The Immigration Question: Part Two

Framing the Discussion in Unfortunate Ways

by M. Daniel Carroll R.

It is the news. It is making the rounds on radio talk shows and the television news networks. The “IT,” of course, is the legislation signed into law last Friday by the governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer. This is not the place to rehearse its contents; others—newspapers, magazines, internet resources—have done that. But it is safe to say that it is the strictest (some say draconian) legislation directed at undocumented immigrants in the country to date.

Those of us who are involved in some fashion in the push toward comprehensive immigration reform are hearing accounts of fear and intimidation coming out of that state. Hispanics are already being stopped and asked for identity papers; families are packing up and leaving their homes; congregations have already lost members and leaders who are fleeing Arizona; ministries that work within Hispanic neighborhoods are trying to cope and pastor the many who are worried about driving to work, school or church… the stories are many and will increase over he next few weeks.

There are many ways to approach this law and criticize it for its potential violation of human dignity, racial profiling, constitutionality and the like. I would like to return to something I've said in the past:

“Laws reflect the values of a nation. The laws of Israel were to demonstrate compassion to those in need... This ultimately was because God himself loves these people (Deut. 10:17-19). In other words, the Old Testament Law was to reflect the very heart of God and his values. Here then is a test for any nation: How do the laws treat the vulnerable in its midst? Is the engagement with those from the outside for exploitation and pushing them to the margins as inferior persons? Or, do the laws extend a hand in charity and justice to those who struggle?”

What does the Arizona legislation say about us as a nation? Where is our heart? What do we value, and what measures are we willing to put into law to protect what we value? God loves the vulnerable; is this nation instead singling out the vulnerable to exclude them and drive them away or further into the shadows?

The Arizona legislation has reduced the complexities of immigration to the issue of national security and criminality. Now the discussion there is framed around these two topics, and other key matters such as human dignity and the sacredness of the family are pushed to the side. Is national security an item to be handled? Of course it is (drug trafficking, violence, etc.); but national security cannot dominate the debate. Of the hundreds of thousands in Arizona who are undocumented, how many are involved in these kinds of activities? How do the new laws deal with education, health, and work issues? This kind of reductionism is shortsighted and polarizing; it is counterproductive and harmful to the immigrant and to the national ethos alike.

This post and others by Danny Carroll can be found at Denver Seminary's website.

Comments

Loran E. Scott

Your statement starts as though this is a new problem. Not so! There is a long history to this issue. You state that "Laws reflect the values of a nation." This problem began with those who have failed to observe the laws of this nations, both from within and from without. We have had a long history of failure to keep the laws of our own nation, in the matter under discussion, and in so doing we have not upheld the values inherent in those existing laws as well as having been disobedient to them ourselves. The lack of loyalty and obedience from within is a very great part of this current event.

By the same token, those who have taken advantage of our lack of upholding our own laws are equally at fault for their willingness to further denigrate and destroy those laws that have good values within them.

In the process of both sides having destroyed the value of law, we come to the present event in which it appears that the former values expressed when the original immigration laws were adopted now have been carefully re-expressed in the current legislation as an attempt to begin a process to restore those original laws and values. There is a great outpouring of emotion because we, each one of us, desire not to be caught up in guilt --- whether citizen or illegal immigrant. So, we appeal to 'rights' --

Being a Seminary student, surely you are aware of Holy Writ that reminds us that "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." It is in the loud and vociferous clamoring for rights that the greatest calamity is created, for Scripture also reminds us that it is when are willing to own our own actions (maybe they are sins?) and, in humility before God, to confess them to Almighty God (see Psalm 32) that there is a real and possible resolution to the conflict. As presently being debated / fought, there will only be pain and destruction to all involved -- whether on either side within the USofA, or by those who have the distinction of being illegal immigrants within this land.

The Arizona legislature has started at the proper starting point by reasserting the law and the values of this land with their re-statement of the law. It is time for the rest of us to claim our own involvement and, in humility, begin to seek those procedures of resolution for this most serious condition.

