Thursday, July 26, 2007

Illegal immigration and the government

Tonight I begin answering the specific question: “What if someone is starving and destitute? As Christians, I thought we live by a higher law and that we see other people through the eyes of God, not through the eyes of any sort of nationalism.”

After I finish the immigration posts, I will do the Creationism posts as also stated earlier. I will deal with each comment received in the order that I received them. Then, I plan to answer the response about Iraq. Thank you for your understanding and patience.

How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish, barbaric decisions of the United States Supreme Court?

Stop the
Murder of

“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)

To answer the above question, I think it is important to divide it into two segments—the appropriate response by government and the appropriate response by Christians. To do so however, I think I need to clarify a few things. First, I am not certain what is meant by “through the eyes of God.” I am going to define that phrase as through the WORD of GOD as given in the Bible. Of necessity then, my response is based upon my understanding of the WORD of GOD. Others may disagree with my understanding of what the Bible says. I can’t control that; I can only attempt to answer based upon my understanding.

I don’t intend to give what I want the Bible to say but rather what I understand it to say. In my opinion, just as the Supreme Court over the last 40 plus years has disregarded what the Constitution says, many people today try to reinterpret the Bible based upon their desires not upon what the Bible actually says. I have read articles written by so-called ministers who declared that the Bible is wrong in certain areas. I don’t believe we have the right to rewrite the Bible to serve our desires or to declare sections we don’t approve of as being wrong.

Tonight’s post will deal with the appropriate response of government:

First, I know of no place in the Bible where we are told to delegate our responsibility to serve GOD to the government. The primary, first responsibility of any government is to protect its own people. That is why governments were created and exist.

I know of no place in the Bible where GOD specifically is opposed to “any sort of nationalism.” GOD is a righteous GOD. He is concerned with righteousness whether as a nation or as an individual. “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” [Proverbs 14: 34 (NIV)] By making such a statement, GOD, through the author of Proverbs, recognizes that nations are, in fact, a reality and have decision making power that influences others.

Further, it has been argued that GOD chose to create nations. Genesis 10: 32 (NIV) states “These are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their lines of descent, within their nations. From these the nations spread out over the earth after the flood.” Genesis, Chapter 11 tells of the tower of Babel and GOD confusing the language of the various peoples. The conclusion of the account declares “So the Lord scattered them from there (the area around the tower of Babel—my addition) over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. That is why it was called Babel—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.” [Genesis 11: 8-9 (NIV)] The apostle Paul when speaking to the men at Athens declared “From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.” [Acts 17: 26 (NIV)] I would think that Paul is referring to the tower of Babel episode where men where scattered over the world and formed nations. GOD was directly involved in the formation of nations according to the Bible.

Also, GOD directly created and blessed a specific nation. “The Lord had said to Abram (whose name was later changed to Abraham—my addition), ‘Leave your country, your people and your father’s household and go to the land I will show you. I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.’” [Genesis 12: 1-3 (NIV)] The nation, of course, was the Jewish people who formed the original nation of Israel. (By the way, that blessing today is carried forward not by Israel but by Christians through the church of which JESUS the CHRIST is the head.)

The apostle Paul writes in I Timothy 1: 9 (NIV) “We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers and mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.”

Now, Paul may not be directly referring to laws passed by governments. However, the concept is the same. Laws are not passed (or at least should not be—governments can become corrupt) to prevent righteous, just, and good people from doing good. Laws are passed to prevent people from doing that which is wrong as defined by the government and to provide a punishment for doing that wrong. For example, people shouldn’t have to be told not to murder. However, if there was no law against murder, there would be people, because of their sinful nature, who would commit murder. The law tells them that they are not allowed to commit murder and they will be punished in a certain manner if convicted of murder. The absence of law is anarchy. Every society because of our sinful nature needs rules (law) to define right from wrong.

The United States, as has every other nation that I know of, has established laws to govern the immigration of people into the United States. Those laws were established according to the recognized procedure prescribed by the U.S. Constitution which is our “Supreme Law of the Land.” If so desired, Congress could have allowed immigration into the country based upon individuals starving and being destitute. Congress did not. As far as I know, no country in the world has used that as a criterion for entrance into that country.

If an individual violated a law against bank robbery by robbing a bank, would it be acceptable to allow the bank to be robbed because that individual was starving and destitute? That might be a mitigating circumstance for deciding the appropriate punishment. But to allow a bank robbery to occur because of a personal circumstance is to invite anarchy.

Any individual can claim they are starving and destitute. That has not been made an exception to the law nor should it be. It would be allowing the individual to write the law the way he wants the law to be in order to satisfy his own perceived needs over the needs of all others—that is anarchy and also known as man doing that which is right in his own eyes. The Bible repeatedly condemns the concept of man doing that which is right in his own eyes. I know of no passage in the Bible which allows people to sin because of a specific circumstance—situation ethics is not a concept that is approved by GOD.

When an individual enters the United States illegally, he has declared that he is above the law of the country. He, not the country, has the right to decide whether or not he will entry the United States. Not only does he violate our law by entering the country illegally; he continues to violate our laws by illegally working within the country. He also is encouraging American businesses to violate the law either unknowingly or explicitly. Illegal immigrants often also use fraudulent documents. He also harms American citizens by working jobs that are then not available for American citizens. Consequently, illegal immigrants don’t just violate the law regarding entrance into the United States. They violate other laws and continue to do so.

My argument has always been that I personally and philosophically basically support open immigration. That is not practical today for several reasons including the continuing threat of terrorists coming into the country. But, more importantly, that is not the law of the land. These individuals are violating our laws. It is insanity to grant citizenship to people who have deliberately and knowingly violated the laws of the United States. It also punishes all those who have obeyed our laws. That’s nonsense!

The proposal to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants also violates our own concept of due process and equal protection of the law. The proposal would reward individuals who have unquestionably violated our laws and penalizes those individuals who have followed our laws by agreeing to go through the legal process to come to the United States and become American citizens.

It is a statement by the law breakers that they decide what laws apply and what laws they will obey. Why would a government want to reward people who deliberately violate our laws for their own perceived benefit and punish those who obey our laws? Where is the equal protection of the law?

The people who benefit are the ones who violate our laws and the ones who are punished are those who obey our laws. It is a topsy-turvy world of illogical nonsense. How can any law abiding citizen or foreigner respect a Congress that rewards criminal behavior against its own laws and punishes those individuals who have chosen to obey those same laws?

Congress can not even argue that the end justifies the means. This proposal will not, in all probability, end illegal immigration into the country. In fact, it will most likely increase illegal immigration. How can one say that? Because we have granted amnesty once before. That first program was supposed to curtail illegal immigration. It did NOT!!!

Now, we have a similar proposal that we are promised will be successful this time. Why should it be? Illegal immigrants now have two examples of the topsy-turvy, illogical “cures” being touted. Why not try for a third time? This time those who have been following legal procedures may well decide it doesn’t pay to follow the rules. They may well be part of the new wave of illegal immigrants. Who can blame them? It will have worked twice before if Congress agrees to this flaunting of the laws they passed in the first place.

There is absolutely no logical, governmental reason to reward illegal immigrants with citizenship. There are a lot of reasons to not grant citizenship to illegal immigrants. One of the most important is to maintain the integrity of our laws. People who violate our laws should not be rewarded for violating our laws with citizenship! It’s just common sense. Why are there some people in Congress who just don’t get it?


Post a Comment

<< Home