Trail of Dreams: Undocumented Students March from Miami to DC

Amen, brother.

Morna, you're still evading the issue. The problem isn't the lack of documents, but the law.

Lemme put it this way: if I were to leave home without my wallet I'd be "undocumented", but I'd still be legally in the US. Whether or not the system is fair is only secondarily about documentation.

LV

"Immoral" by the standards of whom? Does the government not have the right to have immigration laws?

Romans 13 only applies to obeying government authorities if it can be done without disobeying God. The Bible also says "Judge for yourselves if it is right that we should obey men rather than God."

Social comments and analytics for this post...

This post was mentioned on Twitter by sojourners: Trail of Dreams: Undocumented Students March from Miami to DC http://bit.ly/4DmKEY...

Let me answer your rather flippant comment by referring you once more to the Cato Institute, that bunch of pesky free-market libertarians. :

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10438

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10650

There are other articles here:

http://www.cato.org/immigration

It's the government (with the anti-immigration people's encouragement) who puts up artificial barriers to the free trade of labor. I agree with Morna in that the current immigration laws as they are practiced are immoral, not in terms of how they interfere with the free market, but in how they violate Christian tenets.

"Undocumented"? I am unfamiliar with this term. Doesn;t that fact that you have named some of their names mean they are "documented"?

Perhaps you mean "in the country illegally"?

We say "undocumented" because we believe the laws designating them "illegal" are immoral laws and which we therefore do not treat with the same respect as laws based on moral principles.

The arguement still doesn't fly -- because every government has to answer the question of how to treat the people who ignore the government's laws -- no matter what the grounds.

The government (specifically the immigration enforcement authority) also uses the term "undocumented."

All of us are God's children and deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. At the same time, each country has the right and responsibility to determine its immigration policy, including the number of people allowed to emigrate. Currently, the United States allows about a million people a year under various programs. Whether one argues that is too many or not enough, few would argue for unlimited immigration. Therefore, we will never allow everyone to come who wants to come, regardless of the Bible verses quoted above.

Australia, Ireland and Canada now determine entry based on their labor needs. I think we should do the same. While it is a generous thought that people are struggling in their own lands and should come here where they might find more opportunity, there really is little opportunity here for people who don't have the skills that match workplace needs.

When you like at our relationship with Mexico, what you see is a government that encourages its poor to move to the United States so they do not have to provide the needed education, social services and infra-structure that they should be providing. The Mexican economy benefits significantly from remittances sent from the U.S. We act as a safety valve that allows Mexico to ignore its internal problems.

If we really cared about the individuals affected we would find a way for them to be able to make a living in their own countries instead of risking their lives and tearing apart their families to come here.

Romans 13 is one of my favorite passages too! I remember the soldier quoting it to Corrie Ten Boom when they were arresting her family. It just really touched my heart at that moment and I realized the utter splendor of that passage.

Amen, brother.

The arguement still doesn't fly -- because every government has to answer the question of how to treat the people who ignore the government's laws -- no matter what the grounds.

So they do receive a lot of services even though they are illegal. So the supposed abuse is not completely there. I believe it is exsegerated just a bit. Yea its not perfect which is what seems to be what is wanted here. The same old same old, make the story seem as bad as possible to get the most out of it. Maybe that is good or not if it helps those iin need, the problem is when others try to tell the real truth of it they are jumped as inconsiderate or anti-immagration etc. For being Gods politics it happens way to much her, the ridicule of the right and conservatives her is amazing, were pretty much idiots or ignorant or selfish, at the least just wrong and dont know what we are talking about. But maybe thats just me. What do other conservatives say. I say just tell the truth and speak what you believe needs done without the bashing of conservatives and republicans or those who disagree in general. I predict within a week sojo will have another article bashing someone while making their point about something.

If you were one of them you would not think it silly. When the nations are gathered together (see Matthew 25) the Lord will not ask whether we did better than Korea, Venezuela, etc. "You did it not for the least of these, you did it not for me." Scat, goats!

Jesus says that we should treat others as we want to be treated. He makes no exception in case they don't recipricate. There is no "two-way street" to Christian ethics. Morna quoted Leviticus 19:33-34; there is nothing there about how the aliens should be acting to earn fair treatment.

