigrants. And according to The New York Times, "Officials said the rules would be backed up by stepped-up raids on workplaces across the country that employ illegal immigrants." A spokesman for DHS added, "We are tough and we are going to be even tougher."
Ugly, sad, and tougher. With the failure of Congress to enact a fair and just immigration system, that's what we've come to. More raids on workplace and more families separated. It's time to remember and act on our fundamental beliefs as people of faith, as the Statement of Principles of Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform puts it:
We believe that all people, regardless of national origin, are made in the "image of God" and deserve to be treated with dignity and respect (Genesis 1:26-27, 9:6).
We believe there is an undeniable biblical responsibility to love and show compassion for the stranger among us (Deuteronomy 10:18-19, Leviticus 19:33-34, Matthew 25:31-46).
We believe that immigrants are our neighbors, both literally and figuratively, and we are to love our neighbors as ourselves and show mercy to neighbors in need (Leviticus 19:18, Mark 12:31, Luke 10:25-37).
We believe in the rule of law, but we also believe that we are to oppose unjust laws and systems that harm and oppress people made in God's image, especially the vulnerable (Isaiah 10:1-4, Jeremiah 7:1-7, Acts 5:29, Romans 13:1-7).
When I was doing missionary work in Southeast Asia, I attended a service in a language that I didn’t speak. At a certain point, I discerned that they were saying the Lord’s Prayer. It was an amazing moment; I felt the depth of our connection as brothers and sisters in Christ, beyond all of our differences. When we got to the line, “Forgive our debts as we forgive our debtors,” I was struck by the insight that one of the deepest roots of our connection is the common experience of God’s mercy. While we were yet sinners ... while we did not deserve forgiveness … before we had any capacity to repent ... someone loved us enough to die for us. Someone had compassion on us—literally “com” (with) and “passion” (feeling)—someone felt with us, felt our pain as if it was his pain, our hopes and dreams as if they were his hopes and dreams.
Sanctuary is an act of compassion, an expression of mercy. It is, however, not mercy at the expense of justice. Participants in the New Sanctuary Movement believe that our current immigration system is profoundly unjust—so unjust that we believe that we are facing one of those unique moments throughout history when divine law and human law are in conflict and God’s justice demands that we stand with those who break unjust laws even at the risk of sharing their punishment. Sanctuary is not only about mercy; it is also about justice.
But for many of us, the decision to provide sanctuary is rooted in the impulse of the heart to love as we have been loved—to hear the cries of Liliana and Joe and Mae and Jose and Juan and Jean’s children and respond with compassion.
Yet, the act of sanctuary is more than simple charity. What we do with someone who has broken into our house only to go on to clean it, take care of our garden, remodel the deck, watch over the children, and cook us dinner? We read in Hebrews that those of us who provide hospitality have entertained angels unaware. To offer sanctuary is to recognize that the strangers in our midst are blessing us, in clear and mysterious ways. May we respond with the hospitality that we have received.
Rev. Alexia Salvatierra is the Executive Director of CLUE (Clergy and Laity United for Economic Justice), an organization of religious leaders in Los Angeles county who support low-wage workers in their struggle for a living wage, health insurance, fair working conditions, and a voice in the decisions that affect them.
The current immigration deal under consideration in the Senate needs a family values fix. Right now, there are "an estimated 1.5 million legal immigrants in the United States who have been waiting as long as seven years to bring husbands, wives and small children to live with them." The current immigration bill does NOTHING to fix this, and in fact, reduces the number of family reunification visas available each year. This means that the backlog of families waiting to be reunited will only continue to grow. ...
[S] houldn't there be a lot more noise on this from the faith community, from the left and right? Shouldn't all groups who claim to be pro-family be firing up their constituencies in support of this family values fix? Here are the statements from religious leaders and organizations that we have seen so far ... anyone seen any more?
Driving around yesterday afternoon, I was flipping between the news on two radio stations – a local talk station and BBC World Radio. During the same hour, both stations covered the same story about Islam: the findings of the first-ever nationwide survey of American Muslims, a study conducted by The Pew Research Center.
The commercial station led with the finding that one in four younger American Muslims support – under some circumstances – the practice of suicide bombing in defense of Islam. The BBC report highlighted the fact that American Muslims are far more middle class and assimilated to mainstream culture than European Muslims. The two stations, one sensationalistic and the other measured, seemed as if they were reporting on entirely different research! I went home and downloaded the whole study to check it out for myself.
