Here is a very good article on the immigration question and how a Christian conservative might need to think about it.
Here's a taste
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton invoked the authority of Jesus himself to oppose a Republican-sponsored House resolution aimed at cracking down on those who aid and abet the smuggling of aliens across the Mexican border. “It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scripture because this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably Jesus himself,” Mrs. Clinton claimed Read more
3 comments:
I appreciate the link to this article. There are probably two things I disagree with in it.
1) Klinghoffer suggests that "there is a problem, of course, with selective cherry-picking of Biblical verses to support the political cause of your choice" and insists that "if we want to take the Bible as a guide to crafting wise policies, that means trying our best to see Scripture as an organic whole with a unitary message." Of course, most of us would agree with those statements. HOWEVER, Klinghoffer writes this premise to suggest that this is all the liberal left is doing when citing scripture in this debate. I disagree. The NT principles Clinton and Cardinal Mahony point to do apply to this debate. Klinghoffer errors against the very principles he promotes when he discounts the NT principles only to go on to cite OT Jewish laws.
2) Klinghoffer seems to suggest that because the political left rarely turns to scripture to form the basis of their political platform they have no right to do so now (in this debate). Again, I disagree. Biblical principles are, of course, relevant to this debate. To condemn the political left for rarely taking into account Biblical principles in their decision-making policies and then to turn right around and condemn them when they do is hypocritical and unfair.
3) Klinghoffer cites OT laws taken from the Pentateuch, as a basis for American immigration policy and this (I believe) is simply poor hermeneutics. It would be okay to do this if we were living 6,000 years ago in the "Promised Land". It would be justifiable if America was a God-established theocracy and these laws were handed down to our forefathers. But neither is true. We are a republic, a nation of immigrants, and a secular society. I doubt Klinghoffer or any of us would really like to revert back to these "political standards" of the OT.
My only other thought is that Klinghoffer suggests that the OT passages made it difficult to become a Jewish national, or that an immigrant was expected to become fully "Jewish"... thus protecting the unique identity of Israel. I don't believe any "American citizens" need fear that immigrants will not taken on our "culture"... rather the immigrants ought to fear what will become of them when they do so... i.e. we aren't known for our high ethical standards, our tight family values or our resistance toward materialism and greed. Any immigrants who join us will soon find themselves swept away by our lust, greed and individualism within one (maybe two) generations past their arrival. If I were them I might just stay home.
On a personal note: Glad to read something from your blog again... I missed reading your commenatry and ideas.
Doug,
Thanks for coming back and for posting. I am going to be posting thoughts and links much more regularly now. I will most likely focus on Christian issues, even when I am posting current events and issues.
About your comments. Klinghoffer is right, I think, to be wary of utilizing scripture to establish a foundation for any policy in government in an intentionally non-religious constitutional democracy. To call our democracy non-religious is not to deny that religion can play a formative role (and has!). However, one must ask the question about how say Matthew 25 really speaks to our modern dilemma of illegal entry into the country. Before one applies the scripture as a soundbite principle, one must think theologically about life (what Klinghoffer calls the "unitary message" of the organic whole).
Of course, compassion and care for the needy is a virtue that God expects of individuals and of constitutional democracies. But how does that play out. Does it really imply open borders or even the kind of quasi amnesty that President Bush is calling for? Thinking through the application is the critical thing. I am glad that you are actually thinking about it.
Come back and vist the site. And tell others about it. Perhaps we can establish a kind of think-tank approach to issues, if we could get enough people together interacting with one another's ideas.
Steve,
Well, since very few people have ever made me think as deeply about theology, church and culture as you have... you should know that I've had a link to your site on my blog for a long time now, and I will gladly pass word around about this site.
On the issue of immigration... I've not really thought deeply enough about it, honestly. My knee jerk reaction is to call the populist outrage a product of greed and insecurity. I've heard the arguments from big business calling for the need of immigrant labor and it seems to make sense to me. As of yet (I'm sure it exists) I have not heard a clear argument that explains why immigrants should be banned from the States. The 11 million that are here appear by most accounts to be critical to our economy, are they not? Why lash out at them as so many are doing?
I do support immigration laws and am not in favor of granting citizenship to the illegal immigrants living in America... why have laws if they are not enforced? It's the populist bonanza that irks me... why are so many Americans so protective, so defensive, so fearful of losing what they've got? We have more than we need! Our materialism is an evil that is suffocating our culture as it is.
Whenever I place myself in the shoes of a Mexican citizen (or even an illegal immigrant) I feel a great sense of obligation toward them. If I had children living in poverty would I not rush the boarder to earn a wage that would support them? You’d better believe I would.
I recognize that it would be an error to throw open our boarders and welcome anyone and everyone into our country... and that seems to be what granting illegals a workers program or fast-track to citizenship would accomplish... but I do wish we were able to do more as a nation besides rise up in reactive pride and prejudice (which is the general feel you get in a rural Ohio county like the one I live in).
There aren't any easy answers here. One things for sure, this issue isn't going away in 2006 or 2008!
Post a Comment