By the way, there are procedures which this nation has used in the past that have been very successful in resolving such disputes. It is too bad that so few know their history well enough to remember them. I have been, within my lifetime, the recipient of the values of some of these procedures. There is hope, if we adopt the proper manners to get to them! ---- Loran E. Scott, Honorably Retired 2X ---

Michael Batley

"Laws reflect the values of a nation"

Yes they do, and thank goodness for that.

Quite possibly the greatest value we still have in this country is "the rule of Law." It is what keeps us a civil society. As long as that value rules the day we may continue to stand as a country long after other societies fall.

Go overseas (especially Greece) now and those places that have ignored this important value have accepted a form of anarchy. In these places bribery, tax cheating, lying, produce an underground economy that stifles true opportunity and erodes a civil society where, in the end, those who best wield brutish power will rule.

Only our value of "the rule of Law" prevents us from moving down this road. Couple that value with the value of our nation's sovereignty and you have a very powerful argument for not allowing anyone to simply ignore a law because it is inconvenient.

42 states already have laws on their books requiring citizens to produce some sort of official document when asked by police. This is nothing new. This law only takes effect if the person is pulled over for a primary suspicion or offense.

The vast majority--probably in the high 90's percentile--are here for purely economic reasons. They aren't here because of persecution, or other political issues. There exists a process (a very poor one I admit) to apply to come here legally. That should be addressed. That should be the focus here. But to simply encourage millions of people to pick and choose to follow only those laws that happen to work for them is a recipe for societal disaster in the end.

Joden Caine

Well, so far I am the only one, but I wholeheartedly agree with the author. My problem with the Arizona immigration law is that it's application will be to essentially assume that if you are brown-skinned and look hispanic, you have likely violated our nation's laws and therefore should be questioned and perhaps detained. Yes, I came right out and said it. It is the ugly truth of this new law that nobody who supports it is willing to confront about it.

It doesn't take a scholar of history to notice that when nations have previously taken such dramatic measures to isolate and root out those who start out as immigrants and end up as enemies, terrorists, or vermin in our vernacular, awful things are done in the name of upholding the laws of the land. Things nobody could ever be proud of, but only see for what they are in hindsight. Here we have already taken our first step in that direction and there are a lot of people not only willing to be complicit in it, but who will defend it vehemently, even venomously. This is how it always starts, a step that seems so innocous, so justifiable.

Some will have the predictable knee-jerk reaction to my comments here and be tempted to respond with fervor and patriotism as any red-blooded American should, right? It saddens me that such responses will come from people who are thinking with their heads, their wallets, and most of all, their fears. Fears which have our country in vice grips. But they will not come from people using their hearts. Or, more to the point, a reflection of the heart of God for his people. It has no concern for patriotism, offers no fight to be right, is slow to judge, and above all, is compassionate toward His people...all people.

The problem with letting our fears and our anger guide us into passing and supporting legislation such as Arizona has, is that it leaves absolutely no room for empathy. It doesn't force us to reflect upon what we, citizens of this nation, would do if it were our country economically depressed to the point where finding steady work and putting food on the table were far from guarantees. There isn't an American I know who wouldn't do anything and everything to provide for their family when push came to shove...but it's easier to dismiss from our side of the border. And what would we do if we were required to carry identification proving our legal citizenship at all times if only because we were of an unfavorable skin color in the eyes of our state? There isn't an American I know who wouldn't see that as unfair if it were carried out against them for the tone of their skin, or age, or sex, or any other thing outside of their control. Especially for those who are citizens and have done nothing wrong...which, by the way, is most of who will be detained and questioned in Arizona.

Perhaps, so that we can do a better job of telling them apart, hispanics from other races of similar skin-color, we should take a lesson from the Nazis and have them wear a symbol on their clothing at all times to represent their race. It is the natural next step. That would make the job of the police easier when it came to identifying, sorting, and demanding papers from the wrong sort of people. Those who don't belong. Those whom Jesus would surely have tossed back into Mexico with his own bare hands if he were here today.

Are we in danger of being so consumed by the politics that we think Christians should believe, that we have forgotton the sort of man Christ was while on Earth?

Steve McCormick

Joden, I question if it is not you who are reacting in fear and anger. Nazis? My goodness. You do not bolster your message by simply invoking Christ's name and statements like "the ugly truth is...) Don't bully people. All the other posts were pretty decent.