Needless to say, the commercial station lifted the edgiest finding – one tempered by the fact that Muslim Americans reject religious terrorism by a much larger margin than do Muslims in other western countries. Older American Muslims almost completely reject Islamic terrorism, and half are “very concerned” about Islamic extremism throughout the world. And 53 percent also say that since Sept. 11 it has become “harder” to be a Muslim in the U.S.
The BBC got the big story right. According to the survey, American Muslims are happy, politically and socially moderate, and middle class. The data counters conventional wisdom. U.S. Muslims are better educated, have higher incomes, and express a higher degree of life satisfaction than European Muslims. Fifty-three percent think of themselves as “American” first and “Muslim” second. They believe the American dream: 71 percent agree that people who work hard can get ahead. Almost two-thirds said that “life is better” for Muslim women in America than in Muslim countries.
Muslim satisfaction with American life is a pleasant surprise; a result that should cause all Americans to consider how well immigration can work. However interesting that data may be, the story behind the story – that of the contrasts between U.S. and European Muslims – strikes me as more provocative. In Britain, France, Germany, and Spain, Muslims are much poorer than other citizens. Eighty-one percent of British Muslims consider themselves “Muslim” first and “British” second. French, German, and Spanish Muslims express little concern over Islamic extremism. Of all western Muslims, those living in Germany and Spain expressed greatest life dissatisfaction. Germany and Spain were, of course, places where the Sept. 11 terrorists had cells and financial support.
The primary historical difference regarding religion between the United States and these western European nations is the separation of church and state. Britain, France, Germany, and Spain have long – and often violent – histories of church-state establishments, often having made Christianity (or some form of Christianity) their official religion. In some cases, religious toleration was forced (either slowly or violently) upon European governments, not developing as a natural part of the society’s internal sense of identity. As recently as 2000, during the writing of the European Union Constitution, many Europeans still argued that Europe was “Christian,” and that religious identity should be part of the Union’s legal apparatus.
In the United States, Christianity was the religion of vast numbers of early settlers and political leaders. But it was never of a singular form, allowing for religious diversity since the nation’s founding (and, please, remember the native religions that inhabited this land). Diversity made it impossible for one church to gain hegemony over politics thus necessitating the establishment clause and guarantees for religious freedom. Eventually, the experience of religious diversity, a desire for toleration, and the prohibition of establishment led to the contemporary doctrine of the separation of church and state. At its best, America has a heritage of Christian liberality, intellectually influenced by Christianity but open to a wide range of ideas and peoples through the practice of religious toleration. Religious freedom is the great American contribution to classical liberalism and the foundation of contemporary liberal movements.
With its contrast between the U.S. and Europe, the Pew study suggests that the separation of church and state works to create a more generous, open, and safer society in regard to terrorism. In his recent book, Freedom’s Power: The True Force of Liberalism, Paul Starr argues:
[T]he guarantees of religious toleration and freedom of conscience exemplify the logic of liberalism as a foundation for a stable policy. Internecine religious conflicts and wars of religion, like revenge feuds, deplete the powers of states and societies. Religious toleration serves not only to allow people to worship differently but also to reduce conflict, facilitate economic exchange, and create a wider pool of talent for productive work and the state itself (p. 22).
Since Sept. 11, some Christians have called for an end to the separation of church and state to combat terrorism, claiming a stronger national Christian identity, a “Christian America,” is the way to defeat Islamic extremism – a tactic employed by some reactionary European political parties. The Pew study shows that approach is wrong-headed. The path to peace between Christians and Muslims is that of religious freedom, separation of church and state, and appreciative toleration in the best traditions of liberality.
The immigration system in America is beyond broken; it is in crisis. Because it is not simply a crisis limited to issues of documentation and border enforcement, but rather one that is tearing at the very fabric of individuals, families, and communities, it is a crisis that the church is, in my opinion, compelled to address.
The Hebrew prophet Micah declared that God’s expectation of the faithful is to “do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God.” We take in part, from that mandate, the understanding of bringing both justice and compassion to circumstances of human need. And also we understand the need to soberly, humbly, and prayerfully consider the response from the church to this crisis in order that far more light than heat is added to the present dialogue and subsequent solutions.
I commend Congress as it begins the “heavy lifting” of crafting legislation that is fair and comprehensive, that keeps our nation secure, and that preserves family values as well as strengthening the economic and social fabric of our society.
