Another Christian approach to immigration reform

LilOlLady

Gold Member
Apr 20, 2009
10,017
1,313
190
Reno, NV
Another Christian approach to immigration reform
By Bryan Fischer

Our immigration policy is quite clear that border trespassers have broken the law and are to be returned to their country of origin. To reward lawbreakers by guaranteeing them a path to citizenship that is not available to lawkeepers makes a mockery of the concept of justice and equality before the law.

No matter how hard evangelicals try to pretend that this isn't amnesty, that's exactly what it is. When someone gets rewarded rather than punished for breaking the law, that's amnesty, no matter how it's finessed by nuanced language. And they can of course talk all they want about penalties and background checks, but illegals know they're catching a huge break here, a break denied to those waiting patiently overseas.

Those waiting in line overseas would be happy to pay the same amount of money and go through the same background checks if they could be guaranteed citizenship in the U.S. But that option is not available to them for one simple reason: they haven't broken our immigration laws. So we teach them that lawbreakers get rewards in America that law-abiding folks don't. What is remotely compassionate or just about that?

The scriptural standard, when it comes to the role of our legal system, is quite clear: judges are "to acquit the innocent and condemn the guilty" (Deut. 25:1). To acquit, nay reward, the guilty turns justice and the rule of law on its head.

In all the evangelical rhetoric about compassion as it relates to immigration, I read virtually no discussion whatever about the enormous cost illegal aliens impose on law-abiding Americans, who lose jobs to those who have no legal right to be in this country, who are forced to foot the bill for medical services and welfare benefits paid out to those who are not entitled to them, and whose cities are wracked by the gang violence associated with the drug trade.

Hospitals all along our southern border have closed, depriving American citizens of access to local health care, because they have been overwhelmed by the cost of providing care for people who have trespassed on another country's sovereign soil.

Where is either the Christian compassion or justice in that?

We already have the most generous legal immigration system in the world, legally admitting 1.1 million immigrants to our shores every year. Equality under the law requires that everybody who wants legal status in the U.S. must play by the same rules by which everyone else plays. To do otherwise, I submit, is the exact opposite of Christian compassion for everyone who gets leapfrogged in the process. What this teaches them is that they are chumps for playing by the rules, and that the rule of law is meaningless in what is supposed to be a Christian nation.


Another Christian approach to immigration reform
 
Dear LOL: I believe in Earned Amnesty, where the restitution owed by those who broke laws is proportional to the degree of the violation, so it is fair to all and also provides a way for building facilities along the border for secure development USING the penalties or labor owed for restitution, including companies that abused labor and also criminal traffickers who owe restitution to both society, taxpayers and the direct victims of their crimes.

I posted this on a blog at Earned Amnesty because I was tired of sounding like a broken record.

I AGREE with you (as a Constitutionalist and Christian believer that Jesus fulfills these natural laws and civil laws where the people become the govt by embracing them, as Jesus fulfills the sacred laws of the church where the people as the church embrace the laws) that Christian teachings on forgiveness CANNOT be abused to bypass civil laws but restitution and corrections are still owed on trespasses even after they are forgiven. Yes the spiritual forgiveness of God has no conditions and is not earned, but for human relations and laws on earth, justice may require physical corrections, as the Bible says all debts must be paid.

The way I explained to a Christian ministry friend (who had cited the scriptures about the people coming later in the day and being paid the same as the ones who came in earlier and worked) is that Scripture is distinct from Civil Law that cannot require people to follow this. The Bible instructs us to respect human institutions and authority; we must still follow the Civil Authority, and the people who did follow the laws did not AGREE to such inequality.

Also, if people believe that the land originally was shared freely with Native American tribes, and these immigrants who are descendants have equal right to the land, the difference is the benefits of American citizenship under Constitutional laws were established later and are not automatically part of the land. Where the natural laws could be practiced freely is along the border where people could develop communities and establish equal residency; but not riding on the development of others already created under certain laws UNLESS this is freely volunteered and donated by people who AGREE to share with others. So I am proposing to set up communities where church, nonprofit and business volunteers COULD choose to invest in building secure educational and military communities to provide legally for residents.