Joden Caine

You may question it as much as you wish. As for bullying, I tend to think I'm actually the only one trying to stick up for the marginalized here. I'm sorry if you feel bullied, I'm just trying to get people who enjoy so many priveleges to open their eyes and their hearts to recognize the plight of those who do not. I doubt any disagreement with the other posts which you like so well could effectively bolster this message effectively for you. My aim was not to be politically correct, there are plenty of people out there doing enough of that these days. My aim was to stimulate a different kind of thinking. If it didn't get you thinking, it wasn't meant for you.

Steve McCormick

In all sincerity, you did stimulate my thinking. I believe this debate is much more multifaceted than any one of the opinions that have been put forth. I suspect the best path forward is a combination of a variety of points of view, including national security, legislatively fixing legal immigration, helping the poor ect.

I must apologize for not explaining myself more, I need to be more careful with blog postings. You have put forth a very passionate response and I think is necessary in the debate. By saying bullying, I believe you are pushing the other lines of thinking out of the debate illegitimately by invoking Nazi's and peoples compassion. The rule of law, national security, immigration legislation, and compassion for the poor all have a place in the debate. The commandment in Luke 10:27 is very helpful in this regard: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."

I would disagree with your assertion that those who are promoting national security and the following of the law in this debate don't care about the poor. The fact that we have a law and order society, and the fact we have an active national security apparatus creates the situation where we can help the poor. People come here legally and illegally because those two things, among others, have helped create the country we have.

Jason Rodriguez

Regardless of the uprightness of the Arizona law, I agree with the author's assertion that today's immigration debate is unwarrantably reductionistic. From what I can tell, it is simply not the case that all of the relevant questions are either being asked by the typical Christian or being addressed by our politicians. And how can we, as Jesus-followers seeking to engage our culture in a way that most accurately reflects the gospel, come to conclusions about such an important and divisive issue without wrestling with its intricacies?

Here are some questions I can think of that I have not heard addressed much in the public arena: (1a) What are the "push-factors" behind illegal immigration? I.e., what realities within immigrants' home countries are motivating them to leave? That itself is sure to require a multi-faceted answer... And it leads to a follow-up question: (1b) Do our foreign policies in any way exacerbate these push-factors? Or, if you rather: How can our nation help the nations of Latin America better meet their needs? These are huge questions!

(2) To what extent and in what ways does xenophobia play a role in the current debate? It is certainly a question worth asking, given that it has had such a presence in our country's history. Historically, every large surge of immigrants, legal or otherwise, has been accompanied by a backlash among the groups of people already here (e.g., the "Know Nothing" movement of the 1850s and the Immigration Act of 1924). I recently heard someone express, with somewhat of a concern, that "before long we'll all be speaking Spanish!" I heard someone else express indignation that some Latinos do not know English. We would like to think that these kinds of attitudes don't influence the debate, but we need to take a good hard look at our society (and at ourselves) and evaluate whether or not that is really true. It would be foolish to think that we are immune to those types of attitudes.

(3) To what extent and in what ways should we provide exceptions to the law in the name of compassion? Here is an example. Recently, my school made the news because of a student whom the authorities discovered came here illegally with her family when she was ten years old. My school president is fighting to let her finish her education (she has one more year), but some local and state officials want to have her deported immediately. It is very hard for me to believe that the proper Christian response to this situation is to have her deported to a country she barely remembers -- especially since it was not her decision to come here in the first place. Shouldn't we, at least somewhat, tackle the issue on a case-by-case basis?

(4) Are there ways to have more porous borders without it compromising our national security? It seems that this would be a more Christ-like goal than developing a more effective system of barricading and expelling. I'm optimistic that we can find a more humane, more inclusive, more creative solution.

Those are just some questions -- perhaps there are more.

Name:
Email:
Comment:
Verify Code:
	Please keep me informed with the latest updates from Q

ALSO BY M. DANIEL CARROLL R.

ALSO IN GOVERNMENT

The Immigration Question: Part Two

Framing the Discussion in Unfortunate Ways

Comments

Leave a Comment