But I also come to you today with a pastor’s heart, and with the deeply held concern that any laws enacted consider the very American tradition of compassion. The heart of what we teach, preach, and live is anchored in the Good News, Christ’s saving and liberating love and compassion that has not built walls, but “broken every barrier down.”
Family, in its strongest and most stable structure, is an essential pillar of our society. Within the church the institution of family is supported, encouraged, and applauded. In my own congregation, I see again and again - and am truly thankful for - the examples of family strength and values in the homes and lives of those who have immigrated to the United States.
The limitation of family-based immigration by the reduction of family reunification visas would impair that family structure in significant measure. Siblings, adult children, and parents (those directly affected by any potential reduction) are in many examples and cultural contexts core, and not merely “extended,” family. It is also important to note here the idea of “chain” immigration, the concept asserting that immigrants sponsor an uncontrollable number of family members, is without basis. In reality, only immigrants who have already gained legal permanent residency or U.S. citizenship are able to sponsor relatives, and on average only 1.2 family members are sponsored.
It is within the structure of families that immigration reform can wield the most enduring benefits. Through a process of restitution, integration into the larger community, and a pathway to earned citizenship, we will do away with a system that has kept millions of hard-working individuals who wish to become productive, law-abiding members of our society in the shadows, and has prevented numerous families from being fully intact and stable (two conditions that benefit society).
Finally, let me say that many within the historically African-American church have made their voices heard in support of comprehensive immigration reform. Like the overwhelming majority of all Americans, African-American voters support immigration reform that includes enforcement and a path to citizenship. It is the legitimate continuing legacy of the civil rights struggle and part of the very nature of the African-American church that one should speak for those who have no voice, advocate for those who have no power, and stand for those who are not represented. But with a fair and compassionate earned pathway to citizenship, those who are now in the shadows will be able to speak, be empowered, and stand for themselves.
Rev. Derrick Harkins is Senior Pastor of the Nineteenth Street Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. He previously has served as a pastor in Dallas, Texas, and as the Assistant Pastor of the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, New York. He is a member of the Board of Directors for World Relief, and a vice president of the North American Baptist Fellowship of the Baptist World Alliance. This post is adapted from his testimony to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law in the House of Representatives on May 22, 2007.
CNN host Lou Dobbs is a man of strong opinions - but last week he offered a wrong opinion. Dobbs challenged the First Amendment rights of pastors and asked his viewers in an online poll whether they believe "churches and religious institutions that engage in political activity should have their federal tax exemptions revoked." He attacked church leaders for speaking out on the immigration debate.
There is much disagreement on immigration, but these leaders have every right to express their views. Last year, Lou Dobbs said the "intrusion of religion into our political lives, in my opinion, should be rejected in the same fashion that we constitutionally guarantee government will not interfere with religion."
Throughout American history, church leaders have spoken out on the vital moral issues of the day - whether it be slavery, civil rights, or in defense of the family and the dignity of human life. One of the enduring lessons the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. taught is the power a religious community can have in society. Reverend King said, "The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority."
While the Iranian government plays a complicated game of international roulette regarding its nuclear power and weapons capacity, its role in stabilizing (or de-stabilizing Iraq), and its work to stem the flow of drugs through the Middle East, one thing - sadly - has remained consistent: human rights abuses.
Less than three weeks before the much touted U.S-Iran meetings on May 28, Iranian security forces have abducted and imprisoned Haleh Esfandiari, the 67-year-old director of the Middle East Program at the Washington, D.C.-based Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Dr. Esfandiari, who has lived in the U.S since 1980 and traveled to Iran to visit her 93-year-old mother, has been held for a week at Tehran's notorious Evin Prison.
“Her arrest,” reported a London-based Iranian agency, “came amid increasing restrictions on Iranian rights groups, particularly women's organizations, and other critics by the hard-line government of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iranian authorities have stepped up their warnings that the U.S. aims to use internal critics to destabilize the Iranian government amid the mounting tensions between the two countries.” Nobel peace laureate Shirin Ebadi, who has herself been imprisoned at Evin, has agreed to defend Esfandiari through Ebadi’s organization, the Human Rights Defenders Center.
“Gracefully she approached, in a dress of bright blue silk,” writes Iranian poet Simin Behbahani. “With an olive branch in her hand, and many tales of sorrows in her eyes. Running to her, I greeted her, and took her hand in mine: Pulses could still be felt in her veins; warm was still her body with life.” We pray for Haleh Esfandiari’s safety and the protection of her grace and dignity.