Though I am hesitant to declare God's mind on a matter, I think the Bible is pretty clear that all humans are to be treated with dignity. Our current system encourages human trafficking, splits up families, and treats as criminals those who are guilty of nothing more than trying to create a better life for themselves. I regard this as immoral and therefore refuse to dignify our current immigration laws.

In answer to your question, yes, the government has the right to make any laws it wants. 200 years ago, the government made a law requiring anyone who knew the whereabouts of a runaway slave to turn him or her in to the authorities. I hope that if I were living then, I'd also refuse to dignify that law, and would break it outright if a fugitive slave needed my help.

Here's a Bible verse for everyone to contemplate:

"When an alien lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the Lord your God."
(Leviticus 19:33-34).

I don't doubt the exegesis, and honestly I agree with it. But...

Is our government "Christian"? Is it right when a politician claims that God has placed him or her as the head of a government? As POTUS?

I seem to recall the political left in the US upset with Bush and then Palin for giving their roles as somehow Christian in nature.

Let me answer your rather flippant comment by referring you once more to the Cato Institute, that bunch of pesky free-market libertarians. :

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10438

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10650

There are other articles here:

http://www.cato.org/immigration

It's the government (with the anti-immigration people's encouragement) who puts up artificial barriers to the free trade of labor. I agree with Morna in that the current immigration laws as they are practiced are immoral, not in terms of how they interfere with the free market, but in how they violate Christian tenets.

I am not saying our laws are based on Christian tenants. The last thing I want is a theocracy. Justice and the dignity of human beings are not "Christian" tenants per se, though they are things which God demands of His followers, and which I think we all agree our laws should protect.

I totally agree the laws need to be fixed. Many people, such as Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, are working on fixing them.

I used the fugitive slave law as an example of the concept that what is legal is not always what is ethical. Slavery and immigration have some important differences, though I would like to note that the current immigration system plays right into the hands of human traffickers.

You state that "to keep saying we mistreat our immigrants is bordering on dishonest." I don't understand the basis of this protest. Undocumented immigrants have no rights under our laws. They are subjected to pay and human rights abuses with no legal recourse. How is this not mistreatment?

You say we ask them to come "the right way". For many, coming here "the right way" isn't an option. Legal immigration has an 8 year backlog. When you're starving in your native land, you don't have 8 years to wait.

Lastly, you complain that I won't use the "right terms for who they are." I personally don't believe that it's right to reduce the whole identity of a human being to his or her status under a specific law. My choice of terminology is based on my personal ethics, not political correctness.

I love the way this post been a while here. I reviewed past articles and would study them as part of my research. I am mainly got some suggestions as to what site should I be finding with. So far this site meets my standards that are necessary for my research.
Regards,

Shadsni

The Democratic party, which currently holds a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, is especially eager to address this issue before election campaigns are in full swing.

Unfortunately, I don't think they are. Nancy Pelosi has said she will not ask her House caucus to vote on any controversial bills in 2010 to lessen the the number of Democrats getting defeated in November. Immigration reform definitely falls in the category of "controversial". The ironic thing is, 2010 is probably the best chance to pass this or any other immigration reform bill we'll see in a while. Democrat numbers in Congress are at a high point.

All of us are God's children and deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. At the same time, each country has the right and responsibility to determine its immigration policy, including the number of people allowed to emigrate. Currently, the United States allows about a million people a year under various programs. Whether one argues that is too many or not enough, few would argue for unlimited immigration. Therefore, we will never allow everyone to come who wants to come, regardless of the Bible verses quoted above.

Australia, Ireland and Canada now determine entry based on their labor needs. I think we should do the same. While it is a generous thought that people are struggling in their own lands and should come here where they might find more opportunity, there really is little opportunity here for people who don't have the skills that match workplace needs.

When you like at our relationship with Mexico, what you see is a government that encourages its poor to move to the United States so they do not have to provide the needed education, social services and infra-structure that they should be providing. The Mexican economy benefits significantly from remittances sent from the U.S. We act as a safety valve that allows Mexico to ignore its internal problems.

If we really cared about the individuals affected we would find a way for them to be able to make a living in their own countries instead of risking their lives and tearing apart their families to come here.