Mennonite Weekly Review

Comments

• Someone has been keeping their TV station glued on MSNBC and don't realize that the FEDs haven't done their enforcing of the EXISTING laws. We also forget that when we break GOD's laws there are consequences. Finally, the God of love is also the God of JUSTICE. Let's look at the WHOLE picture and be people of integrity.

  - Harold (may 12 at 12:02 a.m.)

• My father came to this country when he was 18 years old and he passed away at the age of 93. He went through the proper channels and procedures of becoming an American citizen. I have no problem with our neighbors from the south coming into our country and doing the same thing. I do have a problem with a government that lets them come in without any obligations, gives them their food-clothing-shelter-no taxes for several years and allows them the right to vote in our elections plus gives them more rights than we who are citizens of this country. For these reasons I feel Arizona did the right thing and we do not have to feel ashamed by refusing to have our MC USA conference there in 2013.

  - Arthur Carlson (may 12 at 5:20 p.m.)

• Thank you for reading and commenting, Arthur. I'm glad you shared your opinions on illegal immigration. However, some of your facts are incorrect or misleading. Many undocumented immigrants pay for their own food, clothing and shelter, as well as paying taxes. Immigrants, including undocumented ones, often provide a boost to local economies through purchasing goods and services. Finally, only U.S. citizens can vote in national elections. Permanent residents are sometimes able to vote in local or statewide elections.

  - Celeste Kennel-Shank (may 12 at 6:05 p.m.)

• I don't think the church can wait until 2013 if it wants to make a witness about this unjust law. We are going to see a lot of "me too" legislation from other states in any case, and especially if it seems that there are no negative economic consequences from convention organizers. Indeed, convention organizers may be the only people with the clout to do anything. I don't know what level of financial commitment those binding contracts carry, but if there's any kind of reasonable buyout I think Mennonite Church USA needs to look for a different site.

  - Dave (may 15 at 10:50 a.m.)

• What many do not realize when they say they are Ok with "legal" immigration and refer to their own ancestors' history is that currently the annual quota of legal immigrants from Mexico is 26,000. This is exactly the same as the quota for Nepal. I have no idea how many illegal Mexican immigrants there are in the U.S., but, supposing it is 10 million, this means that for them to stand in line to wait to immigrate legally would mean a wait that is 384 years long. As a practical matter, there is no way for a typical Mexican to immigrate legally to the U.S. The quotas were much different when your ancestors came.

  - Dave (may 15 at 10:55 a.m.)

• While true there needs to be additional legal migration from Mexico it is equally true that the government that GOD has ordained for our country has a clear and legal process for entering. Regardless of how rightious apersons reasons for comeing here are the fact of the matter is they know the law and that to thwart it is commiting an illegal act aginst the sovereign government that GOD has ordained for this land. Every effort should be made to increase legal immigration and make it easier. But that cannot happen while the flood gates are open allowing both good and evil people across our boarders. It has put too great a strain on our local law enforcement, hospitals, and private citizens who no longer feel safe in their own homes. Arizona has done nothing but to say that they as state will enforce existing laws and give reasonable authority to officers to carry it out. The arguement that our ancestors didn't come here legally is wearing thin. Miy mom's side came here seeking religious freedom in 1639. My dad's had to flee Zurich in 1751, but I can assure you that neither came here to sell drugs cimmit rape or any other number of terrible crimes so many crossing our borders today seem to be commiting. We must have reasonable security if we are ever to make immigration easier for productive people seeking a better future.

  - Richard A. Matter (may 16 at 4:00 p.m.)

• Richard--We should not confuse crimes such as drug smuggling and rape with illegal immigration. The former are criminal regardless of a person's nationality or location. Just as we do not project violent criminality on all Americans because of the wickedness of a few, we ought not project it on all illegal immigrants. Aside from their undocumented status, most are here for otherwise legal work.

  In this debate, it bothers me that nobody is discussing the major economic factor behind immigration. We can debate back and forth how hard we ought to drop the hammer on illegal immigration--and yes, something ought to be done--but migrant workers do not act alone.
  

  Immigrants come for economic opportunities, often filling positions that many citizens do not want. Housekeeping, meat packing, fruit harvest. Who is hiring them?
  

  Do these employers pay minimum wage to undocumented workers? Do they offer benefits? Do they assure migrants of a safe workplace with OSHA standards? Do they offer overtime pay to migrant workers? Unfortunately, the answer to these questions is often no. There are myriad examples of undocumented workers injured on the job, cheated of pay, or otherwise victimized by their employers, but with no legal recourse. The system continues only because employers benefit from cheap labor of undocumented workers, while the illegal immigrants' sub-standard wages are nevertheless much better than what they could earn at home.

  Unfortunately, the Arizona law places the entire burden on migrant workers and not on their exploitative employers. Surely if an employer had to pay an undocumented worker the same wages and benefits it would have to offer an American worker, there would be little incentive to hire illegal aliens.

  - JPR (may 16 at 11:53 p.m.)