It’ll feel good to get this off my chest: I’m harboring an undocumented person. Growing at the rate of half a pound each week, somewhere between my rib cage and my bladder, this interloper is preparing to make his/her grand entrance sometime in the next four to seven weeks - and for the life of me, I can’t figure out whether he or she is a true-blooded U.S. citizen.
Unlike many of our uninvited, hard-working guests currently in the United States, this little stowaway doesn’t have so much as a library card for documentation. And what about this meaningless “birth certificate” I’ll sign with the aid of my coyote (okay, midwife)? I’ve looked that document over, and as far as I can tell it doesn’t offer any guarantee that this new citizen will be productive, good looking, or give a hoot about U.S. foreign policy. Do we really want such an unpredictable kid running wild on the streets of Washington, D.C.?
So what exactly has this child done to deserve U.S. citizenship? Should he/she expect a free ride on the American Dream Expressway just for passing through the birth canal of a tax-paying, hard-working, U.S.-citizen mother? Talk about cheating the system! This small fry hasn’t paid one cent of taxes (and if I read the IRS materials correctly, I actually get to pay less when he/she hits the scene!), I’d be surprised if he/she can speak more than a few words of English within a year of arriving on U.S. soil, and instead of contributing to the U.S. economy this little person will just take, take, take.
Right now the U.S. Senate is working hard to hammer out the details of building big fences on the border (mostly concerning themselves with the one to the south) and finding ways to make immigrants pay for the great honor of picking tomatoes for our Big Macs and turning down the sheets at our Hilton Hotels. They’re suggesting that these workers pay $5,000 (over 20 percent of the average yearly salary for an agricultural worker) and return to their country of origin to get a nice stamp in a visa book before returning to pick up where they left off in those high-paying gigs.
What’s wrong with coming up with a way to make sure that those lucky enough to be born on U.S. soil actually deserve the benefits of citizenship that are so casually bestowed to them when they arrive, all wrinkled-up and screaming? If some folks are willing to walk across a burning desert with no money, little water, and no guarantee they’ll make it past some over-caffeinated Minuteman’s pickup truck, shouldn’t we ensure that those who make the comparatively easy trip down the birth canal work a little bit harder for their journey to citizenship?
Here’s my proposal: nobody gets automatic U.S. citizenship. Instead, we give ourselves some time to get to know these new recruits. How about instituting a review board for toddlers? For those who show anti-social tendencies (remember, we've grown terrorists here, too) we’ll go ahead and install some wiretaps and video-cams for closer observation. And imagine having all 12-year-olds pass an English language and citizenship test. Additionally, the $5,000 citizenship fee should be extended to all who wish to live and work in this great land. Or, better yet, we institute a progressive fee determined by an individual’s net worth. Rich kids will pay more. A large number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. currently pay taxes, so that’s no excuse for those of us born here - from here on out you pay your taxes and you pay for the unwarranted privilege of being born in Atlanta, Georgia, Granville, Ohio, Sacramento, California, etc. Fair is fair.
Oh, and these kids shouldn’t be allowed to vote until enough pollsters have been dispatched to figure out exactly which way they swing. If they promise to disrupt the balance of power, we won’t allow them in the voting booth. Our democracy depends on stability and predictability. Who knows what upstarts are being born right now?
As one or two country music musicians remind us: freedom isn't free. And U.S. citizenship shouldn’t be either. A note to the little kick boxer in my belly – Immigration and Customs Enforcement may not be knocking down the door to our birthing room, but don’t think because you’re scheduled to be born on the 4th of July it means you deserve high-priced healthcare and the freedom to own a gun. Kid, you’re going to have to prove you deserved to be born here.
Amy Ard is the National Field Organizer for Sojourners/Call to Renewal.
At age 75, Dolores Huerta—the mother of the United Farm Workers movement—serves as president of the Dolores Huerta Foundation, which educates on public policy issues affecting immigrants, women, and youth. As an advocate for immigrant workers rights, Dolores has been arrested 22 times for non-violent peaceful union activities. In 1998, Dolores received the United States Presidential Eleanor D. Roosevelt Human Rights Award from President Clinton. On May 3, 2007, she addressed 2,500 women at the New York Women’s Foundation on the need for comprehensive immigration reform.
At a press conference announcing Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Jim talked about "welcoming the stranger" and "the least of these." Watch it:
See Jim and others respond to questions about the breadth of the campaign here. You can watch the entire press conference at Faith in Public Life. Jim's remarks weren't lost on Lou Dobbs, who aired this segment:
Copyright (c) 2006 Beliefnet, Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this site is subject to Terms
of Service and to our
Privacy Policy.