NOT imposing this on citizens who did NOT agree to fund it or overlook violations of the law.
As long as it is VOLUNTARY people are free to fund development as a business or church program, nonprofit or school, especially medical and prison facilities as even Governor Schwarzeneggar suggested be built in Mexico for all the nationals costing taxpayers billions in state prisons. Given the restitution owed to taxpayers and trafficking victims, that alone should be enough to finance development along the border by issuing bonds against the debts and having violators pay off or work off those debts over time, or investors lend capital in exchange for tax writeoffs or profit from the interest on loans to government.

Another Christian approach to immigration reform
By Bryan Fischer

Our immigration policy is quite clear that border trespassers have broken the law and are to be returned to their country of origin. To reward lawbreakers by guaranteeing them a path to citizenship that is not available to lawkeepers makes a mockery of the concept of justice and equality before the law.

No matter how hard evangelicals try to pretend that this isn't amnesty, that's exactly what it is. When someone gets rewarded rather than punished for breaking the law, that's amnesty, no matter how it's finessed by nuanced language. And they can of course talk all they want about penalties and background checks, but illegals know they're catching a huge break here, a break denied to those waiting patiently overseas.

Those waiting in line overseas would be happy to pay the same amount of money and go through the same background checks if they could be guaranteed citizenship in the U.S. But that option is not available to them for one simple reason: they haven't broken our immigration laws. So we teach them that lawbreakers get rewards in America that law-abiding folks don't. What is remotely compassionate or just about that?

The scriptural standard, when it comes to the role of our legal system, is quite clear: judges are "to acquit the innocent and condemn the guilty" (Deut. 25:1). To acquit, nay reward, the guilty turns justice and the rule of law on its head.

In all the evangelical rhetoric about compassion as it relates to immigration, I read virtually no discussion whatever about the enormous cost illegal aliens impose on law-abiding Americans, who lose jobs to those who have no legal right to be in this country, who are forced to foot the bill for medical services and welfare benefits paid out to those who are not entitled to them, and whose cities are wracked by the gang violence associated with the drug trade.

Hospitals all along our southern border have closed, depriving American citizens of access to local health care, because they have been overwhelmed by the cost of providing care for people who have trespassed on another country's sovereign soil.

Where is either the Christian compassion or justice in that?

We already have the most generous legal immigration system in the world, legally admitting 1.1 million immigrants to our shores every year. Equality under the law requires that everybody who wants legal status in the U.S. must play by the same rules by which everyone else plays. To do otherwise, I submit, is the exact opposite of Christian compassion for everyone who gets leapfrogged in the process. What this teaches them is that they are chumps for playing by the rules, and that the rule of law is meaningless in what is supposed to be a Christian nation.


Another Christian approach to immigration reform
 
I would have thought that the Christian response would have been obvious: feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick. In regards to immigration, it may not be as obvious. But I seriously doubt that Christ, were He present, would merely slap Band-aids on people & transport them to who-knows-where in Mexico.

Was Christ about the fulfilment of the law? I thought He had instituted a new covenant, & thus the New Testament - love your neighbor as yourself. The issue will turn, then, on Who is my neighbor? An altogether different question from trying to parse the Word of God to deliver justice, as if justice were the goal of Christianity.
 
What on earth does Christ have to do with the immigration policies of nations?

He told us to abide by the law of the land we live in.
 
Try immigration reform if the immigrants were white people from South Africa or Eastern Europe or Ireland.

There would BE no such thing as immigration reform. It would be racist.
 
What on earth does Christ have to do with the immigration policies of nations?

He told us to abide by the law of the land we live in.[/QUOTE]

(My emphasis)

Sure thing! & how did you or your forebears get here? Did they walk? If not, you or they were not native to the land.

I bring up Christ because that's the title of the OP - is that a mistake? Isn't that the point of the OP?
 

Forum List

Back
Top