• A few points of factual clarification: In most states and the District of Columbia, undocumented immigrants do have legal recourse for wage theft and workers compensation claims for workplace injuries. Yet fear of deportation keeps many of them from seeking such recourse.

  Additionally, section 7 of Arizona Senate Bill 1070 (available as a PDF) states that employers who knowingly employ unauthorized immigrant workers are subject to five years probation and suspension of their business licenses for a minimum of 10 days.

  - Celeste Kennel-Shank (may 17 at 10:06 a.m.)

• Sorry, but you have missed the point entirely. The arguement isn't that that most illegals are criminals (thuogh illegal status makes them so). But, that non enforcement of exististing laws alows an overwhelming amount of hardened criminals in. The blame does not fall upon Arizona or any other government trying to stem this tide of voilence, but rests solely upon the criminals and people unwilling to either make legal imigration easier or enforce the law. Mexico'sa own immiogration laws are much stricter than ours will ever be. All peoples are perfectly welcome here but there are conditions just as there are to enter that holiest af cities, The New Jerusalem. After all there will be many times the number of citizens crying out to GOD to let them in but HE will saty I never knew you. The SPIRIT and bride say come. However you MUST be a beleiver. It is very reasonable to me that we have a similar approaqch to immigration. Just because aperson wnts to be here is NOT enough for entry. Remember the young man invited to the bridegrooms wedding who refused to wear the wedding clothes provided? HE was removed to outer darkness. The answer is simple. Make the law clear, enforce it, and invite everyone

  - Richard Matter (may 17 at 6:11 p.m.)

• OK, so I am confused. You say it is not a claim that illegal aliens are perpetrating violent crime. Just an "overwhelming amount of hardened criminals." Forgive me for viewing this as a generalizing, blanket statement about the violent nature of illegal aliens. Whether it is or is not, this sort of stereotyping is more confusing than enlightening. It does not help our discussion. We can agree that the undocumented status of these workers is a violation of law, but to argue that their criminality extends beyond this is to bear false witness.

  The scriptural references do not fit. While I understand the importance of the state as a tool for the maintenance of order, we must remain mindful of whether the laws of the state are just. If the laws are not just, then we must seek appropriate ways to fix them.

  Politicians have proposed increasingly stringent migration policies as method of gaining quick political points through appeal to base fear and xenophobia. The policies emerge from and reinforce a mentality of us vs. them. The current legal situation increases the dangers to migrants and facilitates exploitation. Yet it does not stop or even slow illegal migration. (If one is willing to risk death in the desert or in transit to find a better life, will additional fines, imprisonment, or deportation really be a deterrent?)

  With caveats to Celeste's clarifications, the Arizona law represents some of the worst of the above problems, while unacceptably widening the net to include friends, families, and acquaintances. Combined with another recently passed law banning ethnic studies from public schools, this creates a very unwelcoming environment indeed!

  Rather than focusing on the legality of immigrants right now, we need to focus on a bigger, more complicated question. How can we best maintain justice and dignity for all parties involved, while still maintaining border security?

  - JPR (may 19 at 5:02 p.m.)

• OK so wat is the Biblical model? Our churches invite everyone to partace of the blessings of being a believer. Everyone is invited to join the bruderhoffe. However a person from another discipline either atheist, agnostic, Mormon, Jehovahs Witness etc... you name it must give up their old alegiences to be aa member. A mormon cannot join any Christian church and continue to profes, promote and live the mormon life. Likewise they cannot just walk in the door and claim to be a member and commune without going through that particular churches rites of membership. The motto at Ellis Island states "give me your poor your seick etc. and Revelation 22 says the Spirit and bride say come to whoever thirsts whoever is hungry come drink from the river of life FREELY. But that is ONLY for those who will surrender to JESUS and give their bodies up for a living sacrifice. There MUST be a filter to prevent chaos. The Arizona law does just that. It also states no les than six times in its 14 pages that an officer cannot take into consideration a person's race, country of origin, or colour!!! It is now the responsibility of the federal government to expand the number of immgrants allowed to come to this country legally. Finally, if I were to use your previous argument of justifying illegal immgration because of poverty I could say that the homeles woman down the street from you has every right to break into your house and call her self a member of your family because she has none of her own. Now; answer me this question. If we were to evangelize these poor souls. How many would come to faith? Of the people who do become believers and followers of the WAY, would they as beleivers contue to seek immigration through illegal means or would they disciple their neighbours and petition their government and ours to broaden legal immigration? You see I have a friend from Columbia. He mistakenly thought as did I that as long as you were married to a citizen you could stay in this country. Well you can't. Brother Diaz ignored warnings sent to him from immigration and found himself deported 3 years ago. It has taken alot of prayer, work and some help from a local Hispanic cogregation but he will be coming home this summer. However, he and his wife Kimberly have decided to go to missions traning camp and return to Columbia as missionaries. Even though it is far more dangerous than Mexico. This should beyour model.
  

  - Richrd Matter (may 21 at 5:50 p.m.)