Constructed by Beliefnet.
Last year I lived in a Catholic Worker house that offers hospitality to immigrants without first inquiring about their legal status. One day, a woman called the house on behalf of two young boys who had come home to an empty apartment; their parents had been taken in a raid, and the boys had no other relatives or friends in the country. They had been born in the U.S., but their parents were undocumented workers; the raid had traumatized and temporarily orphaned them. They were afraid to leave their home and had no idea how to locate their parents.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Allison Johnson is the policy and organizing assistant for Sojourners.
As a South African, it is a downright shame that brothers and sisters from other countries in 
Seth Naicker is an activist for justice and reconciliation from South Africa. He is currently studying and working at Bethel University, in St. Paul, Minnesota, as the program and projects director for the Office of Reconciliation Studies. He can be reached at: 
When I first decided to spend this semester of my college career in 
Carolyn Delossantos is a junior at Gordon College. She just completed a semester internship at Sojourners.
A few of us around Sojourners have been reading award-winning Haitian-born writer Edwidge Danticat since she published her first novel Breath, Eyes, Memory in 1994. Ten years later we were thrilled when she sent us a lovely vignette, 
The Hebrew Scriptures clearly call for the children of Israel to make room for the alien. The Israelites are reminded that they, too, were once aliens in a strange and distant land.
In the past year, political expediency, xenophobia, and extremism defeated reason, compromise, and reconciliation in the immigration debate. The level of animosity directed towards the immigrant community, particularly the Latino community, stands at an all time high. We cannot stay silent. 
Rev. Samuel Rodriguez Jr. is president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, an organization of Hispanic evangelicals. 
Rev. Gabriel Salguero is the pastor of the Lamb’s Church of the Nazarene in New York City, a Ph.D. candidate at Union Theological Seminary, and the director of the Hispanic Leadership Program at Princeton Theological Seminary. He is also a Sojourners board member.
There seems to be much concern lately over the people being referred to as "illegal immigrants." Let's define our terms: "Immigrant" - somebody who has come to a country and settled there. "Illegal" - forbidden by law. Concern about illegal immigrants has a familiar ring to us Native Americans. We have been empathizing with those concerns for over half a millennium.
Rev. Randy Woodley is a Keetoowah Cherokee Indian teacher, lecturer, poet, activist, pastor and the author of 
A reader asked about 
At its board meeting last month, the National Association of Evangelicals formally named Leith Anderson as its president. Anderson is senior pastor of Wooddale Church in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, and has been serving as interim president of the NAE for the past year.
I sat with 
But for three hiatuses for school, I've lived my whole life in the Twin Cities, and my heritage and skin tone match the Lake Wobegon image of my city and state. I'm the descendant of German, Norwegian, Welsh, and British immigrants. I've even been known to utter "you betcha" on occasion. But the new faces of Minnesota have been on display in the wake of the I-35W bridge collapse on August 1.
John Howard Yoder, a Mennonite theologian and significant influence on Sojourners, used to say that the world often helps the church remember what it means to be church. The observations of those outside often serve to return the church to its roots.
The immigration system in America is beyond broken; it is in crisis. Because it is not simply a crisis limited to issues of documentation and border enforcement, but rather one that is tearing at the very fabric of individuals, families, and communities, it is a crisis that the church is, in my opinion, compelled to address.
Rev. Derrick Harkins is Senior Pastor of the Nineteenth Street Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. He previously has served as a pastor in Dallas, Texas, and as the Assistant Pastor of the Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, New York. He is a member of the Board of Directors for World Relief, and a vice president of the North American Baptist Fellowship of the Baptist World Alliance. This post is adapted from his testimony to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law in the House of Representatives on May 22, 2007.
While the Iranian government plays a complicated game of international roulette regarding its nuclear power and weapons capacity, its role in stabilizing (or de-stabilizing Iraq), and its work to stem the flow of drugs through the Middle East, one thing - sadly - has remained consistent: 
It’ll feel good to get this off my chest: I’m harboring an undocumented person. Growing at the rate of half a pound each week, somewhere between my rib cage and my bladder, this interloper is preparing to make his/her grand entrance sometime in the next four to seven weeks - and for the life of me, I can’t figure out whether he or she is a true-blooded U.S. citizen.
At age 75, 