• There is no satisfactory "Biblical" model for this if we are looking to justify the harsh enforcement of flawed immigration laws. If one looks hard enough and can ignore the general message of the Bible, one can find justification for just about any position. However, the Bible has much more about showing hospitality, kindness, and mercy to the strangers in our midst than it does about condemning them. No amount of piety or self-righteousness will change this fact.

  By your example of the homeless lady breaking in, you once again illustrate confusion between violation of migration laws and crime of other types. But for the sake of argument, let us make your example fit a little better. No, the lady may not break into my home, but she may go beyond the conventions of politeness and be a pest about seeking what she needs. And if I offer the lady a small sum of money for pulling weeds over my spouse's objections, would it be fair for my spouse to blame the lady for coming onto our property to do the job?

  But I digress. The point is, we are not in disagreement about the illegal status of undocumented migrant workers and no one is really questioning this. No one is questioning the importance of documenting those who cross our borders. This is as essential to he workers' fair treatment as it is vital for law enforcement. The question people are asking, at least those not dead set on stringent enforcement of immigration law, is this:

  How can we maintain border security, ensure that all workers are documented, and guarantee all migrants will be treated with fairness and dignity? Migrant workers perform many vital functions in our country, and we are harming ourselves if we do not find a just solution.
  

  The Arizona law, once again, is not concerning itself with treating migrants with fairness, dignity, or justice. Though I am aware that the law makes specific statements against racial profiling, we kid ourselves if we believe that racial profiling will not be involved.

  Kudos to your Colombian friend for making the best of a bad situation. Quite admirable. But his treatment is an example of our broken system, and had little to do with justice or dignity.

  - JPR (may 22 at 10:03 a.m.)

• Mr. Matter, thank you for sharing your views on illegal immigration and Arizona's new law. However, I take strong offense to your suggestion that GOD has ordained the current (or past) US government to rule our land. I understand that there are some verses in the New Testament in which Paul suggests that we be respectful of the extant worldly authorities and follow their guidelines when they do not conflict with our Christian principles.

  This does not mean, though, that every law passed by any earthly government is ordained or sanctioned by GOD. Surely you recognize that there are legitimate statutes passed by governments worldwide that are completely contrary to Christ's teachings.

  Moreover, your severely undermine your point that immigrants should follow the rules of the government ordained by GOD when you assert that current enforcement and restrictive quotas are part of the problem. It is your allegedly GOD-ordained government that is responsible for creating immigration law and enforcing it. How can you hold immigrants to the moral obligation to follow a government that you admit makes illogical and unjust decisions?

  Finally, as a patriotic (but anti-violence) American I am deeply offended by your comparisons between allowing people to enter the United States and admittance to the church. The United States border is an imaginary line arbitrarily created by humans to mark the territory governed by our Constitution. I sincerely hope that you do not place the same importance on crossing an imaginary line that you do on entrance into the Kingdom.

  Furthermore, you make a mockery of the Constitution of the United States by attributing a religious character to US citizenship and to being an American. I believe firmly in the principle of separation of church and state espoused for centuries by both the Mennonite Church and the US Constitution. Therefore, I was deeply offended by your implication that the same type of decision-making we use in offering membership to the church should be applied to federal immigration policy. That cheapens the church's commitment to discipleship by equating it with the irrational and un-Christlike idea of refusing to welcome those who wish to live, work, and worship in our beloved country. It also gives US citizenship a special moral and religious significance that the Bible discourages and the Constitution prohibits.

  I believe most of your specific proposals and opinions have been addressed already by other commentators. I simply wish to ask that you consider how offensive your comments may be to those who believe that the Kingdom of God and the United States are not one and the same. And to those who respect the US Constitution enough not to treat obedience to the law as a moral or religious obligation.

  - Offended (jun 11 at 3:46 a.m.)

• Would we change the debate a little by remembering that Jesus came to fulfill the law and the prophets, not to enforce it/their teachings? Yes, the law he mentioned is not USA law, nor AZ law. But does that make the principle any different?

  As Christians, our guide is Jesus and the Bible, not human reasoning. Which has dominated this debate? In regards the Bible, we need to not quote verses that "prove" our human reasoning. Is it the kind of reasoning/teaching that Jesus did? Do we have the "mind of Christ"?

  - Les (jun 11 at 6:48 p.m.)

• Going back to the original question, I agree with Dave. If we do not show our support for our Hispanic brothers and sisters right now in the present reality of the Arizona law passed in 2010 and the current climate of fear based response to our broken immigration system, I can't imagine how we think our support in 2013 won't ring hollow. The time to act is now. 2013 will bring new and different problems of its own for us to respond to.

  - Sonja Andreas (jun 16 at 5:51 a.m.)

Comment on the article MC USA: Arizona law 'not welcoming' for 2013 convention

The purpose of comments is to engage in dialogue. We expect commenters to treat authors and each other as each would want to be treated. Respectful criticism is welcomed; offensive comments or parts of comments will be removed by the site administrator. Name and comment will be posted; email address is for follow-up only and will not be made public.